About Me

Name: Gabrielle Cusumano
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Should Terrorists Be Afforded the Rights of U.S. Citizens? Take You Poll

 
 
 Go To YouPoll at: http://www.youpolls.com/
Should Terrorists Be Afforded the Rights of U.S. Citizens?
Yes
No
 
 
 
  
 
Related Article 
Terrorists Should Not Be Afforded the...
Added 2 days ago on January 5th, 2010
House Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) today issued the following statement in response to reports that the Obama...
 
 
Go to YouPoll   http://www.youpolls.com/
Should Geithner be fired for deceiving the American Tax Payer?
Yes
No
 
Related Article
 
Geithner's Fed Told AIG to Withhold Swaps...
Added 6 hours ago on January 7th, 2010
The Federal Reserve Bank of New York, then led by Timothy Geithner, told American International Group Inc. to... Read More

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Conflict of Interest? Larry Summers was paid $5.2mn by the hedge fund that employed him, D.E. Shaw

 
 
 

Summers Feeds at Hedge Fund Trough

By: masaccio Friday April 3, 2009 5:50 pm  Excerpted from: http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/03/summers-feeds-at-hedge-fund-trough/
 

In the run-up to the election, I pointed out that the enormous amounts of money the President raised from ordinary people could well mean that we might have an administration attuned to the problems of ordinary people. Well, I was wrong.

Larry Summers was paid $5.2mn by the hedge fund that employed him, D.E. Shaw, according to the Wall Street Journal. That isn’t all the cash showered on him either. Here are some of his $2.77mn in speaking fees: JP Morgan ($67.5K), Skagen Funds ($180K), Citigroup ($99K), Goldman Sachs ($202.5K), Lehman Bros. ($67.5K), CEO 100 ($45K), Price Waterhouse Coopers ($67.5K), State Street Corporation ($112.5K) McKinsey and Co. ($135K), Merrill Lynch ($45K, donated to charity).

Apparently, Larry can’t quite live on the miserly $587K he got as salary from Harvard.

In case you were wondering about conflicts of interest, the WSJ provides this helpful hint:

Among the many decisions the economic team has wrestled with has been whether to step up regulation of hedge funds, one of the most contentious subjects during a summit of world leaders this week. European nations pushed for tougher rules, while the Obama administration preferred a less stringent approach.

Geithner doesn’t pay taxes until he gets caught. Summers is just another Wall Street money grubber. I guess that $300 million regular folks donated in $10 and $20s to Obama wasn’t enough to get anyone on the economic team who isn't in the bag for the financial elites. I wonder how much more that would have cost?  (more at link)

 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Our Outrageous Un-American President and Congress. START Grass Root Impeachment Proceedings Now!

"Un-American is a term of US political discourse which is sometimes applied to people or institutions in the United States in an attempt to deny the targets the identity of American. It implies a substantial deviation from US norms and may extend to internal subversion, espionage or treason."  Wikipedia
 
Looking at all the actions of the President and Congress in the last three months, "ALL" should be declared "mentally incompeted".

The budget deficit is overnight corrected to be $2.6 TRILLION*.  Americans are angry and getting angrier. We can't trust them to act in good faith on our behalf. Either they get kicked out under the LAW or the alternative is a "French Revolution" carnage!    It will be you and your families against THEM **!!!

OBAMA’S MANDATORY UNIFORMED ‘VOLUNTEER’ CORPS?
** (also see American Thinker article ** below)

Posted by jgrantswankjr at 9:00 AM on 3/20/2009 and (They have taken a pledge of loyalty to Obama. Organizing for America, a project of the Democratic National Committee)

Reasons for Impeachments to Begin

* Make that $1 trillion more

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/20203.html__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

U.S. law-making is riddled with slapdash, incompetence and gamesmanship

Terence Corcoran: Is this the end of America?

By Terence Corcoran  http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/archive/2009/03/19/terence-corcoran-is-this-the-end-of-america.aspx
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Friday, March 20, 2009
Republicans Vote for Confiscatory Tax      (Unconstitutional Tax)
Posted by: Matt Lewis at 9:07 AM
Yesterday, the House passed Charlie Rangel's ridiculous bill, retroactively taxing the AIG bonuses at 90 percent. As the Washington Post reported today:

... 85 fellow Republicans joined 243 Democrats in voting "yes." It was opposed by six Democrats and 87 Republicans.

