Patrick Byrne A concerned citizen who has been hunting the oligarchy and Deep State since 2004. My actions forced me to abandon recently my 2,000 colleagues at Help them out by going to and making a purchase.

Ouch. I'm The 1st Daily Show Guest to Owe Them an Apology

16 sec read

Details to follow. In the meantime, here’s the clip:

Patrick Byrne A concerned citizen who has been hunting the oligarchy and Deep State since 2004. My actions forced me to abandon recently my 2,000 colleagues at Help them out by going to and making a purchase.

0 Replies to “Ouch. I'm The 1st Daily Show Guest to Owe…”

  1. And I can’t wait to read them. I saw the show/segment. Very interestingand curious to say the least.

  2. You made it on TDS? I don’t know whether it is funny or depressing that one of the few places that a truly free press exists is on comedy central’s satirical news programming. Much like the speech colbert gave at the presidential correspondents dinner, it just shows the guts that those guys have. Granted this is a somewhat complicated issue and easy to obfuscate, I know that Stewart, Colbert, their writers and producers are brilliant people and are masters at seeing through bs.
    It does get complicated involving cramer though because there is part of him that wants to inform the little guy of just how corrupt things are out there… last november he brilliantly described how organized shorts were taking down financial stocks through bidding up cds’s, put options, naked short selling of the company stock and dishonest journalism. But at the same time it seems he still has loyalty to some of these crooks from back in the day. I call it the anakin skywalker complex…. whats it going to take for him to finally throw the milken/boesky network into the core of the death star?

  3. Curious that message has been deleted and I’m glad as I’m sure it was tacky!!Seems like the daily show runs a clean blog and that is good to know(just like this one!!) Patrick we await the details!!

  4. Its up now. the “money honey bee”. lol. I think it came out pretty good. I think the point was to make andrew horowitz look like a belligerent ass, which it did quite well.

  5. Jack. Don’t be mislead. Jim C is a very smart man and his statements and actions are calculated. The bottom line is right and wrong. Yes he is informing NOW as part of a strategy to offset what he wasn’t doing back in 2003/2004/2005 when he was implemting a strategy then and using tactics. That video that was made was NOT an accident but part of a strategy and it was just a tactic. Go back to that timeframe to understand what was taking place, who was in place and who his angels were. Then fast forward to one of his angels was taken down. You do NOT get to write BULL on a govt document and flash it in front of many UNLESS you have an angel. What I believed happened is that once JIM witnessed the taking down of BSC and a few others he then became concerned as he should have. BUT in my world one does NOT TAKE THEIR CHANCES with the LIVES OF MILLIONS as many on that deck of cards did. They played a game of same ol same ol that has gone on for DECADES. Cept this time it was MANY of them who were helping out the bad guys as bad guys attacked us. NOW we have many who understand such but don’t want to be up front to admit such and they do the duck and cover and let’s fix it as best we can but lets not do away with the usual. Let’s just make a few adjustments to avoid another attack. YUP we were attacked but this time it wasn’t planes into buildings. This time it was the use of point and click. Like another here has presented to what extent were others complicit? From my perspective if you KNEW and you didn’t stop it. YOU are responsible. IF you were one of those LOOTING that STOREFRONT during or after the storm then you too are complicit. It really is THAT CLEAR CUT. But don’t expect financial sociopaths to admit such. And that is why we are here. We understand and accept they will NOT admit such and do the RIGHT THING. So we expose them with FACTS and either they get a case of honesty or we will continue till they resign/are removed or other.

  6. the right idea:

    Grassley to AIG execs: Resign or commit suicide
    Tue Mar 17, 2009 10:04am EDT

    NEW YORK (Reuters) – A prominent U.S. senator has intimated that executives of the troubled insurer American International Group Inc might consider suicide, adopting what he called a Japanese approach to taking responsibility for their actions.

    Senator Charles Grassley, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, made his comments on the Cedar Rapids, Iowa, radio station WMT on Monday.

    “The first thing that would make me feel a little bit better toward them (is) if they’d follow the Japanese example and come before the American people and take that deep bow and say, I’m sorry, and then either do one of two things: resign or go commit suicide,” Grassley said.

    “And in the case of the Japanese,” he added, “they usually commit suicide before they make any apology.”

    President Barack Obama on Monday expressed “outrage” about some $165 million of bonuses paid to AIG employees, including some who worked in the unit primarily responsible for the company’s troubles.

    New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo has said he will subpoena AIG for more information about the bonuses, including the names of the recipients.

