Archive for the Law Category

Bailouts: Out; Bail Ins: In; Slowly Boilin’ The Frog (April 15, 2013)

Posted in Bankruptcy, Banks and Banking System, Bernanke, Kleptocracy, Law on April 15, 2013 by e-commentary.org

. . .

CD1      “Makes you wonder what we get for today’s tax payment.  The Dodd-Frank legislation states that we the taxpayers will not bail out banks and other connected businesses again for failed derivatives and the like.  So the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the Federal Reserve (Fed) admit they cannot do their jobs and force the individual depositor to bail out the banks and other connected businesses.”

CD2      “At least now they claim that they will not take our tax dollars directly but will take our money indirectly.  Banks in America still exist to provide taxpayers with regular opportunities to bail them out.  And to pay huge and undeserved bonuses.  And on occasion to finance an upstart organic neighborhood grocery stand.”

CD1      “While individual states serve as laboratories for social and economic experiments, other countries provide insight into responses to social and economic problems.  The response in Cyprus to the banking crisis that afflicts every country today is revealing.  Instead of the taxpayers bailing out the bank, the banksters took deposits from individual depositors to cover shortfalls.  A ‘bail in’ rather than a ‘bailout’ is the way they brand it.”

CD2      “That has been the official policy in the United States and England since December 10, 2012.  The FDIC may promise to insure deposits up to $250,000, but that promise may be repudiated or supplanted or modified by the FDIC’s new formal and promulgated confiscatory policy.  They title their marching orders ‘Resolving Globally Active, Systemically Important, Financial Institutions.’  The Federal Reserve joined in the task and in effect issued a joint press release stating:  ‘Your Deposits Are No Longer Insured.  Get Your Money Out Of Banks Now.’  Taxpayers cannot say that the government did not properly warn them.”

CD1      “The only event that really threatens the banking system is a literal run on the banks.  News broadcasts will have a field day interviewing those in line if they stay in line and the outraged ‘man on the street’ demanding his deposit.  However, by privately stealing funds from the public, there is no single public event to steel public attention and ire.”

CD2      “Failing banks were always taken over by a receiver and the small depositors recompensed by the FDIC.  However, if a bank fails today, the derivatives that doomed and continue to doom the economy are afforded super-priority status.  Ordinary depositors are booted to the back of the line.”

CD1      “Or the ordinary depositor is kicked completely out of the creditor’s queue and given worthless stock in the failed bank.  Four months have passed without an uncompensated failure.  A fortnight will pass and perhaps another four years without incident, but this banking fraud cannot go on forever.” 

. . .

CD1      “The insurance on up to $250,000 in deposits ostensibly provided by the FDIC has exacerbated the ‘moral hazard’ by disconnecting the individual investor from the process.  Individuals do not even make a cursory inquiry into the viability of a financial institution.”

CD2      “Should the depositor be obligated to do so or should the banking system be regulated and monitored by the government.  The answer is that the banks are inadequately regulated and monitored by the government, so by default it is ‘depositor beware.’”

CD1      “If depositors were rational as rationality is defined by economists and in the face of near zero transactions costs, they would transfer their funds to a credit union.  The National Credit Union Association (NCUA) has not joined the ‘bail in’ scheme publicly at this time.”

CD2     “A depositor who is rational as defined by economists realizes that interest rates are near zero and thus the benefit of leaving money in a bank is near zero unless the money is safe.  The potential costs are far more than zero and thus the depositor should transfer the money to a safe location such as a safe located in the basement.”      

. . .

CD1      “They say that if a frog in a pot of water is brought to a slow boil, it will not know or respond to what is happening, but if the frog is thrown in a pot of boiling water, it will jump out.”

CD2      “MF Global is forgotten.  They are slowly turning up the heat without response.”

CD1      “At least the frog reacts.  I’m tired of ‘bailing out’ and now ‘bailing in’ banks and am bailing on banks.”

. . .

[Peruse the government scheme titled “Resolving Globally Active, Systemically Important, Financial Institutions” at http://www.fdic.gov/about/srac/2012/gsifi.pdf and the similar policy in New Zealand at http://www.rbnz.govt.nz/finstab/banking/4430900.html.]

[Reflect on the discussion in http://www.voxy.co.nz/politics/national-planning-cyprus-style-solution-greens/5/150410, http://www.publicbankinginstitute.org/ and http://webofdebt.wordpress.com/2013/04/09/winner-takes-all-the-super-priority-status-of-derivatives/.]