  When America Is Not America Anymore

 
 
O's TH ?: Can You Like Make Corn Syrup, Trans Fats, Hormones And Additives Illegal Or Something?
Posted by: Greg Hengler at 5:25 PM
Obama: "This is actually a serious question."
 
And Recent Articles In The American Thinker Gives Some Of The Reasons
 
March 20, 2009

** Obama wants you to pledge loyalty to him tomorrow Excerpted from:  http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/03/obama_wants_you_to_pledge_loya.html
at March 20, 2009 - 10:36:36 AM EDT

They have taken a pledge of loyalty to Obama, and they say they are coming tomorrow for yours. Organizing for America, the Obama-for-President campaign morphed into Obama-for-Maximum-Leader army, will hit the streets for their "Pledge Project Canvass," knocking on doors and accosting folks in parking lots and sidewalks to ask them to sign a pledge to support Obama's policies for health care, energy and education reform.

Organizing for America, a project of the Democratic National Committee, is variously described in the media as [President Obama's] "own version of a lobbying firm", "a parallel organization to the Democratic National Committee" and "an independent force to lobby for Obama's goals" (Houston Chronicle); "an independent group" (Dayton Daily News); Obama's "citizen army," and a way of building public opinion" (The Bergen County Record); "a grass-roots lobbying group," (Roll Call), "Obama 2.0" (Newark Star-Ledger), "a joint partnership," (DNC press release), and as a "political bully," (AP).

According to Mitch Stewart, Director of OFA, the organization will be "getting out in front of Washington and asking our elected officials to lead the charge on energy, education and health care this year."

So one might suppose that all the names and emails collected this weekend will be sent to our lawmakers in Washington in the form of a petition. Except that David Plouffe, Obama's former campaign director and an "advisor" to OFA, has emphatically stated that they will do no such thing.

Plouffe "stressed that Organizing for America is not aimed at twisting the arms of members of Congress but meant to keep activists engaged on issues such as health care, energy and the economy."

Syndicated columnist Dick Polman reported on January 29 that:

"Mr. Obama's aides emphasized that the effort was not created to lobby directly or pressure members of Congress to support Mr. Obama's programs... ‘This is not a political campaign,'' Mr. Plouffe said. ''This is not a 'call or e-mail your member of Congress' organization.''"
Whoops! Looks like Plouffe is out of the loop on that one. The OFA website prominently asks people to call Congress and helps them look up their representative's name and number. It even provides a script.

Now, it is confusing to see the Democratic National Committee asking for help to persuade the Democrat-led Congress and the Democrat-led Senate.

But according to OFA Director Stewart, ordinary folks like you are needed to combat "a Washington establishment that doesn't welcome change.... It's up to you to show Washington that Americans are demanding this new direction."

Okay, so who in Washington, exactly? Is the DNC going to give the names and emails to lobbyists? To Washington bureaucrats? That's doubtful. The sign-up sheet to be used for the pledge drive does not mention any privacy policy.

It does reveal (at the very bottom) that OFA is a project of the DNC. This might come as a surprise to dedicated Obama supporter Janine Poppa, who told the Dayton Daily News, "It is a nonpartisan effort, and I hope people believe it's nonpartisan, because we truly do need each other to move it forward."

Poor Ms. Poppa might be disillusioned to learn that the Florida Democratic State machine unabashedly bragged to the St. Petersburg Times that they were "preparing to tap into Barack Obama's grass roots machine to build the biggest political operation ever seen from the state party."

"The million-dollar question is how to translate the activism and enthusiasm that Barack Obama was able to create and translate it down the line,'' said Steve Schale, a Democratic consultant who managed Obama's Florida campaign. "That's the challenge, but fundamentally the state is better for Democrats than ever before because of what Barack Obama was able to do. It's still up to candidates to have compelling messages and drive up enthusiasm."

No doubt the Florida Dems will be getting another memo from Plouffe to remind them that OFA a movement "not to win an election, but to change this country." Excerpted from:  http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/03/obama_wants_you_to_pledge_loya.html
at March 20, 2009 - 10:36:36 AM EDT
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"Outrage expressed by Obama, Summers and Geithner must be feigned -- or they don't know what they are doing

"Goldman and AIG both lied about their positions last September. And Hank Paulson and other major financial elites involved in the AIG bailout knew it also." That is the story we should be following -- but few are paying attention."   Steve Clemons 
 
"While many are criticizing the gross and wrong AIG taxpayer-funded bonuses of senior executives, the truth is that that kind of corruption is relatively small time -- even at $165 million -- and was predictable. The outrage expressed by Obama, Lawrence Summers and Tim Geithner must be feigned -- or they don't know what they are doing in the positions they have acquired. But what is serious is that Goldman Sachs executives seem to have lied or at best seriously misled the media and public during the early stages of the AIG financial crisis stating that their firm did not have significant exposure to AIG's collapsing financial position. "

But after AIG published its roster of financial distributions, Goldman Sachs comes in on the top of the list at $12.9 billiion.