    Grassley’s office did not immediately return a request for comment. A spokesman, Casey Mills, told the Associated Press that the senator “doesn’t want U.S. executives” to commit suicide, but that executives who “make a mess of their companies should apologize, as Japanese executives do.”

    (Reporting by Jonathan Stempel; editing by John Wallace)

  7. The clip was painted to make it sound like Patrick was complaining about legitimate shorting of overstock. Naked shorting and settlement failures didn’t come up.

    I want to see an interview of Patrick rather than just a clip piece.

  8. anonymoose. FINANCIAL SOCIOPATHS do NOT have a concious nor a sense of doing the right thing. ERGO, it is those who do have a concious to HELP those that do NOT, to do the right thing. At this point no one wants rhetoric and WORDS. . ACTION and EXAMPLES are needed. AND needed NOW, not two years from now.

  9. patrick aired around 10 minutes into the 3/16/09 the daily show, and in the following clip of “the money honey bee” started with his first words being specifically about “ABUSIVE short selling”…
    @ 2:21
    “abusive short selling drives down stock prices, destroys companies, costs millions of jobs, almost destroyed our company. they get journalists to come do hatchet jobs on them and destroy them for profit…..”

    isn’t “the money honey bee” a spoof on maria from cnbc?
    btw, “CNBC Thrives as Hosts Deliver News With Attitude – Mar 9, 2009 … (CNBC and The New York Times have a content sharing agreement.)”
    which imo explains why Joe Nocera form The New York Times seems to be in the abusive short sellers pockets.

  10. Mon Mar 16, 2009 7:11pm EDT

    By Jeremy Pelofsky

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Two U.S. senators introduced legislation on Monday aimed at forcing securities regulators to reinstate a rule that was designed to limit short sales of stocks and was repealed two years ago.

    Democratic Senator Ted Kaufman told Reuters he and Republican Senator Johnny Isakson would offer a bill ordering the Securities and Exchange Commission to act within 60 days to revive the so-called uptick rule and place other restrictions on short sellers.

    The SEC recently said it may meet next month on the issue but any plan to reinstate the uptick rule would likely be subject to a public comment period with a final rule possibly months away.

    “I think that there’s a general consensus that we should put it back in again,” Kaufman said in a telephone interview. “The main idea is to send a message to the SEC to do this.”

    There is some support for reinstituting the rule among key lawmakers in the Senate and the House of Representatives. House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank said he believed the SEC would revive it soon and Senate Banking Chairman Christopher Dodd expressed support for such a move.

    The uptick rule, adopted after the 1929 stock market crash, allowed short sales only when the last sale price was higher than the previous price. The SEC abolished the rule in 2007, after concluding that advances in trading strategies rendered it ineffective.

    Short-selling is often blamed for precipitous declines in stocks but short-sellers defend their role, saying they prevent shares from becoming overvalued.

    “I think it will have an effect on the decline in the market,” Kaufman said. “But also I think it sends a very clear message that things have changed.”


    The proposed bipartisan legislation would require the SEC to prohibit short sales that are not made on the increase of a stock price, which would prevent sellers from piling on to drive down the shares, according to Kaufman.

    Short sellers would also have to give priority to transactions by long sellers of a stock, according to a summary of the legislation.

    Under the bill, if the Treasury secretary and Federal Reserve Board chairman agreed, short sales of financial institutions’ securities would be allowed only if they are at least 5 cents higher than the prior transaction.

    Additionally, Kaufman said that to address the problem of some short sellers failing to deliver securities, the Senate measure would also require a short seller to have the ability to deliver the securities by the required settle date.

    The legislation would also require short sales to settle within three days, like long sellers, rather than the 13 days they currently have to do so, according to the bill summary.

    The SEC last year adopted short-term restrictions on short-selling but the measures were judged by some market watchers to have been largely ineffective.

    Short-sellers borrow stocks they expect will fall in price in the hope of repaying the loans for less and pocketing the difference.

  11. This clip will be taken apart, and maybe shown on re-runs.. The points were well made. Shorting is legal.. and if we don’t like what it does to our markets, we should do something about it. People learned what shorting was last night. They have no idea yet that the DTCC allows more shares to be sold than issued by the company and the DTCC is owned by special interests who profit from the loopholes.

    Something is going to be done. Too little, too late.

    When options or swaps create an incentive to manipulate stocks. it is time to fix the system.

  12. that bill misses the boat. the problem is not uptick it is non-delivery. Laws against naked short-selling need to be tightened, strengthened and enforced.

