Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Economy
Related: About this forumExclusive Federal Reserve Videos and the Glass-Steagall Media Conspiracy
http://wallstreetonparade.com/2015/10/exclusive-federal-reserve-videos-and-the-glass-steagall-media-conspiracy/New York Times--spectacularly false narrative telling readers that the repeal of Glass-Steagall Act had nothing to do with the crash because problem firms like Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch and AIG didnt own insured commercial banks which would have been prohibited under the Glass Steagall Act, had it not been repealed in 1999. In fact, all three of the firms did, indeed, own banks insured by the FDIC at the time of the crash.
We figured that Sorkin had just made an error, or, well, three monster errors, so we wrote to his editor. We heard nothing. We wrote to the New York Times public editor who is supposed to uphold the integrity of the paper. Nothing. We wrote to the publisher. Nothing. To this very day, the errors remain in the Sorkin article. When the so-called paper of record allows three outrageously wrong errors to persist as fact, it doesnt look like sloppy journalism, it looks like a conspiracy to deny the public an honest narrative.
Sorkins lie has since been regurgitated by two other writers at the New York Times: Paul Krugman and William Cohan. The lie has also spread to President Obama and Presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, as a cover for why they wont buck Wall Street and work to reinstate this critically needed legislation as Senators Elizabeth Warren, John McCain, Bernie Sanders and dozens of others in Congress are demanding. Marcy Kapturs legislation in the House of Representatives to restore the Glass-Steagall Act has 67 cosponsors.
The New York Times seems disingenuous at best and conspiratorial at worst: admitting in an editorial that it blew it big time in advocating for the repeal of Glass-Steagall while hiding in the wings as its writers are allowed to push a false narrative that the New York Times refuses to correct.
<snip>
Theres a quick and simple way to blow a mile wide hole through all of these false narratives. As the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported and Senator Elizabeth Warren stated in the Senate Banking Committee on March 3 of this year, Citigroup (the largest insured bank in the U.S. in 2008 in terms of assets), Merrill Lynch (which owned insured banks) and Morgan Stanley (also owner of an insured bank) required a cumulative total of more than $6 trillion in secret loan assistance from the Federal Reserve during the financial crash. Warren stated:
During the financial crisis, Congress bailed out the big banks with hundreds of billions of dollars in taxpayer money; and thats a lot of money. But the biggest money for the biggest banks was never voted on by Congress. Instead, between 2007 and 2009, the Fed provided over $13 trillion in emergency lending to just a handful of large financial institutions. Thats nearly 20 times the amount authorized in the TARP bailout.
Now, lets be clear, those Fed loans were a bailout too. Nearly all the money went to too-big-to-fail institutions. For example, in one emergency lending program, the Fed put out $9 trillion and over two-thirds of the money went to just three institutions: Citigroup, Morgan Stanley and Merrill Lynch.
Those loans were made available at rock bottom interest rates in many cases under 1 percent. And the loans could be continuously rolled over so they were effectively available for an average of about two years.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 1160 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (14)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Exclusive Federal Reserve Videos and the Glass-Steagall Media Conspiracy (Original Post)
eridani
Oct 2015
OP
This claim: "the repeal of Glass-Steagall Act had nothing (or little) to do with the crash"
99th_Monkey
Oct 2015
#1
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)1. This claim: "the repeal of Glass-Steagall Act had nothing (or little) to do with the crash"
was also made by Krugman recently, which really surprised me, since I've generally
considered him to have sound judgement on such matters.
I wonder how Krugman would respond to this debunking of his claim.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)2. I would also like to hear Krugman's response to this.
Demeter
(85,373 posts)3. Paul Krugman is either myopic, or bone lazy
He makes questionable statements trying to claim that an ephemeral incident constitutes a holy writ in economic reality. He's in the cloud, and just as hard to pin down.
antigop
(12,778 posts)4. so if you repeat a lie does that make you a liar? Hillary is a liar? nt