Treasury Secretary Paulson and former Treasury Secretary Bob Rubin both served as top executives at Goldman Sachs -- and in the end, they wouldn't let Goldman collapse despite allowing Lehman Brothers to die.

Rubin and Paulson have had major conflicts of interest that make Tim Geithner's tax manipulations while an IMF employee look pathetically insignficant. Tom Daschle's rides in a town car, Killifer's failure to pay taxes on domestic help, and others who have avoided government because of the very high hurdles Obama has set for those who join his team simply pale in comparison to what we have learned about Bob Rubin's ties to Citibank, Goldman and the Treasury; Hank Paulson to both Treasury and Goldman -- and which have implications as well for their chief acolytes Lawrence Summers and Timothy Geithner.

AIG and Goldman both lied about their positions last September. And Hank Paulson and other major financial elites involved in the AIG bailout knew it also.

That is the story we should be following -- but few are paying attention.

And we should remember that the great economic genius of the early United States, Alexander Hamilton -- the man who hatched the great Bank of New York -- possessed just 'one share' of that bank.

We should be re-reading about Alexander Hamilton's life and deeds. Soon it is easy to see how he would have been fairly disgusted by those who have recently held his position and pretended to carry on his brand of national interest public service.

-- Steve Clemons  Excerpt of Alexander Hamilton's Scorn: Reflecting on AIG, Goldman, Hank Paulson and Bob Rubin
Tim Geithner and Robert Rubin Lunching at Four Seasons. Geithner getting instructions? By Gabrielle Cusumano at 4:57 PM on 3/16/2009 ...
gabriellecusumano.blogtownhall.com/.../tim_geithner_and_robert_rubin_lunching_at_four_seasons_geithner_getting_instru... - 44k -
 
Obama's economic team shows influence of Robert Rubin - with a difference   at:
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Reason For Outrage Towards Congress: Rangel Pushed for an AIG Donation; Insurer Pushed for a Tax Cut

Now House Tax Chairman Opposes Using Tax Code To Recoup AIG Bonuses March 17, 2009
 
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Charlie Rangel [hearts] AIG

John Aravosis (DC) · 3/17/2009 05:07:00 PM ET · Excerpted from: http://www.americablog.com/2009/03/charlie-range-hearts-aig.html


It's been really tough for AIG the past few months, what with getting an $85bn bailout from the US taxpayer, and now another $165 million in bonuses. Life is tough.

But fret not. Congressman Charlie Rangel (D-NY), who chairs the House Ways and Means Committee, is coming to the rescue of the little-guy billionaires over at AIG. Rangel, whose committee oversees taxes, is going to make sure that we don't "unfairly" use the tax law to stop AIG from wasting taxpayer money. (I'm sure Rangel's sudden interest in defending the fat-cats at AIG has nothing to do with the fact that he's a congressman from New York City, and gosh, where is Wall Street?)

Anyway, Rangel thinks it's very very very unfair to use the US tax code to get those bonuses back:
"It's difficult for me to think of the code as a political weapon," said Rangel, who spoke to a handful of reporters outside his office.

"Is this an indictment or a bill?" asked Rangel. "Are they naming people? I mean, are they naming the taxpayers?"

Rangel said he sympathizes with the effort, but not the means it takes. "There's no way that good thinking Americans should reward people when they've been complicit in wrong doing," he said. "But as a former federal prosecutor, as I recall, it was the criminal code that you dealt with, not internal revenue."
First off, a political weapon? I have no idea what the politics are of the folks at AIG. I do know that I just lent them $85bn of my money and I just caught them wasting it. So, what Rangel is saying is that it's wrong to stop bailed out companies, now and in the future, from giving exorbitant bonuses. It's "political." It's not moral, it's not ethical, it's not the right thing to do, it's simply "political." That's a new one.