    People cannot be allowed to sell shares that they do not have.

  13. MHelburn:

    Those who know understand SHORTING is legal. Those who know also know naked shorting is legal. Those who know also know its the ILLEGAL use of such and the tactics used to take down a company or country. Hopefully Stewart and gang or OTHERS will begin showing clips of planes flying into buildings with others in some parts of the world CHEERING and then folow it with a clip of the NAMES of the many banks, and others along with indices that have collapsed along with supportive numbers re job losses trillions lost and people lining up in front of an INDY MAC, foreclosures and THEN showing those who were using ILLEGAL methods to take down such..CHEERING. One has to make it PERSONAL for the masses to understand.

  14. OMEGA DOG. THIS IS A SERIOUS MOMENT in OUR HISTORY. ONE doesn’t waste rocks or opportunities as DAVID clearly showed with GOLIATH. You don’t just take GOLIATH/the ENEMY down you CUT OFF HIS HEAD.

  15. Shorts will just move their sales to originate in Canada or Europe. International depositories like Clearstream, Euroclear and CDS can have big naked obligations to the DTC.

    Ban on Naked Short-Selling in the U.S.
    It appears that the ban imposed by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission on naked short-selling will be permanent. It is unlikely that Canadian regulators will alter the rules with respect to short-selling because the imperatives for further regulatory action do not appear as compelling in Canada.

  16. nice to see that Sen. Kaufman does understand…


    “Sen. Kaufman said during the introduction of the legislation on the Senate floor. “The uptick rule should have never been repealed. To permit people to sell shares they don’t have and won’t be able to deliver turns investment into pure speculation. The time has come for this practice to stop.” ”

    better substitute “manipulation and fraud” for “speculation” in that quote above

  17. The part of the clip that will resonate with the audience was when the bee asked the short what happened to all the workers in the company he bankrupted and he said “I guess they got layed off, but I made a lot of money.”

  18. Here is quote in the news story about DELIVERY!!!!!!!!

    The measure introduced by Sens. Kaufman and Isakson also calls for the SEC to alter several other rules. If passed, the bill would require exchanges and other trading venues to execute the trades of long sellers ahead of short sellers, all other things being equal. Additionally, all short sales would be required to settle on the same time frame employed for long sales of the same securities.

    “There is no reason short sellers should have 13 days to deliver shares when long sellers have only three days,” Kaufman wrote on his Web site.

    The bill also seeks to offer greater protection to financial stocks, as it would prohibit short sales of the securities of any financial institution unless that trade is affected at a price (in minimum lots specified by the SEC) at least 5 cents higher than the immediately preceding transaction in such securities.

    “Our financial sector, and financial stocks, are in a fragile state — and our taxpayers now hold substantial shares of many institutions,” read a statement on Kaufman’s Web site. “If the Treasury and [Federal Reserve] believe they need additional protection in these times, this legislation permits it.”

    The legislation also takes aim at abusive naked short selling, which occurs when a short sale occurs but the trader does not first borrow the shares and fails to deliver on the transaction. The bill attempts to “tighten up the rules” already in place that prohibit any person from selling securities short unless that person has at the time of the short sale a demonstrable legally enforceable right to deliver the securities at the required delivery date.

    Naked short selling is considered extremely harmful to certain stocks because it can keep share prices artificially depressed, allowing unscrupulous traders to take advantage of the stock. While certainly illegal according to SEC regulations, many investors argue that naked short selling occurs often enough to be destructive and that the SEC does little to enforce the rules against the practice.

  19. I thought Congress passed laws and the SEC only passed rules.

    Why doesn’t congress just pass a law clarifying that it is illegal to represent IOU’s as if they are shares on brokerage statements, then have the DOJ arrest custodians that break the law.

    Just take the SEC right out of the loop instead of waiting for years of comment periods for them to pass some swiss cheese rule.

  20. New Twist to the story of Strewar vs Cramer…….


    March 17, 2009 —

    JON Stewart, the scourge of Wall Street and bane of CNBC, may have had a secret weapon in his corner to help him prep for his grudge match with “Mad Money” host, Jim Cramer – his older brother.

    As the Wall Street Journal recently pointed out, Stewart’s brother, Larry Leibowitz, is head of US Markets & Global Technology at NYSE Euronext. (Stewart’s given surname is also “Leibowitz,” but he famously told “60 Minutes” that he changed it to “Stewart” because Leibowitz “sounded too Hollywood”). Larry has also held high positions at Credit Suisse and Morgan Stanley.