[See the “e-ssays” titled Money “In The Bank” Or “Under The Mattress” (October 8, 2012) and Boycott Big Banks – Vote Your Dollars (November 21, 2011).]

Bumper stickers of the week:

I am not so much concerned with the return ON my money as I am with the return OF my money.  Attributed to a number of wits.

“An efficient path for returning the sound operations of the G-SIFI [Globally Active, Systemically Important Financial Institution] to the private sector would be provided by exchanging or converting a sufficient amount of the unsecured debt from the original creditors of the failed company [meaning the individual depositors who were previously assured their deposits are insured] into equity [meaning worthless stock].  In the U.S., the new equity would become capital in one or more newly formed operating entities.”  Page 3 at Paragraph 13 of the publication “Resolving Globally Active, Systemically Important, Financial Institutions.”

Your Deposits Are No Longer Insured.  Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

Get Your Money Out Of Banks Now.  Federal Reserve

The most condign resolution is to attach the salaries and retirement payments to the employees and retirees of the Fed, the FDIC, the SEC, the OCC, the CFTC, the DoJ, the BoE, the BoA, AIG, GS, S&C, C&B and others to fund any bank shortfalls.  And Congress, the President and the Supreme Court.  Problem resolved. 

“Open Bank Resolution”  “Wikipedia does not have an article with this exact name.”

If banksters were branded terrorists, would there be prosecutions?

42

The Sea Change Is Now A Tsunami (March 11, 2013)

Posted in Constitution, Courts, Equal Protection, Gay Politics, Law, Society, Supreme Court on March 11, 2013 by e-commentary.org

. . .

LS1      “An amicus brief is a ‘friend of the court’ brief filed by someone who is not a party to a case that provides information and argument that may or may not have been advanced by a party to the case.”

N1        “Sounds like a legal way to lobby a court constituted of legal lobbyists for private interests.”

LS1      “In effect.  Before the Supreme Court writes its opinion, it is interested in the opinions of the Owners and others.”

N1        “Who would have guessed.  First the housebroken Republicans came out of the cloak room.  Then the business community came out of the board room.”

LS1      “They realized that inequality is less economically efficient than equality.  Surreal that one can drive from one state in a state of marital bliss to another state and enter into a state of marital banishment.”

N1        “That is bad for business.”

LS1      “No bandwagon has been boarded by as many people in as short a period of time.  Everyone now wants to influence the bench to allow all adults to walk down the aisle.  The train is leaving the station.”

N1        “They say the Supreme Court does not pay attention to the weather, but the Justices do pay attention to the climate.”

LS1      “You don’t need a climatologist to see which way the wind blows.”

N1        “But you do need courage.” 

. . .

[See the “e-ssay” titled Fukushima Daiichied (March 12, 2012) on the anniversary.]

[See the “e-ssay” titled Less Government Regulation Series: Love and Marriage (May 19, 2008).]

[See the articles at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/02/business/businesses-refuse-to-arrive-late-on-same-sex-marriage.html?_r=0, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/28/business/companies-ask-justices-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ban.html?ref=business, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/28/us/politics/gay-marriage-brief-gets-more-republican-support.html?ref=business and http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/01/us/politics/administration-to-urge-justices-to-overturn-a-gay-marriage-ban.html?ref=business&_r=0.]

Bumper stickers of the week:

“Gay marriage?  Here’s the way I see it.  If I had to get married, then THOSE PEOPLE have to get married.  Fair is fair.”

My wife keeps complaining that I never listen to her . . .  or something like that.

Can someone file an “enemy of the court” brief?

Hate is overrated.

Has Scalia Gone Feral? (March 4, 2013)

Posted in Judges, Law, Move To Amend, Politics, Supreme Court on March 4, 2013 by e-commentary.org

. . .

LS2      “Scalia has gone feral.”

LS1      “In the past, he demanded that the Court and the courts construe congressional language in a statute or provision literally – or as he defined literally – even in the face of clear contrary legislative intent and then took great delight in often perverse or unintended consequences or interpretations.”

LS2      “Now he is transforming the High Court into a MegaCongress to proclaim what he thinks animated Congress when it passed legislation.  In the face of crystal clear Congressional language and equally clear legislative intent regarding the Voting Rights Act, he appointed himself to second guess Congress and impose his personal prejudices on the populace.”

LS1      “At least he is blatant and blunt about it.  In his capacity as the Law Czar, however, he surely will not allow a person to bring and maintain a claim to instate the Move To Amend legislation on the ground that Congress would have passed the legislation except for the overweening influence of corporations.”

LS2      “That’s a new possibility.  Introduce a bill in the Supreme Court and let them pass judgment.  Two can play that game, yet only one person is allowed to play the game in the American legal game.”

. . .

LS2      “His great contribution to legal thinking is a grand sophistry.  ‘Originalism’ is an admixture of equal parts hypocrisy, dishonesty, perversity and absurdity.”

LS1      “And risibility, but it is a serious matter.  He is becoming even more grating and obnoxious.  Sarcasm is the first cousin of anger.  He is angry.  Ergo, he is sarcastic.”

LS2      “Sourcaustic.  In contemporary patois, Scalia is a bully of the worst kind.  A bully and a coward.  He uses the bench as a bully pulpit and then cowers behind the guards and security detail.”

LS1      “If someone asked him to step outside, Scalia would soil his panties and then curl up in a fetal position and cry for help.”

LS2      “He should take senior status and take over a hate radio show on Anger Mongering (AM) radio.”

LS1      “A festschrift of his proclamations does not require more than a few hundred words.  He is worth a footnote perhaps but much less than a chapter.  Someone, probably a former fawning law clerk, will spawn a 900 page idolatrous hagiographic piece.”

. . .

LS1/LS2  “He fails to realize that civility is not unconstitutional.”

. . .

[LS1 = Legal Scholar 1; . . . ]

[See the “e-ssays” titled One Gun Per White Adult Male? A Flintlock Musket? The “One Man, One Gun” Decision (October 4, 2010), Are Courts Irrelevant? Are Courts Illegitimate? (October 3, 2011) and The Supreme Court – Unrepresentative And Illegitimate: The 33.3 Percent Solution (October 1, 2012), three of the “First Monday in October” commentaries on the Supreme Court.]

Bumper stickers of the week:

I don’t like some lawyers because some lawyers are not likable.

Do Supreme Court Justices get rabies shots?

Judicial Activism: Rogue Republican Judges (January 28, 2013)

Posted in Congress, Constitution, Courts, Journalism, Judges, Law, Newspapers, Presidency on January 28, 2013 by e-commentary.org

. . .

1          “I can’t say that I like it.”

2          “Me neither.  Smells bad.”

1          “Why is it that the first thing you recognize is that three Republican federal judges concocted the decision.”

2          “Because that is what Republican federal judges do.”

1          “Congress is dysfunctional and inoperative.  The President tries to do something rational consistent with limited Congressional action.  The Republican federal judges in the judicial branch step in and do their part to pummel and constrain the President and the executive branch.”

2          “Congress established the agencies and Congress authorized the funds and Congress appropriated the dollars and then a minority in Congress plays games to keep the President’s appointments from getting in the saddle to run the Congressionally-approved and authorized and appropriated agencies.”

1          “And undermine the actions of the agencies.”

2          “The Republican federal judges take up the ball and undercut the President and the operation of executive branch agencies by proclaiming that the President is playing games.”

1          “Sort of a new take on the old rope-a-dope one–two punch.  Not pretty.”

. . .

1/2       “Courts are increasingly illegitimate, partisan and dishonest.  The day may come when they may need to be disregarded.”

. . .  

2/1       “Journalists typically note the political party and state of a legislator at the first mention of her or his name in an article.  ‘Congressman Billy Bob Jenkins (R-Uranus).’  Articles about court decisions may refer to the politician who appointed the judge in the last few sentences and thus the insight is often among the first sentences to be edited.  In the interests of full disclosure and recognizing that space is always at a premium, articles should note the President who appointed a federal judge in parens at the first reference to a judge or justice.  ‘Chief Justice John Roberts (Bush II)’.”  

. . .

[See the editorial at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/26/opinion/a-court-upholds-republican-chicanery.html?hpwand and the article linked in the piece.]

Bumper stickers of the week:

There is no law; there is only ideology.

Don’t believe anything until it has been officially denied.

Sports Writers: 1 – 0 (January 14, 2013)

Posted in Awards / Incentives, Courts, Economics Nobel, Federal Reserve, Guns, Journalism, Law, Newspapers, Perjury, Perjury/Dishonesty, Sports, Taxation on January 14, 2013 by e-commentary.org

. . .

A          “A mixed group of informed individuals acting individually issued a profound collective indictment.”