Second, as a lawyer myself, this notion of using the criminal code to punish legal behavior is new to me. Maybe prosecutions work differently in New York. But last time I checked, it was perfectly legal for AIG to give huge bonuses to its employees. The problem is, it was also obscene. I checked with my own financial expert who buys and sells big companies, he says it's pretty much common knowledge that when you take over a company, by bailing it out, you put provisions in place to stop them from granting these kid of bonuses. That was Congress' job, to stop the bonuses in the first place. And last time I checked, Charlie Rangel was a congressman. So what happened? (A reader pointed out that AIG's initial bailout came from the Fed, last September, during the Bush administration. So the initial blame is Bush's - fair enough.)

So where does this leave us? Now the Republicans can legitimately blame the House Democrats for blocking the American taxpayers from making sure the bailout monies are spent responsibly. Possibly the most idiotic, tone deaf political move in a generation. The Republicans wanted their issue? Charlie Rangel just handed it to them. Talk about obscene.   Excerpted from: http://www.americablog.com/2009/03/charlie-range-hearts-aig.html
 
 
 
 
"The measure, known as the “subpart F active financing exception,” would benefit a broad coalition of American companies, including hundreds of financial services firms, and according to estimates by the nonpartisan Joint Taxation Committee would cost the Treasury $3.97 billion in revenue in 2009 and 2010. A.I.G., which Congressional records indicate spent more than $9.5 million on lobbying in 2008, had its own lobbyists and three outside firms pushing to extend the measure."   Rangel Pushed for an AIG  Donation; Insurer Pushed for a Tax Cut  New York Times
 
January 3, 2009

Rangel Pushed for a Donation; Insurer Pushed for a Tax Cut

On April 21, 2008, Representative Charles B. Rangel met with officials of the American International Group, the now-troubled insurance giant, to ask for a donation to a school of public service that City College of New York was building in his honor.

Mr. Rangel had already helped secure a $5 million pledge for the project from a foundation controlled by Maurice R. Greenberg, one of the company’s largest shareholders and its former chief executive. And C.C.N.Y. officials, according to the school’s own records, had high hopes for A.I.G. — a donation of perhaps as much as $10 million.

The company has never made a contribution. But less than a month after Mr. Rangel met with its officials, the company turned to the congressman for help: A senior A.I.G. executive who had attended the fund-raising meeting wrote  Mr. Rangel’s exchange with A.I.G. last spring appears to be at odds with the public statements he has made since his fund-raising for the school became an issue. When his approach to A.I.G. was first reported in The Washington Post in July, Mr. Rangel said that he could not recall any issues his committee might have considered in which A.I.G. had an interest.

“I can’t think of one piece of legislation that impacts them, and there has never been a time that they’ve raised any legislation to me,” the paper quoted Mr. Rangel as saying. Indeed, in Mr. Rangel’s formal submission to the House ethics committee, asking it to review his use of Congressional stationery in soliciting money for the school, he wrote, “So far as I am aware, none of those whom I wrote had any pending requests into my office, lobbied me regarding any legislation before my committee, or asked me for assistance on legislation in which they had a special interest.”

Mr. Rangel, who had opposed the tax change A.I.G. was seeking — part of a much bigger piece of legislation — ultimately allowed it to be added to a bill he sponsored. Mr. Rangel’s aides, and fellow Democrats on the Ways and Means Committee, say that he agreed to the bill only after being persuaded by other members of Congress that it would help an array of American companies weather the economic uncertainty.
 
After Mr. Rangel’s office was asked in recent days about the letter from A.I.G., Janice Mays, counsel to the Ways and Means Committee, said a search of the committee’s records had not turned up a copy of it. But she said Mr. Rangel had already changed his mind about the tax provision before A.I.G. says it sent him the letter.

Federal statutes and House ethics rules forbid members of Congress from asking for anything of value from a person or company with business before them.

Ms. Mays said those rules did not prohibit members of Congress from raising money for nonprofit organizations, even from people or companies with interests before the government. And she said Mr. Rangel’s representation to the ethics committee last summer concerned only those instances in which he had written to potential donors on Congressional stationery, not those he might have met with personally in seeking donations.

A review of Congressional records indicate that A.I.G. had interests in a number of issues before Mr. Rangel — both prior to Mr. Greenberg’s gift and the congressman’s solicitation of A.I.G., and afterward.

