General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCredit Suisse’s Guilty Plea: The WSJ Uses the Right Adjective to Modify the Wrong Noun
Posted on May 21, 2014 by William Black
The Wall Street Journal has editorialized about Credit Suisses guilty plea in a piece entitled If Credit Suisse really is a criminal, why protect it from regulators? More precisely, and confusingly, the full title is:
Holder Convicts Switzerland
If Credit Suisse really is a criminal, why protect it from regulators?
The U.S. Saved Switzerland and Its Banks
Ill begin by responding to the WSJs weird claims about Switzerland. Far from convict[ing] Switzerland, the U.S. Fed bailed out the Swiss Central Bank at the acute phase of the crisis (by making large unsecured loans to it in dollars) so that it in turn could provide dollars to its two massive, insolvent, and fraudulent banks (UBS and Credit Suisse). The Treasury, with the support of Secretaries Paulson and Geithner, used AIG to secretly bail out not only Goldman Sachs but also UBS (to the tune of $5 billion). The unconscionable deal was so toxic that the heads of each of the three U.S. financial regulatory agencies involved (Treasury, the Fed, and the NY Fed) deny that they had any involvement in the decision its the Virgin Bailout.
UBS was contemporaneously negotiating a deal with the U.S. to pay a fine of $780 million to settle its criminal liability for aiding and abetting tax fraud by wealthy U.S. tax cheats so we, in economic substance, paid their entire fine and added a bonus of $4.22 billion that rewarded the frauds. As always, the fine was assessed solely on UBS, not the controlling officers who grew wealthy through UBS frauds, so the senior officers got even wealthier through the massive tax fraud and the secret AIG bailout and they overwhelmingly got to keep their jobs and bonuses that their frauds and our bailouts maximized. (The secret U.S. bailout of UBS is considerably larger than the fines assessed to UBS and now Credit Suisse combined so the claim of U.S. hostility to Switzerland that the WSJ is pushing on their editorial pages is refuted by the facts.)
That secret Treasury bailout via AIG was in addition to the Fed bailout that kept UBS and Credit Suisse from collapsing in 2008. Herr Dr. Hummler, the head of Switzerlands oldest private bank the man who propagated the claim throughout Europe that the financial crisis was caused by making home loans to black Americans bragged in my presence at a conference in Switzerland that the only reason his bank existed was to aid tax evasion by wealthy U.S. citizens. His bank, being small and unprotected by too big to prosecute was eliminated by U.S. criminal sanctions. He was up front about the fact that Switzerlands fundamental strategy was to encourage and aid and abet the wealthiest people in the world evading their nations tax laws.
http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2014/05/credit-suisses-guilty-plea-wsj-uses-right-adjective-modify-wrong-noun.html
Leme
(1,092 posts)AIG to secretly bail out not only Goldman Sachs but also UBS (to the tune of $5 billion)
-
I did some search and found where:
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04032009/transcript1.html
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Leme
(1,092 posts)to where I remembered hearing that AIG had given money to the Swiss bank... this was several years ago where I heard that.. on Bill Moyers.
-
I was showing where I probably was first aware of just this small part of the OP.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Leme
(1,092 posts)WILLIAM K. BLACK: They made bad loans. Their type of loan was to sell a guarantee, right? And they charged a lot of fees up front. So, they booked a lot of income. Paid enormous bonuses. The bonuses we're thinking about now, they're much smaller than these bonuses that were also the product of accounting fraud. And they got very, very rich. But, of course, then they had guaranteed this toxic waste. These liars' loans. Well, we've just gone through why those toxic waste, those liars' loans, are going to have enormous losses. And so, you have to pay the guarantee on those enormous losses. And you go bankrupt. Except that you don't in the modern world, because you've come to the United States, and the taxpayers play the fool. Under Secretary Geithner and under Secretary Paulson before him... we took $5 billion dollars, for example, in U.S. taxpayer money. And sent it to a huge Swiss Bank called UBS. At the same time that that bank was defrauding the taxpayers of America. And we were bringing a criminal case against them. We eventually get them to pay a $780 million fine, but wait, we gave them $5 billion. So, the taxpayers of America paid the fine of a Swiss Bank. And why are we bailing out somebody who that is defrauding us?
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)questions Black on that point.