1          “In court, the government only determines whether a person is guilty or not guilty, a court does not determine whether a person is innocent.  Yet when you look carefully, far too many courts have found far too many innocent individuals to be guilty.”

A          “Still not a great idea to be Black or Brown and get mixed up in the American judicial system.”

1          “It is to be eschewed.  The government is not and should not be allowed to deprive someone of his or her liberty without proof beyond a reasonable doubt.  The court of public opinion does not need to meet that high threshold when considering those who play on the court or field or pitch.”

A          “The sports writers are akin to an informed group of jurors from all ages, albeit a little older, and backgrounds, albeit a shade White, and world views from different parts of the country.”

1          “On the uniforms, they sport the initials MLB not MDL – the Major Dopers League.”

A          “They can get their own hall of fame, the Hall of Shame.”

1          “I might waive the character requirement and support a scoundrel if he played clean against others who played clean.”

A          “They may also be atoning for the great oversight in the late 1990s when any honest person realized that the guys were juiced and few said anything.  Finding the individual who was not juiced or was not juiced much will be a challenge.  The brush could be too broadly brushed.”           

1          “This is a promising start.  Now if we can get the Norwegian suits to follow suit and not award the Nobel in e-con-omics unless they award it to someone who understands eco-nomics.”

A          “Everyone from Roberts on the Supreme Court to players on the courts succeeds by lyin’ and cheatin’.”

1          “He’s a lawyer-type.  He said that he would call balls and strikes, but keep this in mind.  He never ever said that he would call a ‘ball’ a ‘ball’ only that he would call balls and strikes.”

A          “He and Alito and Thomas and Scalia are having a ball.”

1          “Dishonesty and hypocrisy are so American.”

A          “So human really.  We don’t have a monopoly on it.”

. . .

[See http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/17/opinion/australia-banned-assault-weapons-america-can-too.html?hp for some international perspective on gun restrictions.]

[See the “e-ssay” titled “Why Johnny And Roger? (April 30, 2012)” and the recent article on the deliberations of the Federal Reserve at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/03/opinion/the-new-tell-all-fed.html?hp&_r=1& and the “e-ssay” at The Kids (At The Fed) Are Not Alright (January 30, 2012).]

Bumper sticker of the week:

Play ball!

Guns. Again. (December 17, 2012)

Posted in Constitution, Guns, Law on December 17, 2012 by e-commentary.org

. . .

[See the “e-ssays” titled The “Gun Show Loophole” (February 6, 2012), On Magazines (February 21, 2011) and One Gun Per White Adult Male? A Flintlock Musket? The “One Man, One Gun” Decision (October 4, 2010) and the dozen other related “e-ssays” posted in the “Guns” Category.]

Bumper stickers of the week:

We regulate dogs, diapers, fireworks, automobiles, . . .

When a psycho shoots up a gun show, should Americans show any interest in sound gun restrictions?   

Constitutional Remedies With An Expiration Date? Affirmative Action and Marriage Neutrality. Again. (December 10, 2012)

Posted in Constitution, Courts, Crime/Punishment, Gay Politics, Judges, Law, Less Government Regulation Series, Miscegenation, Society, Supreme Court on December 17, 2012 by e-commentary.org

. . .

A          “By my simple way of thinking, a constitutional right is either a constitutional right or it is not a constitutional right.  So you say that we treat everyone equally by not treating everyone equally for twenty-five years starting in 2003.  And then the unequal treatment in the name of equal treatment expires in 2028.”

B          “Yup.”

A          “The handiwork of Justice O’Connor.”

B          “Yup.  Not very tidy but workable.” 

A          “But when it comes to marriage neutrality, there is no public incubation period.”

B          “Nope.”

A          “In twenty-five years, no one will even pause when two guys or two gals get married.  But then there is the countervailing contention that society needs to change at its own pace and the law should follow.  Yet you maintain that the Supremes should simply state that it is the law of the land now.”

B          “Yup.  Because it is the law of the land.”

A          “And one person is now elected to make that decision in and for America.  Our friend Tony Kennedy.  The guy who could have been Bork.”

B          “Yup.  Another rich White boy who is a byproduct of one of the two most profitable law schools and an adherent of one of the two most powerful religions.  The youngster who always crayoned within the lines and then as a teenager completely penciled in the designated oval with a number 2 lead pencil is assigned to pen a decision that impacts the lives and the liberties and the pursuit of happiness of millions.”

A          “At the end of the day, the answer is simple.  You need to review the Protest Poem – The Declaration of Independence – quill penned before the Owners Manual – the Constitution.  ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.’”

B          “Yup.  That will work.”

A          “And reference the Equal Protection provisions of the Constitution for good measure.”

B          “Yup.  Absent attacks such as 12/7 and 9/11 that trigger a sea change in public opinion, no public consensus has emerged as rapidly in American history.”

A          “If the vote at the Conference is 5 – 4 in favor of marriage neutrality, Kennedy will write the defining opinion of his career.”

B          “Yup.  The minority will write the Plessy v. Ferguson decision for this century.”        

A          “Some guys get all the luck.”

B          “Yup.  They are reactionary guys.  You have got to give it to them.  The polite description is to note that they are off the wall.”

A          “If Roberts sees the writing on the wall, however, he may switch to the majority and opt to write the opinion himself.”

B          “Maybe.  Roberts took some history courses in college and is shrewd enough to foresee Clio’s ultimate verdict.”

A          “By my simple way of thinking, a constitutional right is either a constitutional right or it is not a constitutional right.  Marriage neutrality is a right.”

B          “What is gestating will be revealing.” 

. . .

[See the “e-ssays” titled The Conservative Solution To Affirmative Action (October 15, 2012), The Supreme Court – Unrepresentative and Illegitimate: The 33.3 Percent Solution (October 1, 2012) and September 17 – Constitution Day (September 19, 2011) and the “e-ssay” titled “Strict Construction” Strictly Construed (March 14, 2005) discussing Loving v. Virginia (1967) where the Supreme Court in an unanimous opinion affirmed the right to marry as a fundamental constitutional freedom.]

Bumper stickers of the week:

Marriage – the fundamental Constitutional right of every person to be miserable

Marriage = one consenting adult and one consenting adult

Marriage Neutrality – the government stays out of the picture and away from the altar

“I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind.  As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times.  We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.”

Thomas Jefferson (engraved on the Jefferson Memorial)

Women: 2; Men: 3; Boys: 4 – A winning combination

Assigning Blame: The Lawyers: 50 Percent; The Non-Lawyer Public: 50 Percent; The Judges: 100 Percent (December 3, 2012)

Posted in Courts, Judges, Law, Pogo Plight on December 3, 2012 by e-commentary.org

. . .

C          “Lawyers have ruined the legal system.”

L          “Non-lawyers have ruined the legal system.”

C          “Lawyers are suing everyone.”

L          “Non-lawyer members of the public are suing everyone.  A lawyer brings and maintains a lawsuit, yet the suit is brought and maintained in the name of a non-lawyer member of the public.  If there is any possible financial reward, a non-lawyer member of the public will steam roll over anyone to get to court.  When he finds out what he can do to his creditors, even an individual who states adamantly that he wants to pay his debts will embrace the Bankruptcy Code and shed debts with zeal.” 

C          “They are encouraged by the lawyer to bring the lawsuit.”

L          “The non-lawyer member of the public makes the final decision.  That is not to say that a lawsuit should be not brought.  So many individuals and institutions do not care about the rights of an individual.  Yet, the most culpable persons in the entire process are the judges.  They fail far, far too many times with no accountability or responsibility.” 

C          “And all the judges are lawyers.”

L          “Judges regularly dismiss legitimate lawsuits and embrace bogus ones with no sound explanation.”

C          “The judges are lawyers.”

. . .

[C = Non-Lawyer Citizen; L = . . .]

[When it comes to judges in America, you get what you pay for.  http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/27/us/judges-rulings-follow-partisan-lines.html]

Bumper sticker of the week:

Is a judge just a political hack in a moo moo black?

The “Gun Show Loophole” (February 6, 2012)

Posted in Civil Rights/Civil Liberties, Guns, Iran, Law, Less Government Regulation Series, National Defense Authorization Act / FY 2012, USA PATRIOT Act on February 6, 2012 by e-commentary.org

. . .

GO1       “Since her shooting, the overtly violent language has abated, yet the underlying violence is still there.  In politics and in life.”

GO2       “Here’s a partial solution.  There is no centralized or computerized list of gun owners or gun ownership in America.”

GO1       “Except the list of gun owners maintained by the National Rifle Association.”

