The Federal Reserve is refusing to identify the recipients of almost $2 trillion of emergency loans

[mirror wall]

From here: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aatlky_cH.tY&refer=worldwide

They're keeping it secret. Bloomberg has filed suit to force them to disclose what exactly is going on. This can't possibly be happening, can it? What the hell?!

[babylonsister]

1. Amazing, isn't it. The bailout was supposedly for us, but now no one's

talking about where the money went to or for. And why do they think we would let them keep this a secret? Because we have so far.

I'm glad to see someone's pushing back.

[defendandprotect]

2. "Secrets Of The Temple" ... Wm. Greider

[ladjf]

3. The obfuscation by the Bush administration is relentless. nt

[Orrex]

4. I might as well come clean about this...

I'm the recipient. Just me. All $2T are destined for my checking account that has, to date, never had a balance in excess of $8,000.

Won't the good folks at the credit union be surprised when they find out?

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

5. K&R. These are some very bold and arrogant criminals.

[Cali_Democrat]

6. The final looting of this nation's wealth by the Bush Administration and it's cronies

To the tune of $2 Trillion dollars. Think about that for a second.

They have absolutely raped, pillaged, and looted America. They have made out like bandits

Fuckers.

[gratuitous]

7. Hey! It's THEIR money

What do all you nosy parkers want to know? It's none of yer business. Just shut yer yappers and keep paying taxes. Uh, or else! Yeah, or else.

[unkachuck]

8. The History of the Guillotine....

http://inventors.about.com/od/gstartinventions/a/Guillotine.htm

[Old and In the Way]

9. Probably extortion payments.

Some country or countries holding a lot of US assets are demanding direct compensation for holding a lot of worthless financial instruments.

[javadu]

10. I Saw This Metaphor On Another Site

Two trillion bucks should be able to be seen. Just like you can not "see" a black hole, but you can infer its existence from its effects -- you should be able to see two trillion dollars.

[On the Road]

11. Here's Barney Franks's Reaction

In an interview Nov. 6, House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank said the Fed's disclosure is sufficient and that the risk the central bank is taking on is appropriate in the current economic climate. Frank said he has discussed the program with Timothy F. Geithner, president and chief executive officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and a possible candidate to succeed Paulson as Treasury secretary.

``I talk to Geithner and he was pretty sure that they're OK,'' said Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat. ``If the risk is that the Fed takes a little bit of a haircut, well that's regrettable.'' Such losses would be acceptable, he said, if the program helps revive the economy.

Frank said the Fed shouldn't reveal the assets it holds or how it values them because of ``delicacy with respect to pricing.'' He said such disclosure would ``give people clues to what your pricing is and what they might be able to sell us and what your estimates are.'' He wouldn't say why he thought that information would be problematic.

[LaStrega]

12. I need to go hang out in the lounge ...

And read up on the shenanigans there. The news is bumming me straight out today.

[Octafish]

13. Would it be too much to ask for a receipt?

Wonder if the banks in Switzerland got about ... $2 trillion heavier, all of a sudden.

[mirror wall]

14. This Truthout article is a good analysis of the situation.

It includes quotes from the filing made by Bloomberg.

http://www.truthout.org/111408N

I agree with its conclusion that pressure should be put on major news outlets to join with Bloomberg News in demanding the release of this information. We have every fucking right to know since it's our money! I've written to the Times and NPR and I'd suggest that you do the same too if you have a spare moment. This is a travesty and what's worse is that it's being woefully under-reported!

[mirror wall]

15. I just came upon this post at KOS.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/11/13/103451/23/701/660367

AAUGH!! FOIA doesn't apply, people!!! (4+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
phonegery, Joe Friday, MyTake, rockhead

The Freedom of Information act applies to governmental agencies. The Federal Reserve is NOT a governmental agency. It isn't run by the government. It isn't answerable to the government. This would be why there is a Treasury Department (governmental) AND the Federal Reserve. The choice of "Federal Reserve" as a name was very intentional and MEANT to be obfuscating -- even now, most people have zero idea that the Federal Reserve isn't part of our government.

I sincerely doubt you'll hear an out-and-out "no" from the FR about releasing information under FOIA -- PRECISELY because the last thing they want to do is bring attention to the fact that they're not in fact part of the government. Why do you think the President has to ASK the FR chairman to lower rates? Because neither he, nor anyone else in the US gov't, actually has any power or say over what the Federal Reserve does.

Is that actually the case? If so, we're more fucked that I previously thought.

[JeffR]

16. That overstates it a little, I believe.

From the Federal Reserve's website:

The Federal Reserve Banks, created by an act of Congress in 1913, are operated in the public interest rather than for profit or to benefit any private group.

Commercial banks that are members of the Federal Reserve System hold stock in the Reserve Bank in their region, but they do not exercise control over the Reserve Bank or the Federal Reserve System. Holding stock in a regional Reserve Bank does not carry with it the kind of control and financial interest that holding publicly traded stock affords, and the stock may not be sold or traded. Member banks do, however, receive a fixed 6 percent dividend annually on their stock and elect six of the nine members of the Reserve Bank's board of directors.

Although they are set up like private corporations and member banks hold their stock, the Federal Reserve Banks owe their existence to an act of Congress and have a mandate to serve the public. Therefore, they are not really "private" companies, but rather are "owned" by the citizens of the United States.

On edit: forgot the link: http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrbanks.htm#6

Note also that the website uses a dot gov domain name.

[mirror wall]

17. Huh interesting.

I wonder if this could be a landmark case in a few different ways then-- is it the first to probe whether or not the Fed is subject to the FOIA?

[mirror wall]

18. Kick.

This is important. Let's get the word out since the major media outlets are (for the most part) failing horribly.