Records kept by the Clerk of the House of Representatives indicate that during the past two years, A.I.G. has paid lobbyists to push for changes in at least 10 bills that have been handled by the Ways and Means Committee, including the $700 billion bailout bill that passed in October to stabilize the financial markets.

A.I.G. lobbyists, the records show, pushed for legislative items that would lower taxes on various life insurance products, offer foreign tax credits to multinational corporations and lower the corporate tax rate. The company’s financial services arm hired lobbyists to oppose a push to tax private equity income at a higher rate and to shape new reporting requirements for investment firms.

And because A.I.G. does business around the globe, the company also lobbied on trade issues, which are handled by the Ways and Means Committee.

The available public record shows that A.I.G. prevailed in some of its lobbying efforts and failed in others.

Asked two weeks ago to provide a detailed accounting of Mr. Rangel’s dealings with A.I.G. officials and lobbyists regarding legislation during the past two years, the congressman’s spokesman and lawyer have said they are unable to complete such a time-consuming task during the holidays. And they challenged the fairness of the request.

The New York Times this week sought a response from Mr. Rangel himself about whether, in general terms, he had any reservations about seeking the money and meeting with A.I.G. officials, and a major shareholder, given what the record suggests were the company’s interests before his committee.

Ms. Mays wrote on Friday: “The law expressly permits members of Congress to engage in fund-raising activity on behalf of nonprofits such as C.C.N.Y. and recognizes that donations will inevitably coincide with legislative activity.”

Ms. Mays said the $10 million figure contained in C.C.N.Y. records as the possible size of an A.I.G. contribution represented “an appropriate request” at that time “given the company’s other support for nonprofit educational activities.”

Mr. Norton, the A.I.G. spokesman, said there was no connection of any kind between Mr. Rangel’s bid for a donation and the company’s lobbying on the tax matter.

A.I.G., one of the world’s 20 largest corporations, has been at the center of several public crises during the past year.

In September, the company received an $85 billion federal bailout when its possible bankruptcy threatened to further undermine the teetering economy. Two months later, after an intensive lobbying effort involving the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve, terms of that financial rescue were enhanced and the amount of federal money involved swelled to $150 billion.

Details of the bailout have been negotiated primarily by the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve. Mr. Rangel’s aides have said he played no role in the bargaining. Democratic Congressional leaders who have been consulted by the Treasury Department about how much government assistance A.I.G. should receive and how the bailout should be structured said the congressman’s aides were correct.

“To say that Chairman Rangel has had minimal involvement in the bailout negotiations would be overstating things,” said Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts and chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.

Mr. Greenberg, who has clashed publicly and in lawsuits with the executives who succeeded him after he was forced out of A.I.G. in 2005, has been highly visible as the company’s problems have made it a ward of the federal government.

Mr. Greenberg has not returned repeated telephone calls over the past month requesting an interview about his dealings with Mr. Rangel and his donation to C.C.N.Y. A spokesman for C. V. Starr, the investment fund headed by Mr. Greenberg, said last week that Mr. Greenberg was out of the country and could not be reached.

Mr. Rangel’s spokesman on the Ways and Means Committee declined to say whether the congressman had spoken with Mr. Greenberg about his strategy to persuade federal officials to revise the tax-funded rescue plan, but said in an e-mail message, “The bailout appears to have done nothing to benefit Mr. Greenberg as a shareholder, with the value of A.I.G. stock dropping from $60 at the beginning of the year to $1.50 a share.”

At a news conference last summer, Mr. Rangel said that he and Mr. Greenberg had forged a friendship based on their service in the Korean War, during which both men were awarded a Bronze Star for valor.

So in July 2006, when Mr. Rangel wrote to 100 philanthropic organizations seeking support for the C.C.N.Y. project, one was sent to an administrator at the Starr Foundation, where Mr. Greenberg serves as the chairman. The foundation did not make a donation in 2006, according to C.C.N.Y. officials. In March 2007, two months after Mr. Rangel had been elevated to Ways and Means chairman, he wrote a letter directly to Mr. Greenberg, using his Congressional stationery.

By the end of the year, Mr. Greenberg had pledged $5 million, by far the largest contribution to a project that has raised $11 million to date.

Ms. Mays said the Starr Foundation had a “well-established record of charitable giving,” and was “a logical potential source of funding for C.C.N.Y.”