GO2       “I am talking about the government.  Look at the actual process.  Before selling a gun, a gun dealer conducts a background check of an individual.  If the individual passes the background check, the dealer makes the sale and keeps a record.  The record is not sent anywhere and is not accessible and just sits in a file cabinet in the back room of the store.  Only if a gun is used in a crime is an effort made to trace the purchase by using the serial number and contacting the manufacturer and then the dealer and then the purchaser.  That is the most decentralized and non-computerized tracking scheme in America.  The system only allows for the tracking of the ownership of an offending gun not of the names of owners of guns.”

GO1       “And the current system does not require us to surrender any fundamental rights.  Look at the rights that have been surrendered in America by Americans without any resistance since 9/11.  The USA PATRIOT Act, the detention provisions in the NDAA of 2012, and so on.”

GO2       “The problem is that a troubled soul can go to a gun show and buy a gun.  Why arm the goons?  Simply require the same background check for any sale at a gun show.”

GO1       “The mayors and the police chiefs know what needs to be done and support the closure of the gun show loophole.  Congress should simply implement their sound and experienced judgment.”

GO2       “Gun sales in a back alley are still a problem.  The most balanced policy may be to require all gun sales to be conducted by a gun dealer.  Gun dealers are all private sector businesses in an industry at the retail level that is among the least monopolized in America.  The gun dealers could compete to facilitate the sales and perhaps offer to handle the sale for free with a fifty dollar purchase of gear.  That should address some of the problem and satisfy the critics.”

GO1       “Except for the insane irrationality of the NRA.”

GO2       “They are coming around.  Institutions change, albeit slowly.  Someone at the NRA may realize that adoption of rational and focused legislation undermines the effort to impose irrational and sweeping confiscation.  We need to keep guns out of the hands of psychos to allow guns to be kept in the hands of law-abiding citizens.”     

. . .

[See the “e-ssays” titled “On Magazines (February 21, 2011),” “Incite, Sarah, Indict? (January 10, 2011),” “O’Bama Arming Industry (November 22, 2010) and “Gun Control, NRA Style (January 9, 2006).”  And “On The Vernal Equinox (March 21, 2011)”]

[February 4 – No War On Iran National Day of Action]

Bumper sticker of the week:

Citizens deserve guns; Psychos do not

Standing Up In America (December 5, 2011)

Posted in "Fiat ______", Bailout/Bribe, Banks and Banking System, Courts, Credit Unions, Crime/Punishment, Housing, Kleptocracy, Law, Locke Gary, Perjury/Dishonesty, Politics on December 5, 2011 by e-commentary.org

. . .

L          “We now learn that while he was Secretary of Treasury, Henry Paulson tipped off some of his hedge fund buddies of the Fannie Mae bailout.  Everyone in power is quick to proclaim that his statements and actions are not illegal and declare that nothing can be done.  His statements and actions are illegal, but those in power refuse to enforce Title 18, the criminal provisions of the United States Code, because they do not want to bring charges against their compatriots in power even their competitors in the other party.”      

O         “They cop out and refuse to send the cops out.  Because otherwise someone could bring charges against them some day.  The Great Ruling Class Truce.  And no one asks any follow-up questions or demands answers.”

L          “However, a federal judge in New York, Jed S. Rakoff, took a stand from his seat on the bench and rejected a settlement between the Big Banks and the SEC that would have let the Big Banks substantially off the hook.” 

O         “I read a blurb that the state attorney general in Massachusetts, Martha Coakley, took a stand and demanded that the Big Banks follow standards.  The lawsuit may put the Big Banks on the hook.”

L          “And in developments overseas, America’s standard-bearer in China, Gary Locke, is America’s stand-up guy in China.”

. . .

[Henry Paulson:  http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-29/how-henry-paulson-gave-hedge-funds-advance-word-of-2008-fannie-mae-rescue.html]

[Jed S. Rakoff:  http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/11/28/142856070/judge-blocks-citigroup-sec-settlement]

[Martha Coakley:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/massachusetts-attorney-general-sues-big-banks-over-foreclosure-practices/2011/12/01/gIQAgwnUIO_story.html.  See the “e-ssay” titled Fire Your Attorney General (November 7, 2011)]

[Gary Locke:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/gary-locke-is-star-in-china-as-first-us-ambassador-of-chinese-ancestry/2011/11/28/gIQA703DEO_story.html?hpid=z2.  See the “Category” denoted “Locke, Gary”]

Bumper stickers of the week:

America Is Exceptional / When America’s Exceptional

Take a stand

Take a few fiat dollars out of your credit union and put them in your pocket for safe keeping.