Secret $301 Billion bailout of Citi: Obama admin refuses to reveal info

[MannyGoldstein]

Secret $301 Billion bailout of Citigroup. Treasury refuses to discuss:

The late Bloomberg News reporter Mark Pittman asked the U.S. Treasury in January 2009 to identify $301 billion of securities owned by Citigroup Inc. that the government had agreed to guarantee. He made the request on the grounds that taxpayers ought to know how their money was being used.

More than 20 months later, after saying at least five times that a response was imminent, Treasury officials responded with 560 pages of printed-out e-mails -- none of which Pittman requested. They were so heavily redacted that most of what’s left are everyday messages such as “Did you just try to call me?” and “Monday will be a busy day!”

None of the documents answers Pittman’s request for “records sufficient to show the names of the relevant securities” or the dates and terms of the guarantees. Even so, the U.S. government considers the collection of e-mails a partial response to an official request under the federal Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA. The Justice Department in July cited an increase in such responses as evidence that “more information is being released” under the law.

...

In the 560 pages of e-mails exchanged in the last two months of 2008 and January 2009, Treasury employees and their colleagues at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York discuss with attorneys the department’s $20 billion investment in New York- based Citigroup and the $301 billion in guarantees. Both followed an initial $25 billion investment in Citigroup through the Troubled Asset Relief Program in October 2008.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/video/63975218/
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-25/u-s-treasury-shielding-of-citigroup-with-deletions-make-foia-meaningless.html

So $45 Billion of our money has been loaned to Citi, but only $25 Billion was part of TARP: who wants to bet that the $20 Billion was used to pay back the TARP $25 Billion so that TARP looked like it was getting paid back? And our cash is guaranteeing $301 Billion in Citi's toxic assets, assets which Treasury won't identify - but we're on the hook for them. Marvelous!

Seems to me that when the bankers get in trouble, they're bailed out in days. The rest of us? "Change is hard... change takes time... big hole to dig out of..."

Some may blame the Silly Impractical Left for everything: but I believe that this story brilliantly demonstrates why we're probably not picking up seats in Congress next week.

[babylonsister]

1. Oh please, the banking industry has nothing to do with

the outcome of what happens next week. People are willfully uninformed and apparently like it that way.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9382854

But the reason I put "movement" in quotes every time I write about the Tea Partiers is that it's an amorphous group of activists with no clear agenda, no leadership, no internal structure, and no real areas of expertise. Its passionate members, while probably well meaning, appear to have no idea what they're talking about. Genuine political movements -- civil rights, women's suffrage, labor unions -- have, as Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C) recently put it, a "coherent vision." The Tea Party has rage and a cable news network, but that's not much of a substitute.

[ProSense]

2. Oooh, a scandal

Someone wants information on shit Bush did.

<...>

In the 560 pages of e-mails exchanged in the last two months of 2008 and January 2009, Treasury employees and their colleagues at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York discuss with attorneys the department’s $20 billion investment in New York- based Citigroup and the $301 billion in guarantees. Both followed an initial $25 billion investment in Citigroup through the Troubled Asset Relief Program in October 2008.

The Treasury Department also released 169 pages that included a “Securities Purchase Agreement” between the bank, the agency and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. The document had previously been disclosed in a Jan. 16, 2009, Citigroup regulatory filing -- almost two weeks before Pittman sent his request.

Exemptions Cited

The department held back 866 more pages, saying each was exempt from disclosure on one of four grounds: trade secrets, personnel rules and practices, memos subject to attorney-client privilege and violations of personal privacy.

Treasury also cited the trade-secrets exemption in responding to a separate, similar FOIA request by Bloomberg News for details about Citigroup’s segregated bad assets. In that response, 73 of 104 pages were completely blacked out except for headings. Only six pages -- the cover, contents, a boilerplate list of legal disclosures and a paragraph titled “FOIA Request for Confidential Treatment” -- were free of redactions.

An article about an FOIA request, "Secret $301 Billion bailout of Citi..."?

[Radical Activist]

7. In conclusion, it wasn't secret and it wasn't $301 billion.

that was just the amount being guaranteed. But hey, who cares about things like facts and details?!

[MannyGoldstein]

8. Are you stating that we're not on the hook for up to $301 billion

if the unknown junk asset drops in value? Are you stating that we know what the guaranteed assets are?

[Radical Activist]

10. I'm stating that your headline is worded in a misleading way.

Probably because it sounded more provocative than being accurate.

[MannyGoldstein]

11. I'm not seeing what's inaccurate. nt

[Lucky Luciano]

12. The guarantee you speak of is a put option on the

$301B of securities being guaranteed. The government would be short that put. The put would have a payoff of $301B to Citi If the securities dropped to zero. They were nowhere near zero and thus not worth $301B. Citi paid over $7B for the put option in question (I think) and Citi closed that position, so the government is no longer short the put - ie no more guarantee.

[MannyGoldstein]

13. You're correct that it's been canceled

Thanks for that info - makes me feel somewhat better.

Doesn't change the fact that bankers get insta-bailouts, we get "change takes time..."

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MannyGoldstein]

5. Why don't you educate me?

What part am I confused about?

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Radical Activist]

6. Is the second link an editorial?

It reads like one. They lay the narrative right out there for you. I'm also not sure what to think of the fact that their first quote is from a conservative group. But I know how quickly you accept anything that might make Obama look bad.

After reading the story, it sounds like there's more disclosure than Bloomberg's narrative let's on.

If you find any evidence that another chunk of federal money was used to repay TARP, then please let us know. Otherwise, it sounds like you're disappointed that TARP is getting repaid. Some people just can't stand to hear good news.

[golfguru]

9. The bigger culprit is Federal Reserve Bank

No one knows anything about or has access to their books!
And yet they control our money supply! It is a
PRIVATELY owned bank, and has a major bearing on
our economy and even the congress has no direct
oversight on these gnomes operating in the shadows.
Tim (Turbo Tax cheat) Geithner worked at the FED and
now he is the boss at the Treasury. Talking about a fox
guarding the chicken coop.

[dionysus]

14. bless your little heart for trying so hard.