In 2008, Mr. Rangel participated in a meeting with officials at A.I.G., to ask for their support. Mr. Norton, the A.I.G. spokesman, said that the purpose of the meeting was to ask whether A.I.G. would make a financial contribution to C.C.N.Y., although he did not know whether a specific dollar figure was discussed. Mr. Rangel and the C.C.N.Y. officials left the meeting without a commitment.

But several weeks later, in a letter dated May 13, Edward T. Cloonan, the highest-ranking A.I.G. official who attended the fund-raising meeting with Mr. Rangel, wrote to the congressman asking him to support the extension of a tax provision designed to help American-based multinational companies lower their obligation to the I.R.S., which was set to expire. Mr. Rangel, who had announced plans to add an array of “tax extenders” to an energy bill he was preparing to introduce that month, opposed extending the specific measure Mr. Cloonan and A.I.G. were lobbying for.

The measure, known as the “subpart F active financing exception,” would benefit a broad coalition of American companies, including hundreds of financial services firms, and according to estimates by the nonpartisan Joint Taxation Committee would cost the Treasury $3.97 billion in revenue in 2009 and 2010. A.I.G., which Congressional records indicate spent more than $9.5 million on lobbying in 2008, had its own lobbyists and three outside firms pushing to extend the measure.

By early May 2008, concern about the damage that American businesses would suffer if the tax break was allowed to expire had grown so great that Democrats on the Ways and Means Committee held two meetings to ask Mr. Rangel to extend it.

Representative Joseph Crowley, a Democrat from Queens, said he pressed the issue because it helped Citigroup, a major employer in his district. At least two committee caucus meetings to discuss many aspects of the legislation followed — on May 7 and May 13 — and Mr. Rangel relented, Mr. Crowley said, and agreed to extend the measure for one year.

“While Chairman Rangel opposed extending the provision this year, a majority of the Democrats on the Ways and Means Committee supported doing so and the chairman listened to his membership,” Congressman Crowley said in an e-mailed statement.

On the date of the second caucus meeting, Mr. Cloonan wrote to Mr. Rangel, according to Mr. Norton. “We urge the Ways and Means Committee to include the tax provision commonly known as subpart F exception for active financing income in the current round of tax extenders legislation,” the letter said, according Mr. Norton.Mr. Crowley’s spokeswoman said the congressman was unaware A.I.G. had written Mr. Rangel about the matter and had thought that “due to other distractions, A.I.G. was not active in lobbying the issue.”

The spokeswoman, Angela Barranco, in a statement Friday, said Mr. Rangel had changed his mind after the May 7 meeting. Mr. Rangel’s aides say that a document dated May 12 from the nonpartisan joint committee on taxation indicated that he had signed off on the provision.

Mr. Rangel included the provision in the Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act of 2008, which was introduced on May 14 and which passed the House a week later, then stalled in the Senate over the summer.

But in September, after the House of Representatives rejected the first attempt to pass a $700 billion bill intended to stave off the collapse of the banking system, leaders in the Senate revived Mr. Rangel’s bill as part of a compromise that won approval in both houses. .   (More)  Excerpted from NYT at: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/03/nyregion/03rangel.html?_r=2&em=&pagewanted=print

 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Tim Geithner and Robert Rubin Lunching at Four Seasons. Geithner getting instructions?

The lunch took place on March 3, just coincidentally the day before Geithner's testimony to the Senate Finance Committee.

Tim Geithner Spotted Lunching with Bob Rubin and Pete Peterson, Sadly, This is not a Joke

By: Janushka Thursday March 5, 2009 8:16 am
0
diggs
 digg it

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was spotted at the Four Seasons lunching with disgraced Citigroup director and father of the credit crisis Robert Rubin and Pete "old ladies can eat cat food" Peterson.

The lunch took place on March 3, just coincidentally the day before Geithner's testimony to the Senate Finance Committee.

Indeed, yesterday we were slumming at the Four Seasons in New York. Among the dinosaurs we observed grazing in the tall grass of this Midtown Manhattan refuge for the transactional class was former C director Robert Rubin, former New York Fed Chairman Pete Peterson and Treasury Secretary Geithner, who apparently was there to get new instructions from his sponsors.

Before Geithner arrived for lunch, Peterson reportedly asked one NY real estate mogul: "How much of that toxic paper is there?" Now we may know where Geithner gathers his market intelligence -- over a luncheon table in New York with his owners. Next time we are going to bring the flip-cam.
 
Found and excerpted from Oxtown Gazette at: http://oxdown.firedoglake.com/diary/4021
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »