• Теги
    • избранные теги
    • Люди710
      • Показать ещё
      Компании1733
      • Показать ещё
      Международные организации68
      • Показать ещё
      Страны / Регионы475
      • Показать ещё
      Разное603
      • Показать ещё
      Издания211
      • Показать ещё
      Формат27
      Показатели83
      • Показать ещё
      Сферы4
24 февраля, 04:55

The Road To Hell Was Paved With Obama Cronyism

Submitted by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog, President Donald Trump’s naïve (or willfully blind) notion that Wall Street will work better at raising capital if it is unleashed from strident Federal regulation is unhinged from the facts on the ground. Those facts, as illustrated above, are that the Boards of two of the largest banks in the U.S. are utterly spineless when it comes to holding their CEOs and employees accountable in the face of a tsunami of crimes.   – From the Wall Street on Parade article: What JPMorgan and Citigroup Have in Common When It Comes to Crime Opposition to Trump is extremely important, particularly when it comes to someone like me who sees his Wall Street love affair and disregard for civil liberties as serious threats to the nation. That said, it is absolutely imperative to see Trump as a symptom of a sick and broken system as opposed to the root cause of anything. The corporate media and legions of mourning Hillary cultists continue to present the Trump threat in extraordinarily simplistic and unhelpful terms. They act as if he’s the head of some evil snake, and that disposing of him as an individual will get America back on track. This couldn’t be more wrong. I spent most of the Obama years warning about the dangers of his policies. I didn’t do this for kicks, or because I thought he would try to stay in power forever, but because I knew his monumental cronyism would only pave the way for major problems down the road. Well the backlash to Obama came quick, and we the people won’t do the country any good if we focus on Trump the man, as opposed to the entirely corrupt, billionaire/special interest-controlled cesspool of a society we inhabit. We need to focus on Trump’s policies, not Trump the man. We also need to be under no illusions when it comes to the disaster that was the Obama administration, and the key role his failures played in providing the fertile ground for Trump to believe he can do whatever he wants — because Obama largely did. As such, today’s article by Trevor Timm at the Freedom of the Press Foundation is extremely important. It provides new documentation demonstrating how the Obama administration worked tirelessly behind the scenes to prevent Congress from expanding government transparency.  Here are a few excerpts from the article, New Documents Show the Obama Admin Aggressively Lobbied to Kill Transparency Reform in Congress”: New documents obtained through Freedom of the Press Foundation’s lawsuit against the Justice Department reveal that the Obama administration – the self described “most transparent administration ever” – aggressively lobbied behind the scenes in 2014 to kill modest Freedom of Information Act reform that had virtually unanimous support in Congress.   Three months ago, we sued the Justice Department (DOJ) under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) for communications between the DOJ and Congress, since there were vague reports that the DOJ may have opposed the bill – despite much of it being based word-for-word based on the Justice Department’s own policies.   Today, we are publishing a detailed memo authored by the Justice Department that strongly objected to almost every aspect of FOIA reform put forth by the House of Representatives at the time.   The bill in question – known as the FOIA Act – was unanimously passed by the House in early 2014. The Senate passed a similar bill – known as the FOIA Improvement Act – in December of 2014, but a final vote in the House to merge the two bills was held up at the last minute by then-Speaker of the House John Boehner and the session of Congress ended before it could become law. It was unclear at the time why the bill did not come up for a final vote, but the Washington Post later reported that a few federal agencies—including the Justice Department—had “warned” lawmakers about some provisions in the bill.   But these new documents show it went well beyond that: the Justice Department vehemently objected to both House and Senate members on nearly all aspects of the bill from the very start, and made clear: “The Administration strongly opposes passage of [the FOIA Act].”Notably, the Justice Department indicates that this policy memo (published in full below) is not just the agency’s individual opinion, but that it is speaking for the entire Obama administration.   The Obama administration’s specious objections to FOIA reform were manifold. They were against codifying the Obama administration’s “presumption of openness” policy that Obama declared upon his first month in office, they were against Congress mandating that the federal government create a unified online portal to process FOIA requests, they were against mandating discipline for FOIA redactors who break any of rules or regulations for processing FOIA requests, and they were against providing more reporting and oversight to Congress to make sure FOIA was being complied with.   The administration tried to couch some of its opposition in concern that the bill would “cause delays” in the FOIA process, despite the fact that many of the provisions were written to speed up the process, modernize the system with an online portal, and encourage proactive disclosure by making more information available to the public without even having to file a request. Concerning other provisions, the DOJ claimed the administration is not opposed in principle, but its is against seeing them codified into law — which allows the Executive Branch to delay implementation indefinitely and gives the next administration carte blanche power to rescind any good policies the Obama administration did put in place.   While the Freedom of Information Act remains a valuable tool (this lawsuit can attest to that), any reporter who has filed a FOIA request can corroborate the fact that the law is badly broken. Multiple investigations have shown that the Obama administration has been the most secretive ever when it comes to FOIA. Requests can often take years to be fulfilled if at all, and the only way to get results is to sue, like we were forced to. (We did not receive any documents for over a year from our first requests, and only received these documents after filing a lawsuit).   This summer is the 50th anniversary of the Freedom of Information Act, and Congress is yet again debating a FOIA reform bill, this time with even more holes in it than last time. We hope that Congress will amend the proposed reform in the strongest possible way and send it to the president’s desk with the same message they did fifty years ago when the Johnson administration opposed it, yet was forced to sign it anyways: transparency is vital to democracy. If I had to pick the most pernicious aspect of Obama’s entire presidency, it unquestionably would be the Department of Justice. By failing to prosecute a single bank executive, the DOJ made it clear to anyone paying attention that crime pays if you’re wealthy and powerful. With that incentive structure in place, financial crime flourished during the Obama administration, as was perfectly described in today’s article in Wall Street on Parade, What JPMorgan and Citigroup Have in Common When It Comes to Crime. Here’s some of what we learned: Jamie Dimon became the CEO of JPMorgan Chase on January 1, 2006. At that point, the bank was more than a century old and had never been charged with a criminal felony. In 2014, the Justice Department charged JPMorgan Chase with two felony counts in connection with their role in facilitating the Madoff Ponzi scheme. The bank was given a two-year deferred prosecution agreement.   The very next year, in May 2015, JPMorgan Chase was hit with a new felony count for its role in rigging foreign currency markets as part of a banking cartel. That’s three felony counts in two years and yet Jamie Dimon kept his job. Before the felony counts there was a $13 billion settlement with the Justice Department and Federal and State regulators in 2013 for JPMorgan Chase’s role in selling toxic mortgage investments to investors as worthwhile products when the bank had good reason to believe they would blow up.   Senator Carl Levin, Chair of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations at the time, said that the bank “piled on risk, hid losses, disregarded risk limits, manipulated risk models, dodged oversight, and misinformed the public.”  And, unbelievably, Jamie Dimon continued his tenure as Chairman and CEO of JPMorgan Chase.   The crime spree at JPMorgan Chase became so surreal that two trial lawyers, Helen Davis Chaitman and Lance Gotthoffer, published a breathtaking book on the subject, comparing the bank to the Gambino crime family. In addition to the settlements noted above, the authors add more details as to what has occurred on Dimon’s watch, such as:   “In April 2011, JPMC agreed to pay $35 million to settle claims that it overcharged members of the military service on their mortgages in violation of the Service Members Civil Relief Act and the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008.   “In March 2012, JPMC paid the government $659 million to settle charges that it charged veterans hidden fees in mortgage refinancing transactions.   “In October 2012, JPMC paid $1.2 billion to settle claims that it, along with other banks, conspired to set the price of credit and debit card interchange fees.   “On January 7, 2013, JPMC announced that it had agreed to a settlement with the Office of the Controller of the Currency (‘OCC’) and the Federal Reserve Bank of charges that it had engaged in improper foreclosure practices.   “In September 2013, JPMC agreed to pay $80 million in fines and $309 million in refunds to customers whom the bank billed for credit monitoring services that the bank never provided.   “On December 13, 2013, JPMC agreed to pay 79.9 million Euros to settle claims of the European Commission relating to illegal rigging of benchmark interest rates.   “In February 2012, JPMC agreed to pay $110 million to settle claims that it overcharged customers for overdraft fees.   “In November 2012, JPMC paid $296,900,000 to the SEC to settle claims that it misstated information about the delinquency status of its mortgage portfolio.   “In July 2013, JPMC paid $410 million to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to settle claims of bidding manipulation of California and Midwest electricity makets.   “In December 2013, JPMC paid $22.1 million to settle claims that the bank imposed expensive and unnecessary flood insurance on homeowners whose mortgages the bank serviced.” Interesting how Jamie Dimon seemed to think being crowned “Obama’s favorite banker” entitled him to a multi-year crime spree. Let’s now turn to Citigroup. Michael Corbat has been CEO of Citigroup since October 2012. Below is just a sampling of the regulatory charges against the bank under Corbat’s reign, including a guilty plea to a felony count in May 2015 which covered conduct that continued after Corbat took the helm.   July 1, 2013: Citigroup agrees to pay Fannie Mae $968 million for selling it toxic mortgage loans.   September 25, 2013: Citigroup agrees to pay Freddie Mac $395 million to settle claims it sold it toxic mortgages.   December 4, 2013: Citigroup admits to participating in the Yen Libor financial derivatives cartel to the European Commission and accepts a fine of $95 million.   July 14, 2014: The U.S. Department of Justice announces a $7 billion settlement with Citigroup for selling toxic mortgages to investors. Attorney General Eric Holder called the bank’s conduct “egregious,” adding, “As a result of their assurances that toxic financial products were sound, Citigroup was able to expand its market share and increase profits.”   November 2014: Citigroup pays more than $1 billion to settle civil allegations with regulators that it manipulated foreign currency markets. Other global banks settled at the same time.   May 20, 2015: Citicorp, a unit of Citigroup becomes an admitted felon by pleading guilty to a felony charge in the matter of rigging foreign currency trading, paying a fine of $925 million to the Justice Department and $342 million to the Federal Reserve for a total of $1.267 billion.   May 25, 2016: Citigroup agrees to pay $425 million to resolve claims brought by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission that it had rigged interest-rate benchmarks, including ISDAfix, from 2007 to 2012.   July 12, 2016: The Securities and Exchange Commission fined Citigroup Global Markets Inc. $7 million for failure to provide accurate trading records over a period of 15 years.   President Donald Trump’s naïve (or willfully blind) notion that Wall Street will work better at raising capital if it is unleashed from strident Federal regulation is unhinged from the facts on the ground. Those facts, as illustrated above, are that the Boards of two of the largest banks in the U.S. are utterly spineless when it comes to holding their CEOs and employees accountable in the face of a tsunami of crimes. While it’s unquestionably true that Donald Trump is a gigantic Wall Street-coddler, so was Obama. When it comes to the real power running this country, no one dares take on the financial criminals. Not even Trump, despite all his big talk.    

23 февраля, 13:45

Here Are All The Favors Donald Trump Has Performed For Wall Street

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible); Donald Trump built his presidential campaign around two ideas: 1) a corrupt financial establishment had swindled the middle class, and 2) immigrants and foreigners are dangerous. Some combination of these two sentiments has fueled every American populist movement dating back to President Andrew Jackson. Populists can take credit for plenty of economic progress: child labor laws, universal public education, the eight-hour workday, the abandonment of the gold standard and all modern antitrust and bank regulations. The dark side of populism can be blamed for the Trail of Tears, the Chinese Exclusion Act and the incarceration of Japanese-Americans during World War II. After a month in office, it’s pretty clear which strain of populism Trump takes seriously. He’s ordered the construction of a border wall with Mexico and plans to hire 5,000 new border patrol agents and 10,000 Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers. He’s also attempted to ban Syrian refugees and travelers from seven Muslim-majority nations from the country. In the meantime, Trump has embraced American financial titans as some of his closest allies. Wall Street is making its peace with people like Trump chief strategist Steve Bannon, the former Breitbart News executive chairman, and Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who’s been repeatedly accused of racism, as the crackdown on immigrants intensifies. Government Sachs Trump’s affinity for Wall Street is most obvious in his choice of personnel. His top economic adviser, Gary Cohn, his treasury secretary, Steven Mnuchin, and Bannon are all Goldman Sachs alums. Trump’s nominee to run the Securities and Exchange Commission is Jay Clayton, a Wall Street lawyer who has represented Goldman Sachs as a partner at Sullivan & Cromwell, a law firm so close to Goldman it is sometimes jokingly referred to as the legal wing of the bank. Trump’s pick for commerce secretary is private equity billionaire Wilbur Ross, whose wheeling and dealing included stewardship over American Home Mortgage Servicing and Option One, mortgage companies that paid millions to settle charges of relying on forged signatures and fabricated documents to push through foreclosures. Mnuchin’s bank, OneWest ― often referred to as a “foreclosure machine” ― also pursued improper evictions by “robo-signing” key documents, a fact Mnuchin lied about in his confirmation hearing. Reviewing Dodd-Frank Within two weeks of taking office, Trump was already delivering policy favors to Wall Street. He feted banking kingpins like JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon at the White House before signing a flashy executive order calling for a review of the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform law. The signing ceremony was essentially symbolic ― regulatory agencies don’t need an executive order to rewrite the regulations required by the law. In fact, they don’t really need to rewrite the rules ― they can simply refuse to enforce them. Trump Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao was a master of this approach when she served as Labor Secretary for President George W. Bush. As The Huffington Post’s Dave Jamieson has reported, a Government Accountability Office investigation found that Chao’s agency simply didn’t investigate serious complaints about labor violations. The GAO determined this by registering several fake and outrageous complaints, and monitoring the department’s response. In the most outlandish case, Chao’s agency didn’t follow up on a report that children were operating meat grinders and circular saws at a meat-packing plant ― during school hours. All Trump’s appointees have to do to gut Dodd-Frank is follow Chao’s example. But the symbolism of the signing ceremony matters. Trump was sending the strongest signal possible to Wall Street that he will not interfere with their quest for profit, however reckless or ill-gotten it may be. Retirement Rip-off The same day Trump attacked Dodd-Frank, he signed another executive order with more immediate consequences. The Obama administration had crafted a “fiduciary duty” rule that required retirement account professionals to manage their funds in their clients’ best interests. Most people think their retirement advisers have to work on their behalf, but many pick and choose investments based on special perks and financial gains that accrue to the adviser or his firm. As far as Wall Street’s bottom line was concerned, the rule was a bigger nuisance than the vast majority of Dodd-Frank. The Obama administration had calculated that Americans lose $17 billion a year to conflicted retirement advice ― and Goldman Sachs projected the rule would cost the investment industry $7 billion a year, plus $13 billion upfront. Trump erased the rule. He invited Rep. Ann Wagner (R-Mo.) to the signing ceremony to explain the move. Wagner, who raises about $900,000 every election cycle from the financial sector (more than quadruple her haul from any other industry), declared: “This is about Main Street … this is a big day, a big moment for Americans.” It was true. It was also a big rip-off. The 2-for-1 Deregulation Rule This executive order was not the most harmful of Trump’s early activities, but it may be the dumbest. Any administrative agency that wants to write a new regulation under president Trump will have to identify two existing regulations that it will eliminate. This is, of course, completely arbitrary. It is also short-sighted. Over the course of a presidency, bad things happen. And one way that presidents can make themselves appear attentive to those problems is by having regulatory agencies respond with new rules. Those rules might not be worth much, but Trump’s executive order makes it harder for the administration to even pretend to paper over future problems. Even if deregulation is your lodestar, this executive order doesn’t really help. Killing enforcement is just as effective as deleting a rule. But like the Dodd-Frank review, the deregulation rule carries real symbolic value. Trump was telling members of the corporate establishment to feast on whatever spoils they can secure. The Mortgage Price Hike Shortly after the Senate Banking Committee advance the nomination of former neurosurgeon Ben Carson as the secretary of housing and urban development, the agency raised prices on mortgages for low-income people. It was a windfall for private mortgage insurance companies that compete with the Federal Housing Administration. The SEC Trainwreck The Securities and Exchange Commission appears to have received Trump’s deregulatory message. Former President Barack Obama left the agency understaffed ― only two of the five commissioners appointed by the president were in office when Trump assumed the presidency. The December resignation of SEC Chair Mary Jo White ― perhaps Obama’s most embarrassing regulatory appointment for her deference to CEOs and dark money ― left Republican Commissioner Michael Piwowar in charge of the agency. And Piwowar has unleashed a reign of corporate favoritism that would make even White blush. Piwowar has already directed the agency to scuttle a Dodd-Frank-mandated rule that would require corporations to report the pay discrepancy between their CEOs and a typical worker. He has done the same for another Dodd-Frank regulation requiring companies to audit their supply chains to determine whether they relied on “conflict minerals” ― mining resources that enrich warlords engaged in long, violent campaigns in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The rule would also have required American companies to tell consumers whether their products were “conflict-free.” The conflict minerals rule was partially overturned in a controversial federal court decision, but Piwowar is apparently not one for half-loaves. His first public statement as acting SEC chair effectively called for killing what remained of the rule. You do you, failed state butchers. Piwowar is also moving to revoke the power of the SEC’s enforcement division to issue subpoenas launching investigations. What could go wrong?   Correction: A previous version of this article stated that Carson had been confirmed as HUD Secretary. He has been voted through the Banking Committee, and is yet to receive a confirmation vote on the Senate floor. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

23 февраля, 13:45

Here Are All The Favors Donald Trump Has Performed For Wall Street

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible); Donald Trump built his presidential campaign around two ideas: 1) a corrupt financial establishment had swindled the middle class, and 2) immigrants and foreigners are dangerous. Some combination of these two sentiments has fueled every American populist movement dating back to President Andrew Jackson. Populists can take credit for plenty of economic progress: child labor laws, universal public education, the eight-hour workday, the abandonment of the gold standard and all modern antitrust and bank regulations. The dark side of populism can be blamed for the Trail of Tears, the Chinese Exclusion Act and the incarceration of Japanese-Americans during World War II. After a month in office, it’s pretty clear which strain of populism Trump takes seriously. He’s ordered the construction of a border wall with Mexico and plans to hire 5,000 new border patrol agents and 10,000 Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers. He’s also attempted to ban Syrian refugees and travelers from seven Muslim-majority nations from the country. In the meantime, Trump has embraced American financial titans as some of his closest allies. Wall Street is making its peace with people like Trump chief strategist Steve Bannon, the former Breitbart News executive chairman, and Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who’s been repeatedly accused of racism, as the crackdown on immigrants intensifies. Government Sachs Trump’s affinity for Wall Street is most obvious in his choice of personnel. His top economic adviser, Gary Cohn, his treasury secretary, Steven Mnuchin, and Bannon are all Goldman Sachs alums. Trump’s nominee to run the Securities and Exchange Commission is Jay Clayton, a Wall Street lawyer who has represented Goldman Sachs as a partner at Sullivan & Cromwell, a law firm so close to Goldman it is sometimes jokingly referred to as the legal wing of the bank. Trump’s pick for commerce secretary is private equity billionaire Wilbur Ross, whose wheeling and dealing included stewardship over American Home Mortgage Servicing and Option One, mortgage companies that paid millions to settle charges of relying on forged signatures and fabricated documents to push through foreclosures. Mnuchin’s bank, OneWest ― often referred to as a “foreclosure machine” ― also pursued improper evictions by “robo-signing” key documents, a fact Mnuchin lied about in his confirmation hearing. Reviewing Dodd-Frank Within two weeks of taking office, Trump was already delivering policy favors to Wall Street. He feted banking kingpins like JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon at the White House before signing a flashy executive order calling for a review of the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform law. The signing ceremony was essentially symbolic ― regulatory agencies don’t need an executive order to rewrite the regulations required by the law. In fact, they don’t really need to rewrite the rules ― they can simply refuse to enforce them. Trump Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao was a master of this approach when she served as Labor Secretary for President George W. Bush. As The Huffington Post’s Dave Jamieson has reported, a Government Accountability Office investigation found that Chao’s agency simply didn’t investigate serious complaints about labor violations. The GAO determined this by registering several fake and outrageous complaints, and monitoring the department’s response. In the most outlandish case, Chao’s agency didn’t follow up on a report that children were operating meat grinders and circular saws at a meat-packing plant ― during school hours. All Trump’s appointees have to do to gut Dodd-Frank is follow Chao’s example. But the symbolism of the signing ceremony matters. Trump was sending the strongest signal possible to Wall Street that he will not interfere with their quest for profit, however reckless or ill-gotten it may be. Retirement Rip-off The same day Trump attacked Dodd-Frank, he signed another executive order with more immediate consequences. The Obama administration had crafted a “fiduciary duty” rule that required retirement account professionals to manage their funds in their clients’ best interests. Most people think their retirement advisers have to work on their behalf, but many pick and choose investments based on special perks and financial gains that accrue to the adviser or his firm. As far as Wall Street’s bottom line was concerned, the rule was a bigger nuisance than the vast majority of Dodd-Frank. The Obama administration had calculated that Americans lose $17 billion a year to conflicted retirement advice ― and Goldman Sachs projected the rule would cost the investment industry $7 billion a year, plus $13 billion upfront. Trump erased the rule. He invited Rep. Ann Wagner (R-Mo.) to the signing ceremony to explain the move. Wagner, who raises about $900,000 every election cycle from the financial sector (more than quadruple her haul from any other industry), declared: “This is about Main Street … this is a big day, a big moment for Americans.” It was true. It was also a big rip-off. The 2-for-1 Deregulation Rule This executive order was not the most harmful of Trump’s early activities, but it may be the dumbest. Any administrative agency that wants to write a new regulation under president Trump will have to identify two existing regulations that it will eliminate. This is, of course, completely arbitrary. It is also short-sighted. Over the course of a presidency, bad things happen. And one way that presidents can make themselves appear attentive to those problems is by having regulatory agencies respond with new rules. Those rules might not be worth much, but Trump’s executive order makes it harder for the administration to even pretend to paper over future problems. Even if deregulation is your lodestar, this executive order doesn’t really help. Killing enforcement is just as effective as deleting a rule. But like the Dodd-Frank review, the deregulation rule carries real symbolic value. Trump was telling members of the corporate establishment to feast on whatever spoils they can secure. The Mortgage Price Hike Shortly after the Senate Banking Committee advance the nomination of former neurosurgeon Ben Carson as the secretary of housing and urban development, the agency raised prices on mortgages for low-income people. It was a windfall for private mortgage insurance companies that compete with the Federal Housing Administration. The SEC Trainwreck The Securities and Exchange Commission appears to have received Trump’s deregulatory message. Former President Barack Obama left the agency understaffed ― only two of the five commissioners appointed by the president were in office when Trump assumed the presidency. The December resignation of SEC Chair Mary Jo White ― perhaps Obama’s most embarrassing regulatory appointment for her deference to CEOs and dark money ― left Republican Commissioner Michael Piwowar in charge of the agency. And Piwowar has unleashed a reign of corporate favoritism that would make even White blush. Piwowar has already directed the agency to scuttle a Dodd-Frank-mandated rule that would require corporations to report the pay discrepancy between their CEOs and a typical worker. He has done the same for another Dodd-Frank regulation requiring companies to audit their supply chains to determine whether they relied on “conflict minerals” ― mining resources that enrich warlords engaged in long, violent campaigns in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The rule would also have required American companies to tell consumers whether their products were “conflict-free.” The conflict minerals rule was partially overturned in a controversial federal court decision, but Piwowar is apparently not one for half-loaves. His first public statement as acting SEC chair effectively called for killing what remained of the rule. You do you, failed state butchers. Piwowar is also moving to revoke the power of the SEC’s enforcement division to issue subpoenas launching investigations. What could go wrong?   Correction: A previous version of this article stated that Carson had been confirmed as HUD Secretary. He has been voted through the Banking Committee, and is yet to receive a confirmation vote on the Senate floor. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

21 февраля, 17:49

What Led to a 25% Pay Rise for Bank of America (BAC) CEO?

Bank of America Corporation's (BAC) Chief Executive Officer, Brian T. Moynihan has been awarded with an annual salary of $20 million for his performance in 2016.

21 февраля, 17:11

Is Citigroup (C) CEO's Pay Cut a Result of Tepid Earnings?

Citigroup Inc.'s (C) Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Michael Corbat received about 6.1% pay cut in his total compensation package.

10 февраля, 02:57

White House leans into Trump Inc.

The president and his family are showing little concern about the appearance they’re profiting off the presidency.

Выбор редакции
09 февраля, 16:32

Car Loans Versus Subprime Mortgages – Are there any parallels?

Is there such a thing as a “subprime car loan bubble” brewing? Both Jamie Dimon (J.P Morgan boss) and comedian John Oliver seem to think so. While dedicating nearly 18 minutes of a recent episode of his show “Last Week Tonight” to auto loans, Oliver said: “There is concern that this could be the subprime mortgage crisis, but with cars,” The critique stems from what’s being perceived as the “fast and loose” credit policies that many used car dealers are adopting – eerily similar (according to Oliver) to what mortgage lenders did in the years and months leading up to the subprime crisis. Mr. Dimon too was very clear about what he thinks about what’s happening with auto loans: "Auto is clearly a little stretched, in my opinion…Someone is going to get hurt. ... “ So what’s really going on here? Are we really standing at a precipitous auto loan cliff, just waiting to fall over? Is there a bubble that’s about to explode in the car loan world? Is there more happening underneath than meets the eye? Should we be bracing ourselves for the other auto loan shoe to drop? LESS THAN WHAT MEETS THE EYE Not so says Melinda Zabritski, Experian’s director of Automotive Finance. According to Zabritski, while there are some concerning elements of subprime loans within the car loan industry: "We're not seeing this big, undisciplined increase in subprime" Mike Jackson, CEO of Auto Nation overwhelmingly agrees with Zabritski’s assessment. According to Jackson, the issue seems to have been overblown by the financial media, taking it out of context. To put things into perspective, Jackson noted that, of the over $12 trillion in consumer debt outstanding, only $900 million relates to auto debt. His argument against the idea of an “auto loan bubble” is based on the fact that auto loan defaults are significantly low (compared to home loans) because these loans are lower than mortgages, credit card debt and even student loans. Bottom line, according to Jackson: “People Pay Their Auto Loans!" And while many analysts sounding the “bubble alarm” warn institutions against extending subprime auto financing, Zabritski points out that for some borrowers, these loans are really a lifeline – enabling them the mobility needed to (travel to areas where better jobs exist and) seek improvement in their economic situations. The logic therefore is, once they stabilize their financial situations, the risk of defaulting on their subprime auto loan reduces. DIFFERENCES BY THE NUMBERS Late last year (2016), Fitch reported that annualized losses from subprime auto loans are ticking higher – over 27% higher in the month of August when measured on an annual basis. Fitch has predicted that we would see subprime auto loan losses surpass the 10% mark heading into 2017 However, the securitization of sub-prime auto loans also differs vastly from those of mortgages. While almost all mortgages are securitized, only a fraction, around 19% (roughly $23.3 billion), of the $125 billion in subprime auto loans are securitized. Experts also point out that legal processes related to recovery of defunct auto loans is very different than that followed for subprime mortgages. Even after a rather protracted repossession process, once the lender goes get possession of the (often abandoned and neglected) home, it has lost most of its book value. With subprime auto loan delinquencies, that’s not the case – automobiles are almost immediately repossessed, and monetized, shortly after defaulting on repayment. It may therefore be that there are no parallels – or at least not as many perfectly comparable ones – between the subprime mortgage crisis and the ongoing subprime auto loan situation. In any case, there may not be the type of underlying structural problems between the two types of sub-primes. In fact, while warning that there may be an issue here, Mr. Dimon admitted that he didn’t see “a systemic issue” in the subprime auto lending arena.

09 февраля, 13:15

Power breakfast at the Four Seasons: Political players, CEOs, and Ivanka

The first daughter schmoozed her way around the hotel's restaurant guided by new White House economic counselor Dina Powell.

07 февраля, 11:00

Дональд Трамп и Голдман Сакс

Дональд Трамп объявил имя будущего министра финансов США: им станет Стивен Тёрнер Мнучин (Steven Terner Mnuchin). Для кого-то это явилось неожиданностью. Ведь среди претендентов на высокий пост называли исполнительного директора банка JPMorgan Джейми Даймона, члена палаты представителей Джеба Хенсарлинга... У Стивена Мнучина, однако, было важное преимущество: в предвыборной кампании Трампа он работал финансовым менеджером. Кроме […]

06 февраля, 23:28

7 Yrs to create Dodd-Frank, doubt repeal anytime soon. Bank rally will reverse but we'll be back to client pillaging

Bloomberg reports: Dodd-Frank’s Tentacles Go Deep. They Won’t Be Cut Fast or Easily. It took seven years to put these regulations in place. Is it rational to think they can be removed in less than 4? If not, then the financial's rally may be a tad bit premature and overdone.   There will be quite a bit fo time before financial institutions see relief from the repeal of Dodd Frank under Trump, Here's a quick rundown of the reasons why: Whether by Democrat's machinations or Trump's performance, this administration does not have the appointees running the agencies that oversee financial rules. New legislation have to be passed in order to ease the current legislation. That means all will have to get along and play nicely, and quickly. Two weeks into the presidency, the Democrats are playing scorched earth and the GOP questioning and questioning again, support for Trump in light of what many perceive to be missteps or even incompetence. Trump has purposely placed livefire lightning rods in the form of two former Goldman Sachs partners as the lead in the effort to repeal bank regulation in the same economic cycle that said bank assisted in tearing down the global economy. The further galvanizes a partisan congress, and even gives some GOP members reason for pause. Obama era protections eyed for the Ax At risk of removal are: Proprietary trading restrictions; Systemic financial institution designation Financial institution dismemberment upon insolvency (Big Banks To Tell U.S. Regulators How To Dismember Their Corpses).and... the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.   Most importantly (at least to many potential subscribers to our advisory servers) Trump is Rolling Back Obama Legislation That requires financial institutions to put their clients interests above their own. This has a special place in my heart, for we have a long track record of countering the effects of Wall Street banks putting their bonus pool above the interests of their clients. This is not only germain to retail investors and mom and pops accounts. Institutions and UHNW get fleeced for more than anyone else.  Remember Wall Street Real Estate Funds Lose Between 61% to 98% for Their Investors as They Rake in Fees! How about our friends at Goldman Sachs and Henry Paulson (Bush's Treasury secretary!) settle fraud lawsuit over Abacus investments (Goldman Sachs, Paulson settle fraud lawsuit over Abacus). The victim was a mortgage insurer, hardly an amateur investors. How about Goldman Sachs Agrees to $5 Billion Mortgage Settlement .. Or how about Deutsche Bank Agrees to Pay $7.2 Billion for Misleading Investors. I can go on, but I think you get the point. BoomBustBlog independent research and forensic advisory services are going to be in very high demand. This liberalizing of Obama era rules is in direct contravention to the populist platform that Trump ran on (with a special part featuring Goldman Chief Executive Officer Lloyd Blankfein in an segment about corporate chieftains pocketing the wealth of American workers)... .     That was the spiel. Here's the reality... If you haven't already, see  Apple's 2017 1st Quarter Results as Viewed Outside the Reality Distortion Field for how Wall Street banks are already gearing up to get them bonuses.... Now, more than ever, the services of BoomBustBlog are needed by both individuals and institutions! The Ex-Goldman team outlined above answer directly to Trump, and two of them, National Economic Council Director Gary Cohn and Treasury Secretary nominee Steven Mnuchin, will be the one's slated to dismantle the Dodd-Frank rules. Ohh!!! I can see how worker-centric that will turn out to be. This will likely hurt the small and medium institutions the most (dollar wise) for that's where the juiciest meat is. As quoted from the Bloomberg article: On Friday, Trump vented that the law had made it difficult for his business friends to get loans, and boasted to a group of executives gathered at the White House that he was getting feedback on how to fix it from an ideal adviser: JPMorgan Chase & Co. Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon. Click here to subscribe to BoomBustBlog.

06 февраля, 17:45

Trump Stands Up For Bad Bankers

The best way to spot a con artist is by paying attention to what you don't see, as well as to what you see. Donald Trump says he represents working people, but he has already moved aggressively to tilt the scales in favor of Wall Street's criminal elite. As Trump moved to rob Americans of some basic financial protections, his choice of companions only added insult to injury. Now You See It, Now You Don't Last year Wells Fargo became enmeshed in scandal when it was learned that 2 million false accounts were opened in its customers' names without their knowledge. It turned out that the bank's employees, many of whom are poorly paid and dependent on bonuses and commissions, were being threatened with loss of income or termination if they fell behind on production. Those who complained to higher-ups or authorities risked retaliation. There were reports of other unfair labor practices as well. The bank paid a fine. In a rare moment of executive accountability, its CEO resigned and was forced to forgo some deferred income. The Department of Labor set up a special page to register employee complaints and protect whistleblowers. The "Resources for Current and Former Wells Fargo Employees" page included links to resources for whistleblowers. It offered guidance as well as for employees who felt they had not been properly paid, had concerns about their retirement benefits or believed they had faced discrimination for race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, disability or veteran status. Shortly after Trump took office, Sen. Elizabeth Warren noticed that visitors to that webpage now encountered a very different message: Page Not Found The page you requested wasn't found on our website. If you followed the link from another website, the link they provided may be outdated. Please check our Topics area or our A-Z Index to find what you are looking for. In response, Sen. Warren wrote a letter to the acting Secretary of Labor  that documented past Wells Fargo offenses. She added, I am concerned that the Department of Labor has removed the website where Wells Fargo's employees who were victims of the company's fraudulent actions could file labor complaints or report illegal activity. Taking down this website enables Wells Fargo to escape full responsibility for its fraudulent actions and the Department to shirk its outstanding obligations to American workers. The Trump Administration has attempted to shift the blame by claiming that the page was taken down before the inauguration. That claim has been challenged. But the fact that the website has not been restored as of this writing suggests that the Trump team was more than happy to see it disappear. But this vanishing act pales in comparison to those that would soon follow. Unleashing the Fraudsters On February 3, President Trump signed executive actions rolling back financial regulations that were put into place after Congress passed the Dodd-Frank banking reform bill in 2010. That bill didn't include all of the measures some believe are needed to rein in bank fraud and mismanagement. But, as Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen notes, it represents an improvement over the status quo that led to the 2007-08 financial crisis. The Dodd-Frank provisions endangered by Trump's announcement are designed to increase financial stability, reduce risky bank behavior and limit predatory mortgage lending. Trump also moved to end something called the "fiduciary rule," a technical-sounding name for something that serves a relatively simple goal: to prevent people who give advice about retirement accounts from having hidden financial incentives that conflict with their clients' interests. Bad Company Trump didn't just declare war on these fundamental financial protections. He also showed the public where his loyalties lay. As he announced the gutting of controls on big bankers, Trump gave a special shout-out to one of the worst of them: Jamie Dimon. As CEO of JPMorgan Chase, Dimon has led one of the most criminally inclined institutions on Wall Street. The long list of documented crimes committed under Dimon's leadership includes money laundering for drug cartels, foreclosure fraud, and violation of sanctions against Cuba, Iran and Sudan. Trump chose Gary Cohn, the new head of his Council of Economic Advisors, to announce the change in the fiduciary rule. Cohn is the former COO of Goldman Sachs, and one of many Trump appointees from that Wall Street powerhouse. When it comes to criminal behavior, Goldman is arguably JP Morgan's only challenger for the title of "most corrupt" investment bank. With these actions, Trump has let the American people know whose side he's on, and it's not theirs. Millions of people are now more likely to be robbed of their savings, their homes and their retirement security. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

06 февраля, 05:40

Extreme Vetting, But Not For Banks

Authored by Matt Taibbi, originally posted at RollingStone.com, Donald Trump, the man who positioned himself as the common man's shield against Wall Street, signed a series of orders today calling for reviews or rollbacks of financial regulations. He did so after meeting with some friendly helpers. Here's how CNBC described the crowd of Wall Street CEOs Trump received, before he ordered a review of both the Dodd-Frank Act and the fiduciary rule requiring investment advisors to act in their clients' interests: "Trump also will meet at the White House with leading CEOs, including JPMorgan's Jamie Dimon, Blackstone's Steve Schwarzman, and BlackRock's Larry Fink." Leading the way for this assortment of populist heroes will be former Goldman honcho Gary Cohn, now Trump's chief economic advisor. Dimon, Schwarzman, Fink and Cohn collectively represent a rogues' gallery of the creeps most responsible for the 2008 crash. It would be hard to put together a group of people less sympathetic to the non-wealthy. Trump's approach to Wall Street is in sharp contrast to his tough-talking stances on terrorism. He talks a big game when slamming the door on penniless refugees, but curls up like a beach weakling around guys who have more money than he does. The two primary disasters in American history this century (if we're not counting Trump's election) have been 9/11 and the 2008 financial crisis, which cost 8.7 million people their jobs and may have destroyed as much as 45 percent of the world's wealth. The response to 9/11 we know: major military actions all over the world, plus a radical reshaping of our legal structure, with voters embracing warrantless surveillance, a suspension of habeas corpus, even torture. But the crisis response? Basically, we gave trillions of dollars to bail out the very actors who caused the mess. Now, with Trump's election, we've triumphantly put those same actors back in charge of non-policing themselves. In between, we passed a few weak-sauce rules designed to scale back some of the worst excesses. Those rules presumably will be tossed aside now. Trump's "extreme vetting" plan for immigrants and refugees is based upon a safety argument – i.e., that the smallest chance of a disaster justifies the most extreme measures. Infamously this week, administration spokesdunce Kellyanne Conway resorted to citing a disaster that never even happened – the "Bowling Green Massacre" – as a justification for the crazy visa policy. This makes Trump's embrace of the Mortgage Crash Dream Team as his advisory panel for how to make Wall Street run more smoothly all the more preposterous. The crisis was caused by the financial equivalent of open borders. Virtually no one was monitoring risk levels or credit worthiness at the world's biggest companies. The watchdogs who are supposed to be making sure the morons on Wall Street don't blow up the planet all failed: the compliance people within private companies, the so-called self-regulating organizations like the NYSE, and finally the government agencies like the OCC and the OTS. These companies are now so enormous that they can't keep track of their own positions. Also, in sharp contrast to the propaganda about what brainy people they all are, many of them lack even the most basic understanding of the potential consequences of deals they might be making. The leadership of AIG, for instance, basically had no clue how its derivatives portfolio worked, despite the fact that they had $79 billion worth of exposure. Similarly, then-CEO Chuck Prince of Citigroup told the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission that a $40 billion mortgage position "would not in any way have excited my attention." Both companies ended up needing massive bailouts. Not only can they not keep track of their own books, they already blow off regulators whenever they get the chance. Take JPMorgan Chase's "London Whale" episode, in which some $6.2 billion in losses in one portfolio accumulated practically overnight. In that case, Dimon simply refused to give the federal regulators routine, required reports as to what was going on with his bank's positions, probably because he himself had no idea how big the hole was at the time. "Mr. Dimon said it was his decision whether to send the reports to the OCC," a regulator later told the Senate.   This is the same Jamie Dimon about whom Trump said today, "There's nobody better to tell me about Dodd-Frank than Jamie Dimon, so thank you, Jamie." The enduring lesson of the financial crisis is that in markets as complex as this one, the most extreme danger is in opacity. The big problem is that these egomaniacal Wall Street titans want markets as opaque as possible. This is why they want to get rid of the fiduciary rule, because they don't think it's anyone's business if they choose to bet against their clients (as Cohn's Goldman famously did), or overcharge them, or otherwise screw them. They don't want to have to submit to even the most basic capital requirements, or be classified a systemically important company, or have to keep their depository businesses separate from their gambling businesses, or have to have a plan for dissolution if they melt down, or really deal with any intrusions at all. Trump – a man who doesn't want you to see what's going on underneath his hair, let alone in his books – naturally sympathizes with Wall Street's efforts to keep the markets opaque. The obvious conclusion is that these orders will eventually lead us back to ballooning risk, overheated markets (the NYSE is already soaring) and speculative bubbles. If we're very lucky, it won't crash soon. But can we at least put an end to the "drain the swamp" nonsense?

05 февраля, 14:00

Wall Street Is Even More Craven Than We Thought

WASHINGTON ― Democrats used to see Jamie Dimon as one of the good guys on Wall Street. Once hailed as a “progressive” by The New Republic, the JPMorgan Chase CEO counted himself friends with two different chiefs of staff to President Barack Obama and traveled to the first black White House no less than 16 times. In 2009, The New York Times described him as “Obama’s favorite banker.” He has publicly supported same-sex marriage and the legalization of undocumented immigrants. Dimon gave hundreds of thousands to Democratic Party candidates, the party itself, and even the Center for American Progress, a think tank advancing the ideas of Bill Clinton and Obama. But there was Dimon on Friday, sitting at a table surrounded by other wealthy corporate executives, being praised by President Donald Trump ― a man who publicly supports war crimes and is already flirting with a constitutional crisis as he implements a campaign promise to impose “a complete and total shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.” “There’s nobody better to tell me about Dodd-Frank than Jamie,” Trump said, smiling and pointing his finger at Dimon. Within hours, the president had signed an executive order calling for federal agencies to scour a 2010 Wall Street reform law for regulations that could be nullified. True to Trump’s reality TV background, the day was more pageantry than policy. He doesn’t need a press conference and an executive order to void Obama’s regulations. He can simply appoint regulators who quietly fail to enforce them. But there was important symbolic meaning to Trump’s daylong celebration of Wall Street. The president was telling America that Dimon and the other CEOs assembled in Washington were on his team, united in the same cause as chief strategist Steve Bannon and Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Those concerned that Trump is pursuing a white nationalist agenda by deliberately attempting to provoke global military conflict can rest easy after Friday: Responsible financiers, including Jamie Dimon, are at the table. In a statement provided to HuffPost, JPMorgan Chase recoiled at the idea that Dimon is enthusiastic about Trump’s full policy platform. “It’s absurd to equate speaking constructively with someone to endorsing all of their views,” bank spokesman Andrew Gray said. Few would insist Dimon agrees with Trump on every issue. But that is not the pressing moral issue of the day. The question is whether political and commercial elites will allow themselves to be co-opted by the Trump regime in pursuit of their own narrow interests. Dimon’s attendance on Friday, and a host of recent enthusiastic comments he has made about the Trump administration, demonstrate he cares more about bank deregulation than the persecution of minorities.  Dimon can make loads of money from the evisceration of Dodd-Frank. There is a reason he opposed creating a new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which has returned more than $11 billion to families wronged by banks, payday lenders and other firms since its inception. There is a reason he fought efforts to rein in the derivatives market that sank AIG; a reason he blasted the Volcker Rule, which aimed to prevent banks from speculating in securities markets with taxpayer-backed funding. The profit motive is real, and as Friday’s event showed, it is often more powerful than conscience. Maybe Democrats should have seen Dimon’s weaknesses earlier. Under his watch, JPMorgan illegally foreclosed on the families of active-duty members of the American military. It pleaded guilty to felony currency manipulation. It paid the federal government more than $1 billion and admitted wrongdoing over its “London Whale” debacle. It paid hundreds of millions of dollars to settle charges that it bribed public officials in Alabama, rigged electricity markets in California, and violated economic sanctions against Iran, Cuba and Sudan. The bank has paid out billions and billions of dollars in foreclosure fraud settlements. Dimon wasn’t the only CEO slapping backs at the White House. Other members of Trump’s official “Strategic and Policy Forum” include Walmart CEO Doug McMillon, Walt Disney CEO Bob Iger and billionaire Steven Schwarzman, who once likened a modest Obama tax hike on the wealthy to “when Hitler invaded Poland.” Some attendees were even more aggressive supporters of the Democratic Party than Dimon once was. BlackRock CEO Larry Fink was a longtime Hillary Clinton backer and a rumored contender for treasury secretary. Trump gave him a shout-out in front of the cameras. “Where is Larry?” Trump cracked, laughing until he spotted the mega-millionaire a few seats away. “He managed a lot of my money, and I gotta tell ya, he got me great returns, Larry.” This scene was the end result of the Democratic Party’s decision to ally itself with Wall Street in the 1990s. Bill Clinton’s economic agenda focused on turning over large swaths of the American political project to the financial sector. From welfare reform to the North American Free Trade Agreement to the repeal of Glass-Steagall to the slashing of capital gains taxes, the Democratic Party’s policy agenda fused with the interests of Wall Street. Most party leaders were happy to go along ― lots of elite bankers were clearly in the tank for Republicans, but some seemed like really good guys. “There are good banks and bad banks just like there are good politicians and bad politicians,” Dimon once told The New Republic. The financial crisis of 2008 was a direct descendant of the Democratic alliance with the banking world. NAFTA and World Trade Organization treaties flooded the U.S. with foreign capital just as the U.S. government deregulated what banks could do with that money. After a festival of fraud on Wall Street, Obama went easy on the financial sector, refusing to prosecute bankers for criminal wrongdoing. In thanks, many of those “fat cats” who once swore allegiance to the Democratic party are now allying themselves with Trump and Bannon. At the 1936 Democratic National Convention, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt declared that “government by organized money is just as dangerous as government by organized mob.” Somewhere along the way, Democrats unlearned that lesson. American democracy may pay a terrible price. Sign up for the HuffPost Must Reads newsletter. Each Sunday, we will bring you the best original reporting, long form writing and breaking news from The Huffington Post and around the web, plus behind-the-scenes looks at how it’s all made. Click here to sign up! -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

05 февраля, 14:00

Wall Street Is Even More Craven Than We Thought

WASHINGTON ― Democrats used to see Jamie Dimon as one of the good guys on Wall Street. Once hailed as a “progressive” by The New Republic, the JPMorgan Chase CEO counted himself friends with two different chiefs of staff to President Barack Obama and traveled to the first black White House no less than 16 times. In 2009, The New York Times described him as “Obama’s favorite banker.” He has publicly supported same-sex marriage and the legalization of undocumented immigrants. Dimon gave hundreds of thousands to Democratic Party candidates, the party itself, and even the Center for American Progress, a think tank advancing the ideas of Bill Clinton and Obama. But there was Dimon on Friday, sitting at a table surrounded by other wealthy corporate executives, being praised by President Donald Trump ― a man who publicly supports war crimes and is already flirting with a constitutional crisis as he implements a campaign promise to impose “a complete and total shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.” “There’s nobody better to tell me about Dodd-Frank than Jamie,” Trump said, smiling and pointing his finger at Dimon. Within hours, the president had signed an executive order calling for federal agencies to scour a 2010 Wall Street reform law for regulations that could be nullified. True to Trump’s reality TV background, the day was more pageantry than policy. He doesn’t need a press conference and an executive order to void Obama’s regulations. He can simply appoint regulators who quietly fail to enforce them. But there was important symbolic meaning to Trump’s daylong celebration of Wall Street. The president was telling America that Dimon and the other CEOs assembled in Washington were on his team, united in the same cause as chief strategist Steve Bannon and Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Those concerned that Trump is pursuing a white nationalist agenda by deliberately attempting to provoke global military conflict can rest easy after Friday: Responsible financiers, including Jamie Dimon, are at the table. In a statement provided to HuffPost, JPMorgan Chase recoiled at the idea that Dimon is enthusiastic about Trump’s full policy platform. “It’s absurd to equate speaking constructively with someone to endorsing all of their views,” bank spokesman Andrew Gray said. Few would insist Dimon agrees with Trump on every issue. But that is not the pressing moral issue of the day. The question is whether political and commercial elites will allow themselves to be co-opted by the Trump regime in pursuit of their own narrow interests. Dimon’s attendance on Friday, and a host of recent enthusiastic comments he has made about the Trump administration, demonstrate he cares more about bank deregulation than the persecution of minorities.  Dimon can make loads of money from the evisceration of Dodd-Frank. There is a reason he opposed creating a new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which has returned more than $11 billion to families wronged by banks, payday lenders and other firms since its inception. There is a reason he fought efforts to rein in the derivatives market that sank AIG; a reason he blasted the Volcker Rule, which aimed to prevent banks from speculating in securities markets with taxpayer-backed funding. The profit motive is real, and as Friday’s event showed, it is often more powerful than conscience. Maybe Democrats should have seen Dimon’s weaknesses earlier. Under his watch, JPMorgan illegally foreclosed on the families of active-duty members of the American military. It pleaded guilty to felony currency manipulation. It paid the federal government more than $1 billion and admitted wrongdoing over its “London Whale” debacle. It paid hundreds of millions of dollars to settle charges that it bribed public officials in Alabama, rigged electricity markets in California, and violated economic sanctions against Iran, Cuba and Sudan. The bank has paid out billions and billions of dollars in foreclosure fraud settlements. Dimon wasn’t the only CEO slapping backs at the White House. Other members of Trump’s official “Strategic and Policy Forum” include Walmart CEO Doug McMillon, Walt Disney CEO Bob Iger and billionaire Steven Schwarzman, who once likened a modest Obama tax hike on the wealthy to “when Hitler invaded Poland.” Some attendees were even more aggressive supporters of the Democratic Party than Dimon once was. BlackRock CEO Larry Fink was a longtime Hillary Clinton backer and a rumored contender for treasury secretary. Trump gave him a shout-out in front of the cameras. “Where is Larry?” Trump cracked, laughing until he spotted the mega-millionaire a few seats away. “He managed a lot of my money, and I gotta tell ya, he got me great returns, Larry.” This scene was the end result of the Democratic Party’s decision to ally itself with Wall Street in the 1990s. Bill Clinton’s economic agenda focused on turning over large swaths of the American political project to the financial sector. From welfare reform to the North American Free Trade Agreement to the repeal of Glass-Steagall to the slashing of capital gains taxes, the Democratic Party’s policy agenda fused with the interests of Wall Street. Most party leaders were happy to go along ― lots of elite bankers were clearly in the tank for Republicans, but some seemed like really good guys. “There are good banks and bad banks just like there are good politicians and bad politicians,” Dimon once told The New Republic. The financial crisis of 2008 was a direct descendant of the Democratic alliance with the banking world. NAFTA and World Trade Organization treaties flooded the U.S. with foreign capital just as the U.S. government deregulated what banks could do with that money. After a festival of fraud on Wall Street, Obama went easy on the financial sector, refusing to prosecute bankers for criminal wrongdoing. In thanks, many of those “fat cats” who once swore allegiance to the Democratic party are now allying themselves with Trump and Bannon. At the 1936 Democratic National Convention, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt declared that “government by organized money is just as dangerous as government by organized mob.” Somewhere along the way, Democrats unlearned that lesson. American democracy may pay a terrible price. Sign up for the HuffPost Must Reads newsletter. Each Sunday, we will bring you the best original reporting, long form writing and breaking news from The Huffington Post and around the web, plus behind-the-scenes looks at how it’s all made. Click here to sign up! -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

05 февраля, 06:20

"Is Trump About To Cause Another Crisis?": 2008 Could Be Eclipsed As Bank Restrictions Eliminated

Submitted by Mac Slavo via SHTFPlan.com, Beware of what may be coming next. We already know the establishment has a plan to blame President Trump for the next financial crisis, and now there are moves being made that will support that narrative. After the 2008 fiasco, a spotlight on Wall Street misbehavior and some weak, but better-than-nothing regulations were put on the industry in the hopes of preventing another string of bank failures and crippling economic disasters. But as the system teeters on edge and prepares to endure the backlash of increased rates at the Fed, Trump is also taking off the shackles that have been put in place by the Dodd-Frank Act which instituted certain protections for consumers, including a requirement that pensioners don’t have their nest egg devoured, etc. For the tens of millions of baby boomer retirees and aging pensioners, the social security net is all they’ve got to count on, apart from a few debt-saddled kids who have hardly been able to save a dime under eight years of Obama. The 2008 economic crisis penalized everyone with an entire cycle of wage freezes, job starvation and crushing dependence upon government programs for assistance. Wall Street, and the banker class at large were spared from blame or reparations to a society that was robbed blind. Instead, eight years of quantitative easing sent a tidal wave of easy money to the financial sector that created a gorge of asset buy-up from the top – especially in housing, where soaring rates are forcing single households to become renters instead of mortgage debt-slave owners once again. The election of President Trump created optimism about our collective financial prospects – with seemingly tangible promises of bringing home jobs and returning to American Greatness™. But the banksters also cheered his election; stock markets shot upwards in celebration. Key positions in the White House were offered to Goldman Sachs men and others of their ilk. Now, President Trump has issued an executive order that has Wall Street once again self-congratulating for backing the right man. The order is expected to gut protections that currently require financial products sellers As the London Independent reports: Donald Trump is expected to order a review of the Dodd-Frank Act, which was implemented in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis to prevent a repeat of the worst financial crash since the Great Depression.   […] council has the right to break up banks that it thinks could pose a systemic risk to the global financial order. It also has the ability to demand that banks hold higher reserves, or cash buffers, to minimise a squeeze. Separately, the Dodd-Frank Act also created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, to oversee consumer financial products, such as mortgages.   A key part of the Act is the Volcker Rule, which restricts the way that banks are allowed to invest and places restrictions on speculative trading. It also restricts banks from engaging in so-called proprietary trading, or trading for the firm’s direct gain, instead of on behalf of a client.   So in effect, the rule is designed to separate the investment and commercial businesses of banks. It seems clear enough that this move benefits many of those at the top of the pyramid, but a Bloomberg report directly quoting from senior leadership on Wall Street, and now inside the Trump Administration, makes crystal clear that the intentions are quite self-interested: Chief executives including Goldman Sachs Group Inc.’s Lloyd Blankfein and JPMorgan Chase & Co.’s Jamie Dimon have been pushing for changes for years, arguing that the industry has been too constrained by the system put in place by the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act. After Trump focused on limiting trade and immigration during his first two weeks in office — policies opposed by many in the financial industry — the president’s stroke of a pen unleashes a process to undo many of the rules they find most irksome.   “We’re going to attack all aspects of Dodd-Frank,” Gary Cohn, director of the White House National Economic Council, said Friday in an interview with Bloomberg Television. “We are going to engage the House, we’re going to engage the Senate. They are equally interested in reforming some of the regulatory processes as well. We can do quite a bit without them, but the more help we get from Congress the better off we’re all going to be.” Not necessarily the brightest news for the people. Though it isn’t immediately obvious that this change in the rules would cause immediate trouble, there is reason for concern. If the limitations – inadequate as they were – are lifted off the banks, specifically with investing in commercial banking and with pensions, things could once again take a turn for the worse. If the same reckless behavior is repeated, it could not only bring the system to a halt, and crash the stock market, but it could potentially wipe out the holdings of those who need it most – pensioners. Meanwhile, defaults and the burden of a debt-supercycle are also threatening to topple the system. One way or another, the next era will have to handle enormous risk of total economic crisis. As the Independent notes: Does this mean we’re at risk of facing another financial crisis? Some economists have even been bold enough to say that getting rid of Dodd-Frank could indeed pave the way for another crisis.   What makes matters a lot worse, is that many experts believe that global financial systems and economies are more vulnerable now than they were ahead of the last financial crisis. So if we do suffer another major crash, the damage has the potential to be a lot more grave.   Central banks around the world have already slashed interest rates to record lows leaving them with limited ammunition to do more to stimulate economic growth. Government debt has also sky rocketed over the decade since the last crisis. Whatever comes next, there is a toxic cycle that is waiting to crash down upon us with a tsunami of financial misfortune. Federal Reserve policies in the wake of the last crisis set up the American people for a very bad fall. Economic vibrancy among the middle class and general population has been sucked dry, and they will be ill prepared to handle a new crunch in credit and possible hyper inflationary/deflationary crisis. Trump’s pro-business, pro-American policies may help if they are instituted correctly, but enabling the financial sector to once again prey upon people and fuel the rise-and-collapse of a massive series of bubbles and a derivatives WMD is not a healthy option. The stage has been set for a nightmare that we must pray never comes.

03 февраля, 23:30

Trump Begins to Chip Away at Banking Regulations

Justifying his latest executive order, he said that "so many people, friends of mine, with nice businesses” had trouble getting loans.

03 февраля, 23:30

Trump Begins to Chip Away at Banking Regulations

Justifying his latest executive order, he said that "so many people, friends of mine, with nice businesses” had trouble getting loans.

03 февраля, 22:03

Трамп помог друзьям-бизнесменам: пересмотр закона Додда-Франка - economy

Президент США Дональд Трамп в пятницу подписал указ, который ослабит регулирование финансовой сферы. Речь идет о пересмотре и смягчении закона Додда-Франка, принятого в 2010 году и призванного не допустить повторения финансового кризиса 2008 года. На заседании консультативного совета предпринимателей Дональд Трамп заявил: "Здесь собрались банкиры. И никто не сможет рассказать лучше о законе Додда-Франка, чем глава банка JP Morgan Chase Джейми Даймон. Мы отменим многие положения этого закона… ЧИТАТЬ ДАЛЕЕ: http://ru.euronews.com/2017/02/03/trump-to-weaken-banking-rules euronews: самый популярный новостной канал в Европе. Подписывайтесь! http://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=euronewsru euronews доступен на 13 языках: https://www.youtube.com/user/euronewsnetwork/channels На русском: Сайт: http://ru.euronews.com Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/euronews Twitter: http://twitter.com/euronewsru Google+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/101036888397116664208/100240575545901894719/posts?pageId=101036888397116664208 VKontakte: http://vk.com/ru.euronews

03 февраля, 21:49

Trump Signs Executive Orders Rolling Back Dodd-Frank, Fiduciary Rule

As previewed earlier today, moments ago President Trump signed two executive orders aimed at starting the process of rolling back the regulatory system put in place after the financial crisis. Among the targets are rules that protect against predatory lenders, force brokers to lower fees for retirees and ban proprietary trading. Specifically, Trump took executive action ordering the review of Dodd-Frank rules enacted after 2008 financial crisis, and halting the "fiduciary rule" that would require advisers on retirement accounts to work in the best interests of their clients. #Breaking President Trump signs executive order scaling back financial regulations. pic.twitter.com/Hs0QQHHzhT — FOX Business (@FoxBusiness) February 3, 2017 Wall Street CEOs such as Lloyd Blankfein and Jamie Dimon, tired of being constrained from blowing up the financial world with undue government regulations and relying almost entirely on NIM which stubbornly refuses to rise, have been pushing for changes for years, arguing that the industry has been too constrained by the system put in place by the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act. After Trump focused on limiting trade and immigration during his first two weeks in office, policies opposed by many in the financial industry, the president’s stroke of a pen unleashes a process to undo many of the rules they find most "irksome" as Bloomberg put it. “We’re going to attack all aspects of Dodd-Frank,” Gary Cohn, former Goldman president director of the White House National Economic Council, said Friday in an interview with Bloomberg Television. “We are going to engage the House, we’re going to engage the Senate. They are equally interested in reforming some of the regulatory processes as well. We can do quite a bit without them, but the more help we get from Congress the better off we’re all going to be.” Meanwhile, Elizabeth Warren - rightfully according to some - lashed out at Trump for rushing to undo the key Wall Street regulations, and issued a statement in which she said "The Wall Street bankers and lobbyists whose greed and recklessness nearly destroyed this country may be toasting each other with champagne, but the American people have not forgotten the 2008 financial crisis." "Donald Trump talked a big game about Wall Street during his campaign - but as President, we're finding out whose side he's really on. Today, after literally standing alongside big bank and hedge fund CEOs, he announced two new orders - one that will make it easier for investment advisors to cheat you out of your retirement savings, and another that will put two former Goldman Sachs executives in charge of gutting the rules that protect you from financial fraud and another economic meltdown. The Wall Street bankers and lobbyists whose greed and recklessness nearly destroyed this country may be toasting each other with champagne, but the American people have not forgotten the 2008 financial crisis - and they will not forget what happened today." While it will take a while to fully roll back the financial regulations, we are confident that Wall Street is already preparing for the next big push into prop trading, major releveraging, blowing a whole new set of asset bubbles, and all those other things which brought the system to a near collapse less than 10 years ago. Finally, while Trump was quick to begin the process of undoing Dodd Frank - no doubt with the helpful advice of numerous former Goldman bankers standing behind his shoulder - he has yet to make any comments on bringing back Glass Steagall, the one law that would truly protect depositors from runaway banker greed, and mandate yet another taxpayer funded bailout the next time the US banking sector is in need of a bailout.

03 февраля, 20:44

Remarks by President Trump in Strategy and Policy Forum

State Dining Room 10:16 A.M. EST THE PRESIDENT:  Well, thank you, everybody, for being here this morning.  This is a really world-class group and I want to thank and congratulate Steve.  You have done, as usual, an amazing job.  Steve called me up the day after the election -- it might have even been the same night, Jamie, to be honest with you.  You know Steve -- (inaudible) -- in fact, I think maybe one minute.  And he said, I'd like to put together a group of world-class leaders and that's what he's done.  So good job, Steve.   A couple of things happened this morning -- 227,000 jobs, great spirit in the country right now.  So we're very happy about that.  I think that it's going to continue big league.  We're bringing back jobs, we're bringing down your taxes.  We're getting rid of your regulations.  And I think it's going to be some really very exciting times ahead.  We're going to be doing -- we're doing it, we're going to be coming up with a tax bill soon, a health care bill even sooner.  And it's really working out.   Toby from the Cleveland Clinic has been helping us a lot with the veterans, and we appreciate that, Toby.  You've been amazing.  And I and all of our friends, we really appreciate it.  One of the things that I heard this morning in watching the news was that, amazingly, it's never happened before, that politics has become a much bigger subject than the Super Bowl -- this is usually Super Bowl territory.  And I have to say that politics is more interesting to people.  So that's good.   I see we have Larry here -- where is Larry Fink?  Larry did a great job for me.  He managed a lot of my money, and, I have to tell you, he got me great returns last year.  (Laughter.)  And then they go crazy -- they'll meet very smart people that made money, why don't you let other people to run the economy?  I said, no, we have to get the right people.  And the people that voted for me understand that, and that's what they want. So when I campaigned for office, I promised the American people that I'd ask for our country's best and brightest, and we have that.  Wilbur is representing us as secretary.  I tell you, you're going to be so great -- Secretary of Commerce, Wilbur Ross.  In fact, Carl Icahn got called up, and he goes, I hear you got Wilbur.  Everybody calls him Wilbur.  I've never heard him called -- what, we just know him as Wilbur, right?  We've got the great Jack Welch, the legendary Jack Welch.  We appreciate him. We're looking forward in a little while, and we have coming in a few moments, to discuss all of the things that you think we can do to bring back our jobs, to get taxes even lower than what they'll be cutting them.  We have a great plan, but I want to have your input on the plan in particular and to do what we have to do in terms of regulation.  We have some of the bankers here.  There’s nobody better to tell me about Dodd-Frank than Jamie, so you’re going to tell me about it.  But we expect to be cutting a lot out of Dodd-Frank, because, frankly, I have so many people, friends of mine that have nice businesses that can’t borrow money, they just can’t get any money because the banks just won’t let them borrow because of the rules and regulations in Dodd-Frank.  So we’ll be talking about that, Jamie, in terms of the banking industry. And with that, I just want to introduce somebody I’ve known for a long time.  He’s done a fantastic job, and we’re thinking of have these meetings -- I think we’ll start maybe on a monthly basis.  It will go to a quarterly basis, because all of a sudden monthly basis sounds like a lot. But we really want your input.  We have the biggest, the brightest in the world.  They’re in this country, in this case.  We also have a manufacturing group which is worldwide, where we have, as you know, great companies representing.  But these are the biggest and the best minds in this country, and I really appreciate you being here.   And I want to thank Steve.  And Steve is going to say a few words. MR. SCHWARZMAN:  Sure.  Well, I’d like to just start out and thank everybody for being here.  The purpose of this group isn’t for general discussion, which is okay.  But the real purpose is to get things done, to advise the government as to areas where we can do things a lot better as a country, for all Americans, and de-bottleneck some things. We have a full agenda, unlike a lot of other meetings that happen of this general type.  We’re going to cover some of the immigration things.  We’re going to cover regulatory, I believe.  We’re going to cover tax and trade, women in the workplace, infrastructure and education.  And in each of those areas we'll get suggestions, ways to make things happen, happen faster to improve the country. And anybody can say anything else they want.  But it’s really important that we mobilize the non-governmental sector, and also, importantly, that we do it on a bipartisan basis.  Apparently, a first in Washington for a (inaudible) Washington.  And everybody on the group was selected because they’re terrific, because they have domain expertise, because they want the country to do better.  And we had no criteria -- we have all kinds of different people from different backgrounds and different political persuasions.  And if we can make things work right, that’s the way the country is supposed to work. And so it’s a big sacrifice for the people who are here to spend the time.  Everybody is busy.  That’s America.  So to puts those things aside to focus on this, not just for me, but there’s prep work that goes into any successful meeting -- means these people who attended have taken the time to care about their country. And so that’s the spirit in which we’re approaching things.  I want to thank everybody on the committee here.  You're terrific.   THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you very much.  We're going to go around the room, but before we do that I just want to say that so many people I call friends of mine in big business, and they wanted to be in the committee.  And I call Steve and I say, Steve, can we get so-and-so?  No.  (Laughter.)  I said, what do you mean no?  (Laughter.)  It’s a big business, massive business -- you know, public companies.  And every once in a while I’d call him -- Steve, how about this one?  I don’t -- he’s a corporate raider, these people don’t want to be sitting with corporate raiders.  (Laughter.)  Five raiders that wanted to come.  But he’s been very, very selective.  And we’ll be putting a couple of more (inaudible).  He’s been very selective.   I thought we might go around the room -- Mary and I met last week, we had a fantastic meeting on the auto industry.  We had Ford there, we had a lot of companies.  We had some great companies -- Fiat-Chrysler, Sergio.  And I will tell you, I learned a lot about the automobile business.  I thought I knew a lot, but they are being so stymied, so restricted with regulation and so many other reasons, and they’re pouring back into the country already.   If you look at Mark, who was telling us what they’re doing with Ford, and Bill Ford, too.  A lot of jobs are going to be coming back into Ohio and Michigan and Pennsylvania, and all of the places that really have been hurt so badly. So maybe we can start with Mary.  We’ll just go around the room real fast so that everybody -- pretty much everybody knows each other, but it would be nice to see. MS. BARRA:  Mary Barra, Chairman and CEO of General Motors. MR. MCMILLON:  Doug McMillon, Walmart. MR. FINK:  Larry Fink, BlackRock. MR. LESSER:  Rich Lesser, Boston Consulting Group. MR. MCNERNEY:  Jim McNerney, the old Boeing guy.  (Laughter.)  MR. ATKINS:  Paul Atkins, Patomak Global Partners. MR. WARSH:  Kevin Warsh, Stanford University. MR. MUSK:  Elon Musk, Tesla and SpaceX. MR. COSGROVE:  Toby Cosgrove, Cleveland Clinic. MR. DIMON:  Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan Chase. MR. YERGIN:  Dan Yergin, IHS Markit. MR. WELCH:  Jack Welch, retired.  (Laughter.)   MR. WEINBERGER:  Mark Weinberger -- someday, maybe, I hope –- (laughter) -- but EY. MR. OGUNLESI:  Adebayo Ogunlesi, Global Infrastructure Partners. MS. ROMETTY:  Ginni Rometty, IBM. MS. NOOYI:  Indra Nooyi, PepsiCo. MS. SCHWARZMAN:  Steve Schwarzman from Blackstone. THE PRESIDENT:  Okay.  Thank you very much.  Thank you, folks.  Thank you, press.   END  10:24 A.M. EST

01 декабря 2016, 06:45

Команда Трампа. Голдман Сакс снова на коне

Дональд Трамп объявил имя будущего министра финансов США: им станет Стивен Тёрнер Мнучин (Steven Terner Mnuchin). Для кого-то это явилось неожиданностью. Ведь среди претендентов на высокий пост называли исполнительного директора банка JPMorgan Джейми Даймона, члена палаты представителей Джеба Хенсарлинга... У Стивена Мнучина, однако, было важное преимущество: в предвыборной кампании Трампа он работал финансовым менеджером. Кроме того, что...

07 января 2015, 14:33

Во время 9/11 Дик Чейни был не там, как это он утверждал официально.

Напомню, что я - аналитик и подборка информации идет соответственно- аналитическая, предполагающее самостоятельное изучение материалов.сначала с вами вспомним как звучит официально:Википедия:9:32: Диспетчеры аэропорта Даллеса в Виргинии наблюдают «цель на первичном обзорном радаре, двигающуюся с высокой скоростью в восточном направлении», относя это к рейсу 77.9:33 до 9:34: Руководитель башни аэропорта Рейган сообщает центру Секретной Службы Белого дома, что «в вашу сторону летит самолёт, который не выходит с нами на связь.» имея в виду рейс 77. Белый дом готовится к эвакуации, когда башня сообщает, что рейс 77 повернул, и заходит на посадку в аэропорт Рейган.9:34: Командный центр ФАА передает штаб-квартире ФАА имеющуюся информацию о рейсе 93.9:37: Вице-президент Чейни направляется в подземный бункер по туннелю.9:37:46: Рейс 77 врезается в западное крыло здания Пентагона, отчего начинается сильный пожар. Это крыло Пентагона находится на ремонте, и большинство офисов в нём не заняты. Погибают все 64 человека на борту и 125 человек в здании.1 канал, Россия:В 8:46 первый самолет врезался в северную башню Всемирного торгового центра в Нью-Йорке. Мэр города и руководитель службы спасения немедленно выехали к башням-близнецам. "Подъехав к торговому центру, мы убедились, что все намного хуже, чем мы думали, - рассказывает мэр Нью-Йорка в 2001 году Рудольф Джулиани. - Мы пытались дозвониться до начальника полиции, начальника пожарного департамента, даже до Белого дома. Но сотовая связь почти не работала".В 9:03 в южную башню Всемирного торгового центра врезался второй самолет. После этого первым лицам США стало понятно, что это нападение на страну. Президенту Бушу доложили о втором самолете.В этот момент новость о втором самолете получили журналисты президентского пула. Встреча со школьниками подошла к концуПервый звонок Буша – вице-президенту Дику Чейни. Они обсудили, с какими словами президент должен обратиться к нации. Оба понимали, что это террористический акт и они обязаны об этом сказать.В то время как президент завершал свое обращение к нации, в Центре управления ПВО возникла новая кризисная ситуация. Был замечен самолет в 10 километрах к востоку от Белого дома. При угрозе нападения на Вашингтон Белый дом должен быть немедленно эвакуирован. "Я работал за своим столом, когда в кабинет ворвался один из руководителей охраны. Он приказал следовать за ним без каких-либо объяснений. Потом одной рукой схватил меня за ремень, а другой за плечо и буквально вынес меня из кабинета сначала в коридор, а потом в туннель, ведущий в подземный оперативный центр", - вспоминает Дик Чейни.Оперативный центр находится в бункере. Он предназначен для управления страной в случае начала ядерной войны. Отсюда Чейни мог руководить организацией обороны страны и подготовкой ответного удара. Задача №1 – нейтрализация рейса 77 American Airlines, взявшего курс на Вашингтон.В 9:37 третий угнанный самолет врезался в здание Пентагона. В это время министр обороны Дональд Рамсфелд находился в своем рабочем кабинете. Выйдя на улицу, чтобы оценить ситуацию, он увидел пламя, дым и раненых и бросился помогать пострадавшим. Почти полчаса его не могли найти. Но затем он вернулся в свой кабинет, чтобы связаться с президентом и вице-президентомА теперь обращаемся к всежим американским источникам, коим является ранее мною упоминаемая согласительная комиссия по альтернативному (официальной точке зрения) расследованию этой трагедии. Ранее она находила свидетелей, которые утверждали,что черные ящики от врезавшихся самолетов в ВТЦ, были найдены: Новые доказательства отрицают,что не были найдены черные ящики самолетов.Пожарные, работающие в Граунд Зеро, утверждают,что были найдены три из четырех черных ящиков, так как они находятся в коробках, которые практически не поддаются разрушению. Эта информация была предоставлена согласительной комиссии из 24 членов по 9/11.Сейчас эта же комиссия утверждает,что слова Дика Чейни расходятся с показаниями свидетелей:Point MC-3: The Claim about the Time of Dick Cheney’s Entry into the White House Bunker  Поставим точку в MC-3: заявление относительно того времени, когда Дик Чейни находился в подземном бункере.The Official Account Официально:Vice President Dick Cheney took charge of the government’s response to the 9/11 attacks after he entered the PEOC (the Presidential Emergency Operations Center), a.k.a. “the bunker”. 9/11 Commission Report said1that Cheney did not enter the PEOC until almost 10:00 AM, which was at least 20 minutes after the violent event at the Pentagon that killed more than 100 people.Вице-президент США Дик Чейни взял на себя управление государством после того,как вошел в правительственный бункер и это произошло по его словам около 10:00 утра, через 20 минут после того, как в Пентагоне погибло более 100 человек.(1)The Best Evidence  Лучшее доказательство:Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta told the 9/11 Commission that, after he joined Cheney and others in the bunker at approximately 9:20 AM, he listened to an ongoing conversation between Cheney and a young man, which took place when “the airplane was coming into the Pentagon.”2After the young man, having reported for the third time that the plane was coming closer, asked whether “the orders still stand,” Cheney emphatically said they did.However, testimony that Cheney was in the PEOC by 9:20 was reported not only by Mineta but also by Richard Clarke3 and White House photographer David Bohrer.4 Cheney himself, speaking on “Meet the Press” five days after 9/11, reported that he had entered the PEOC before the Pentagon was damaged.5The 9/11 Commission’s attempt to bury the exchange between Cheney and the young man confirms the importance of Mineta’s report of this conversation.Министр транспорта Норман Минета сообщил комиссии 9/11,что он присоединился к Чейни и к остальным в бункере уже в 9:20 и услышал разговор между ним и молодым человеком, когда "самолет направлялся в сторону Пентагона".(2)Когда молодой человек в третий раз запросил Чейни, так как самолет приближается и "все ждут приказа", Чейни решительно ответил, что "он обдумывает".Норман Минета не единственный свидетель, кто подтверждает нахождение Чейни в бункере уже в 9:20. Помимо него об этом говорят Ричард Кларк (3) и фотограф Белого дома Дэвид Борер (4)Сам же Чейни утверждает,что он вошел в бункер после того,как был атакован Пентагон.(5)References for Point MC-31. 9/11 Commission Report (2004), note 213, p. 464.2. “911 Commission: Trans. Sec. Norman Mineta Testimony.”3. Richard Clarke, Against all Enemies (New York: Free Press, 2004), pp. 2-5.4. See “9/11: Interviews by Peter Jennings,” ABC News, September 11, 2002.5. “The Vice President Appears on Meet the Press with Tim Russert,” MSNBC, September 16, 2001.Казалось бы- ну и что? Какое это имеет отношение к экономике? А самое прямое. Напомню,что во время 9/11 были объявлены банковские каникулы, после которых в течении недели рынок потерял более 1 триллиона капитализации:Эти атаки оказали значительное экономическое воздействие на американский и мировой рынки. ФРС временно сократил контакты с банками из-за нарушений коммуникационного оборудования в финансовом районе Нижнего Манхэттена. Обратная связь и контроль над денежной массой, включая мгновенную ликвидность банков, была восстановлена в течение нескольких часов. Нью-Йоркская фондовая биржа (NYSE), Американская фондовая биржа и NASDAQ не открылись 11 сентября и оставались закрытыми до 17 сентября. Объекты NYSE и её центры обработки данных не пострадали, но члены биржи, клиенты и другие биржи потеряли с ней связь из-за разрушений телефонного узла около ВТЦ. Когда 17 сентября биржи открылись, после самого долгого периода бездействия со времён Великой депрессии в 1929 году, Индекс Доу-Джонса («DJIA») потерял 684 пункта, или 7,1 %, до 8920, это было самым большим его падением в течение одного дня. К концу недели DJIA упал на 1369,7 пунктов (14,3 %), это было самым большим недельным падением в истории. Американские акции потеряли 1,2 триллиона долл. в течение недели.Стоит обратить внимание на слова Билла Гросса "The Good Times Are Over, The Time For Risk Taking Has Passed" о том, что :"институциональные инвесторы финансовой экономики такие как, фонды денежного рынка, страховые, пенсионные, банковские и даже потребительские балансы больше не могут обеспечить уровень доходности, необходимых для оправдания своих будущих обязательств  и их стало невозможно достичь. Доход по депозитам слишкам мал,чтобы покрыть обязательства. В связи с чем доход по многим классам активов станет отрицательным. По мере снижения ливидности можно будет наблюдать, как ряды рискованных активов будут пополняться , напоминая всем известную игру с музыкальными стульями. И то, что 2015 год или ближайшие 12 месяцев- это время принятия рисков, можно судить по тому,что активов с положительным денежным потоком становится все меньше".Далее мы с вами наблюдаем любопытные вещи, происходящие в крупнейших финансовых учреждениях США.Зерохедж. Is Citi The Next AIG? Citi  - это новый AIG? Напомню, что в Сити работает Саммерс. Тот самый, который организовал в свое время провалившийся фонд Гарварда в России, планировавшийся для того,чтобы организовать то,что сейчас происходит на Украине. Стоит вспомнить о том,что война довольно затратное, а зачастую убыточное мероприятие. И не исключено,что пополнение баланса деривативами как-то связано с тем,что происходит на Украине- Украина банкрот, но , например, Обама подписал закон о поддержке Укрианы на 400 миллионов, к тому же он(Обама) довольно плотно работал с Саммерсом и только общественность заставила отклонить его кандидатуру на пост председателя ФРС, удовольствовашись кандидатурой Фишера на "вторых ролях", хотя Фишер от этого не испытывает никаких страданий.Мы обнаружили,что Citigroup, ранее пролоббировавшая деривативы за счет FDIC, увеличили деривативы на своем балансе в третьем квартале до $70.2 трлн, опередив в этом даже  JPM!Ну раз завели дело о JPM, то давайте поговорим о нем. Этот мегабанк уже довольно давно испытывает давление от регуляторов в том плане, что у них Джейми Даймон одновременно является и генеральным директором и председателем совета директоров. Но, как нам сообщает Зерохедж, основная опасность исходит от конкурента гиганта- Голдман Сакс, чьи люди как раз и работают в регуляторе. Кого заинтересовало, могут подробнее прочитать в оригинале:Зерохедж Goldman's Modest Proposal: It May Be Time To Break Up JPMorgan  Скромное предложение от Голдмана: может, пришло время разбить JPMorganЕще в 2008 году, после падения фондовых рынков, Голдман избавился от двух своих конкурентов: от Bear и Lehman, когда ФРС отказалась спасать эти банки. Теперь, волне возможно, пришла очередь и для JPM.Голдман: недавно было озвучено ФРС,что капитал JPM необходимо поднять до 11,5%,что на 100%-200% выше, чем у всех остальных, то, может быть имеет смысл говорить о целесообразности разделения акционерного капитала, учитывая,что он сейчас является отрицательным. Распад может создать стоимость ниже на 20% и его можно разделить на:  (1) трастовый банк, инвестиционный банк и бизнес по управлению активами и (2) все остальное (то есть более традиционный банковский бизнес). Разделение банка будет способствовать росту акционерного капитала.Вы мне скажете: а при чем тут Дик Чейни? Прямое отношение, конечно, он уже не имеет, просто надо иметь в виду,что США действуют всегда шаблонно, поэтому, например, не исключен вот какой вариант:прогнозирует Байрон Уин из Blackstone Group LP:По словам Уина, в этом году по настоящему проявят себя киберпреступники, которые становятся более ловкими, чем полиция.«Хакеры захватят частные и корпоративные счета одного крупнейшего банка, а Федеральная резервная система закроет это учреждение на пять дней для проверки его счетов»А хакеры- ,понятно, кто- Федеральное бюро расследований США расследует кражу данных из американского банка JP Morgan Chase. Она произошла в середине августа, сообщило агентство Bloomberg со ссылкой на двух сотрудников, имеющих отношение к следствию. По данным агентства, под подозрение попали российские хакеры. Они украли петабайты закрытой информации настолько умело, что эксперты подозревают — хакеры действуют при поддержке российских властей. ФБР расследует, является ли взлом JP Morgan местью российских властей за санкции США из-за конфликта вокруг Украины.или :Блумберг:"элитные российские хакеры взломали биржу Nasdaq и заложили туда цифровую бомбу".Я , надеюсь, что понятно. В условиях, когда ставки находятся на нуле и практически все активы показывают отрицательное значение, то есть идут убытки по причине невозможности капитал воспроизводить, происходит органический рост - за счет поглощения конкурентов. В США давно поглощены мелкие банки, настала очередь крупного финансового капитала выяснять, кто будет сидеть на стуле. В свою очередь, Россия только вступила в данный этап , когда крупные банки выживают за счет разорения мелких, в чем немало способствует ЦБ РФ. Во всяком случае, мы наблюдаем назревание явно революционной ситуации:"верхи не могут, низы не хотят". Вернее: верхи разбираются, для кого стул лишний, а когда разберутся, то назначат мальчика для битья, коим,скорее всего, будет российская элита,этакий хакерский Бен Ладен. Хотя проблемы финансового капитала США должны решаться несколько иными решениями, но американская элита иначе не может- виноват в их проблемах всегда кто-то другой, вот они и решают их, как могут- за чужой счет. И если это кто-то другой согласен его оплачивать- то тем более.

11 декабря 2013, 21:15

Джейми Даймон благодарит Конгресс

 Глава банка JP Morgan Джейми Даймон благодарит конгресс за принятие бюджета. "Этим утром я собираюсь отправить Полу Райану и Патти Мюррей сообщение по электронной почте со словами "Спасибо вам, спасибо вам, спасибо вам, и пусть Господь благословит вас", – заявил Даймон в среду, обращаясь к республиканским конгрессменам и сенаторам из Демократической партии, которым удалось прийти к бюджетному соглашению. По его мнению, бюджетное соглашение - это "большой прорыв", так как повторной временной приостановки работы правительства не произойдет. Напомним, что Конгресс США, не дожидаясь крайнего срока, принял бюджет и предотвратил еще одну временную приостановку работы американского правительства. После продолжительных дебатов демократы и республиканцы все же достигли договоренности и приняли бюджет на 2014 финансовый год. Соглашение предусматривает сокращение госрасходов в течение двух лет на $63 млрд. Причем большая часть секвестра придется на текущий 2014 финансовый год, который в Америке начинается 1 октября.