    A Page Six spy who recently shared an elevator ride at the NYSE with Leibowitz and Big Board CEO Duncan Niederauer says, “They both got off on the sixth floor, after Leibowitz had practically been doing everything but shine his shoes for the short ride up. What a routine they have. One brother pretends to kick Wall Street’s butt by crucifying Cramer on his show, while the other brother is down on Wall Street kissing it.”

    Whatever advice the elder Leibowitz gave the talk-show host before last week’s showdown, it worked: The typically loudmouthed Cramer was uncharacteristically silent in the face of Stewart’s attacks and even seemed repentant at times.

    Meanwhile, the hit to Cramer’s credibility has been followed by a hit to his ratings. While a CNBC rep says that March numbers for “Mad Money” are up overall compared to February, the show suffered a 2 percent decline in viewership in the days following Cramer’s appearance on Stewart’s “The Daily Show” and 6 percent in the 25-54 demographic. Stewart, on the other hand, drew more than 2 million viewers – 50 percent more than his average. Both Stewart and Leibowitz declined to comment.

  21. These clowns we have in Washington are such lying cheats. Do they care about the billions going out the back door at AIG? No, they care about the measly 100 million or so going to working people. INCREDIBLE.

  22. With the way TDS puts together it’s clips it means noone will ever be able to make all the points they want. With that being said, Patrick definitely looked like the good guy.

    And at least you didn’t get hit in the face with one of the Money Honey’s wings.

  23. Patrick, if you’re reading these comments at all, please read my comments on the ‘say you want a revolution’ post…

  24. BTW, any word on the rumor that the fedgov will demand delivery of all the securities it now owns, as well as those held by those entities, in order to keep them from being used for shorting?


    Everybody is rushing to condemn AIG’s bonuses, but this simple scandal is obscuring the real disgrace at the insurance giant: Why are AIG’s counterparties getting paid back in full, to the tune of tens of billions of taxpayer dollars?

  26. That last article was written by Cramer’s pal Elliot Spitzer. The Spitzer scandal broke just in time to stop him from cracking down on Wallstreet.


    Treasury Awards Two New Legal Services Contracts
    By Avi Klein on March 17, 2009 4:04 PM | No Comments | No TrackBacks
    The Treasury Department has hired the law firms of Venable LLP and Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP to provide advice about the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).

    The Treasury Department did not issue press releases about the contracts — as it did with earlier TARP legal-services deals — but posted copies on its web site. Although the links to the contracts did not work, BailoutSleuth was able to access them by deleting extraneous information in their web addresses.

    The contract we found for Simpson Thacher & Bartlett has no specific value, just a minimum of $50,000 and a maximum of $5,000,000. Unfortunately, the hourly rate schedule is redacted, so it is impossible to know whether this is a good deal for the taxpayer.

    The contract with Venable has the same value range, and the task order is identical as well. Both last from Feb. 20, 2009 to Aug. 19, 2009.

    According to the agreement, the firms will prepare documents related to Treasury investments under the Capital Purchase Program, the part of the TARP program dedicated to shoring up the financial services industry.

    The law firms will also provide advice on the government’s investments in mutual holding companies, and will provide “guidance in the formulation of equity investment or debt transaction structures and documentation.”

    This is the second contract the Treasury Department has awarded Simpson Thacher & Bartlett for legal advice for the TARP program. Under a previous agreement reached in October, the firm was to receive $300,000 for its services.

    This is Venable’s first contract with the TARP program.

  28. Some retention plan
    By Chris Carey on March 17, 2009 3:25 PM | No Comments | No TrackBacks

    Eleven American International Group Inc. employees who got “retention” bonuses of $1 million or more last week no longer work there, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo reported.

    AIG came under harsh criticism when it paid more than $160 million in bonuses to employees of its financial products division, whose activities contributed heavily to the company’s near collapse.

    AIG has received more than $170 billion in public money since October, as part of a rescue plan that gave the U.S. government an 80 percent stake in the company..

    Cuomo said in a letter to Rep. Barney Frank, the head of the House Financial Services Committee, that his office had subpoenaed AIG for the names of the employees who received bonuses

    Seventy three AIG employees got retention bonuses of $1 million or more, including the 11 who are no longer with the company, Cuomo said. Seven of the recipients got more than $4 million each, with the highest payout being $6.4 million.

    Although AIG agreed not to make any bonus payments from its $600 million deferred compensation pool, it tapped a separate retention bonus pool for last week’s payments.

    AIG contended that the employees who got bonuses were vital to unwinding the financial products business, which marketed credit default swaps and other exotic and risky instruments.

    Cuomo noted that AIG’s unwillingness to identify those employees makes it impossible for outsiders to evaluate that claim, or to understand why money went to people who have left the company.

    “Until we obtain the names of these individuals, it is impossible to determine when and why they left the firm and how it is that they received these payments,” he said.

    According to Cuomo’s letter, 22 AIG employees got bonuses of $2 million or more, collecting $72 million between them. That amounts to more than 40 percent of the total payout.

    AIG Chairman Edward M. Liddy said in a letter to Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner that the company was contractually obligated to make the payments.

    Liddy even argued that breaching the contracts could lead some of AIG’s counterparties in trillions of dollars worth of financial transactions to declare the company in default, triggering even bigger economic claims that could doom it

  29. Read about Cuomo’s actities at HUD at Expecting him to do the right thing? Only to make a name for himself and protecting those who support his candidacy for office. He is part of the oligarchy.

  30. Comments about bonus money is misdirection. The important thing is where did the 99% of the bailout $ go?
    Goldman Sacks, JP Morgan, Euro banks???

  31. I’d like an explanation of how the counterfeit shares of a naked short sale are covered up. People who think they bought real shares expect to get annual reports and expect to vote in shareholder meetings. How is it that the charade is maintained so that these people don’t complain when they don’t get what a share holder expects to get?

    I saw a post from Sep 5, 2008 talking about the fact that there are over-votes in shareholder meetings due to these fake shares. I cannot understand why the vote isn’t immediately thrown out if more shares than exist are voted.

  32. Who counts the votes? The brokers. they get paid to collect the proxies.

    So, let’s say 10,000,000 shares are issued. Whether 10 are voted, or 5, or 100,000,000, when they get to the magic number, they stop counting. How difficult is that?

  33. The post was actually July 20, 2008.

    Bloomberg writes that the “Securities Transfer Association, a trade group for stock transfer agents, reviewed 341 shareholder votes in corporate contests in 2005. It found evidence of overvoting-the submission of too many ballots-in all 341 cases.”

    lenofus’s explanation that they stop counting when they get to the magic number does not seem to square with Bloomberg’s report.

  34. THE SHAME is NOT the bonus payouts. The SHAME IS NOT that AIG did what they did. MANY MISS THE POINT. THE DISGRACE is that THEY WERE TAKEN DOWN while those who could PREVENT IT/STOP IT. Too many fallen for the misdirection. It isn’t the bonuses. IT IS THE BREAKING OF LAWS. How about we get back to something called PRO ACITVE versus this reactive and crisis management.

  35. It does’nt get any better than this… major Media may have to pick this up by hook or by crook because this is to good to miss…

    Hedge Funds and the Global Economic Meltdown

    Outstanding Video By: Judd Bagley

    This is a video you have to watch!

    It’s about 1/2 hour long.

  36. …and you’re right, your video made me angry.

    That smug smile on Cox’s face gets under my skin.

  37. GREAT WORK JUDD. And each of us should simply pass it along. Keep in mind that LONG before Bear Stearns was attacked there was that failure with the trading system near a year earlier. That was when the markets djia to roll over 500 points in the last 15 minutes of the day. A test perhaps?

  38. The video is simply amazing and the average person on the street can understand the timing and the numbers, the questions.

    My only complaint or warning: Michael Moore mentioned as as a go-to guy at the end.

    If you place his name as a contact, then you should also list other outlets such as Frontline and then perhaps some associations on the right. American Thinker or Powerline or Investors Business Daily. Ed Laskey (editor) at American Thinker has done a lot of work on the hedge fund story and though is not on the same line as Deep Capture, reaching out to folks like him or outlets his lend credibility whether the information is rejected or not.

    If DeepCapture appears to be only reaching out to the left—and MIchael Moore is anti-capitalism left—then be prepared to have large segments of society completely turn their heads to the information that is being uncovered just as it all seems to be reaching a boiling point.

    In fact, because Moore’s name appears at the end, it makes it difficult to even email the link around to my friends on the right that will be asking if I’ve gone to the dark side.

  39. Terry,
    I think this is not a left or right thing….it is a both sides have let us down and were collusive in this redistribution of American’s wealth. Above all, this should be truly bipartisan.. It is both Repub and Demo’s money being stolen. Perhaps having the common interest in our money being stolen we can truly come together for once. Both Geithner and Dodd (the lieing chits) both approved the AIG bonuses although they appear on TV outraged about that which they approved and tried to pull the wool over our eyes. We need an long overdue overhaul of Congress, Senate and our government in general. You suppose Geithner lied to Obama? I think not, they got caught…I also blame Bush for starting this charade. These CROOKS have got to go…how do we expect these very policy makers to clean up wall street when they cater to them behind our backs, act outraged when they pull these bonuses BS, only after it is leaked to the public? They give our money to WS with blessings to pay those bonuses…What is different than our money being stolen in the market behind our backs, and money being stolen by our government right in front of our faces?

  40. I agree with Terry. I’d take Michael Moore out of the video and mention him on the web page instead. Otherwise you will lose a lot of right wing people that also are against corruption in the markets.

  41. A Most EXCELLENT Video. GREAT JOB Judd!! I am sending links to every forum I visit often and searching for new ones I can post it on. I am also sending it to My Congressmen. Maybe those idiots will finaly get a clue, and if they don”t I pray they get replaced in a couple years.

    THANK YOU for putting this Video together!!

  42. Terry,

    My first gut response was as you stated your feelings – my right field / right wing friends will take offense to Michael Moore’s name being mentioned. And the addition of his name will detract from the excellent, clear message of the video and maybe cause these people to NOT forward it on because of some possible hatred for Michael Moore.

    As a compromise Judd, maybe it would better to either:

    1- Add the name of someone in the Right wing.

    2- OR better yet, step up a web page link where people can go to get additional information. Here you can include the Michael Moore information and more. This way one hears or sees Michael Moore’s name in your excellent video.

    My thinking is that #2 is the best choice, since this issue should not be directly connected either to the left or the right as it is a universal concern for all Americans. And you have done such a fine job in creating this video, I do not think it you should mention anyone except yourself and some links for additional information as you did for

  43. Davidn or Anyone Else,

    After seeing Mr. Cox tells us the Naked Shorting IS NOT illegal, then telling us Naked Sorting IS illegal in Judd’s video, I am reminded that you are someone else once supplied us with a link to COMMENTS by SEC Commissioners who publicly spoke in favor of Naked Shorting.

    If possible, please repost the link to these comments. I would like to include them in my letter to congress.

  44. verbatim. from then SEC Chairman Christopher Cox, November 30th, 2007:

      “The SEC is the pre-emenient gold standard of enforcement of securities laws.”

  45. Judd,

    … on one small point about the video…

    I noticed that the buttons at the bottom disappear early in the video.

    While viewing the video, someone came by which required me to leave my office, and I was NOT able to PAUSE the video since there were no buttons visible.

    I am guessing you had the buttons disappear so as not to interfere with the video. If possible, it would be nice to have the buttons available throughout the video.

    Thanks again for such an excellent video!

  46. #55 Correction – Add >> NO <> NO << one hears or sees Michael Moore’s name in your excellent video.

  47. who does anyone know on the “right” who is not part of or apologists for the free market lies, “innovations” and ‘efficiencies” that begot deregulation of the securities markets and non enforcement of laws designed to protect investors against criminal manipulators and speculators?

    the only possibles I know of are senators Grassley and Soecter who are likely more center than right.

    numerous democrats (pres. clinton, schumer and dodd to name a few) made iit easier for the crooks as well–

    the issue of capture and corruption of congress, regulators & media is not a left – right issue– although r wing ideologues can’t seem to see it as otherwise.

    those who will not support the investor reform movement because michael moore’s name is there need to reexamine their priorities and stop allowing themselves to be distracted from reality by the total bs the banksta’s cronies vomit up to obscure their crimes from the public.

    as one of their most despicable mouthpieces likes to say: “get over it!”

  48. Send it to World Net Daily,” right wing “Americans are not as narrow minded as you may think. Many of us have sent info to Michael Moore in hopes that he can make a difference. This fight is too big to be petty.

  49. It’s hard to wrap your head around bail out numbers, but one that caught my attention is that all outstanding credit card debt is only 800 billion and total available credit on cards is only 5 trillion.

    Instead of giving out Tarp funds, they could have paid off everyone’s credit cards. Government is about choices and they chose to give the stimulus to bail out poorly run bankster companies instead of the general public.

  50. Facts re the Bear Stearns story Judd’s superb new video doesn’t have time to cover in detail:

    “Bear Stearns stock was artificially collapsed so that illegal insider traders would make billions and J.P. Morgan would be paid $55 billion of US tax payer money to shore up themselves and buy Bear Stearns at bankruptcy prices.”

    Bear Stearns Buy-Out… 100% Fraud by John Olagues

    This article is about how Bear Stearns stock was artificially collapsed so that illegal insider traders would make billions and J.P. Morgan would be paid $55 billion of US tax payer money to shore up themselves and buy Bear Stearns at bankruptcy prices.

    Massive buying of puts and shorting stock in Bear Stearns

    On March 10, 2008, the closing price of Bear Stearns was 70. The stock had traded at 70 eight weeks earlier.

    On or prior to March 10, 2008 requests were made to the options exchanges to open new April series of puts with exercise prices of 20, and 22.5, and a new March series with an exercise price of 25.

    Their requests were accommodated and new series were opened for trading March 11, 2008.

    Since there was very little subsequent trading in the calls with exercise prices of 20, 22.5 or 25, it is certain that the requests were made with the intentions of buying substantial amounts of the puts.

    There was, in fact, massive volumes of puts purchased in those series which opened on March 11, 2008.

    For example: between March 11-14 inclusive, there were 20,000 contracts traded in the April 20s, 3700 contracts traded in the April 22.5s, and 8000 contracts traded in the April 25s. In the March 25s, there were 79,000 contracts traded between March 11-14, 2008.

Question: Why did the options exchanges not open the far out of the money puts for trading the first time that Bear Stearns stock hit 70, when the April and March options had far more time to expiration? Certainly if the requesters were legitimate hedgers or speculators, their buying the March and April puts with 2 and 3 months to expiration was more reasonable.

Answer: The insiders were not ready to collapse the stock and did not request the exchanges to open the new series when Bear Stearns first hit 70.

Second Request and Accommodation

    On or prior to March 13, 2008, an additional request was made of the options exchanges to open more March and April put series with very low exercise prices.

    These new March put options would have just five days of trading to expiration. The exchanges accommodated their requests, knowing that the intentions of the requesters were to buy puts.

    They indeed bought massive amounts of puts. For example the March 20 puts traded nearly 50,000 contracts (i.e. contracts to sell 5 million shares at 20). The March 15s traded 9600, the March 10s traded 13,000 and the March 5s traded 6300 all on March 14 (the first day of trading of the new March series).

    The introduction of those far-out-of-the-money put series in the April and March months immediately before the crash provided a vehicle whereby extreme leverage was available to the insiders. In other words if an insider had $100,000 and he knew that Morgan would buy Bear Stearns at 2, he could make 5-10 times more on the $100,000 by buying the newly introduced March puts. This is so because the soon to expire far out-of-the-money puts were far cheaper than the July or October out-of-the-money puts. And that is why the illegal inside traders requested the exchanges to introduce the far out-of-the-moneys just days before the crash.

    But this scenario has serious implications. This means that the deal was already arranged on March 10 or before.

    That contradicts the scenario that is promoted by SEC. Chairman Cox, Fed Boss Bernanke, Bear CEO Schwartz, Jamie Dimon of J.P. Morgan (who sits on the board of directors for the New York Federal Reserve Bank) and others that false rumors undermined the confidence in Bear Stearns making the company crash, notwithstanding their adequate liquidity days before.

    I would say that the deal was arranged months before but the final terms and times were not determined until maybe March 7-8, 2008.

    On March 14, 2008, the April 17.5s, the 15s, the 12.5s and the 10s traded 15,000 contracts combined. Each put gives the right to sell 100 shares. So for example, these 15,000 April puts gave the purchaser(s) the right to sell 1.5 million shares at prices between 10 and 17.5. Those purchasers expected to make profits on 1.5 million shares because they knew the deal was coming at $2.00.
    That is the only plausible explanation for anyone to buy puts with five days of life remaining with strike prices far below the market price.

    So there were requests, during the period of March 10-13, to the exchanges to open the March and April series for buying massive amounts of extremely out-of-the-money puts, which were accommodated by the options exchanges.

    Did the Exchanges aid and abet the insider trading scheme? We do not able to have a strong opinion on that idea.

    Media statements of adequate liquidity.

    However, Reuters, on March 10, 2008 was citing Bear Stearns sources that there was no liquidity crisis and that there was no truth to the speculation of liquidity problems.

    And none other than the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 11, 2008 was stating that “we have a good deal of comfort with the capital cushion that these firms have”.
    We even had the “mad” Jim Cramer proclaiming on March 11, 2008 that all is well with Bear Stearns and that the viewers should hold on to their Bear Stearns. And on March 12, 2008, Alan Schwartz CEO of Bear Stearns was telling David Faber of CNBC that there was no problem with liquidity and that “We don’t see any pressure on our liquidity, let alone a liquidity crisis”.

    The fact that the requests were made on March 10 or earlier that those new series be opened and those requests were accommodated together with the subsequent massive open positions in those newly opened series is conclusive proof that there were some who knew about the collapse in advance, while Reuters, Cox, Schwartz and Cramer were telling the public that there was no liquidity problem.

    This was no case of a sudden developement on the 13 or 14th, where things changed dramatically making it such that they needed a bail-out immediately. The collapse was anticipated and prepared for, even while the CEO of Bear Stearns and the SEC Chairman of the SEC were making claims of stability.

    What was the reason that Cramer, Cox and Schwartz were all promoting Bear Stearns immediately before its collapse. That will be speculated upon for years to come. Cramer has admitted that “truth” was not his friend and that he manipulated stocks to influence investors behavior. Was this one of his acts? But no apologies from Cramer as he claims now that

 he was referring to keeping money in Bear Stearns Bank

 not in Bear Stears stock.
    Proof of Insider Trading:

    To prove the case of illegal insider trading, all the Feds have to do is ask a few questions of the persons who bought puts on Bear Stearns or shorted stock during the week before March 17, 2008 and before.

    All the records are easily available.

 If they bought puts or shorted stock, just ask them why? 

What information did they have acncess to which the 

CEO and the SEC did not have? Where did they get the 

info? Why aren’t Cramer and Cox, Dimon, Bernanke, 

Geithner, Paulson, Faber and Schwartz subject to a bit of 

prosecutorial pressure to get to the bottom of this?


Maybe the buyers of puts and short sellers of stock

just didn’t believe Reuters, Cox, Schwartz, Cramer and 

Faber and went massively short anyway, buying puts that

required a 70% drop in a weeK.

    Maybe they had better 

information than Schwartz or Cox. If they did, then that’s 

a felony, with the profits made subject to forfeiture.

    April 4, 2008 Congressional Hearings on the

Bear Stearns Bail-out.

I watched both sessions and drew the following


    In the first session there were the following witnesses.

Bernanke of the Federal Reserve Board, Cox from 

the SEC, Geithner representing the New York Reserve

Bank and an incidental player Mr. Steel from the Treasury.

The only Senators that seem to be willing to attack 

these bankers were Bunning, Tester, Menedez and


 All the rest were useless and very respectful.


All witnesses did their best to keep their stories

consistent but they did slip up a bit.

They all agree that the bail-out was necessary without 

any proof that it was.

They all agreed that what caused the cash liquidity to 

dry up within one day was the rumor mongers. 

Apparently it is claimed that some people have the 

ability to start false rumors about Bear Stearns’s and 

other banks liquidity, which then starts a “run on 

the bank” . These rumor mongers allegedly were able 

to influence companies like Goldman Sachs to 

terminate doing business with Bear Stearns, 

notwithstanding that Goldman et al. 

believed that Bear Stearns balance sheet was in good 

shape. (Goldman between March 11-14 warned their 

average customers that Bear Stearns stock was “hard 

to borrow” for shorting due to the fact that other 

customers had used up all of the stock avaiable for 

borrowing for short sales) .

 That idea that rumors caused a “run on the bank” at 

Bear Stearns is 100% riduculous.
    Perhaps that’s the 

reason why every witness were so guarded and hesitant

and looked so strained in answering questions.

Loans to J.P. Morgan total $55 billion from FED 

The Private New York FED lent $25 billion to Bear Stearns 

(described as the primary facility by James Dimon) 

and another $30 billion to J.P. Morgan (described as the

 secondary facility by James Dimon). So the bail-out cost

was $55 billion not the $30 billion that is promoted. This 

was revealed at the second session of the Senate hearings in 

a James Dimon response to a question from Senator Reed.

    Who gets the $55 billion? J.P. Morgan received the money on a 

loan pleadging Bear Stearns assets valued at $55 billion. 

$29 billion is non-recourse to Morgan. 

Effectively the FED received collateral appraised by Bear 

Stearns at $55 billion for a loan to J.P. Morgan of 

$55 billion. That’s a loan to value of 100%.


If the value of the secondary facility of $30 billion

($29 billion of which is non recourse) is worth only

$15 billion when all is said and done, then J.P. Morgan 

has to pay back only $1 billion of the $30 billion received 

and keeps the $14 billion the the Fed loses. If the $25

billion primary facility is worth only $15 billion when all

 is said and done, J.P. Morgan has to pay $10 billion of 

the $25 billion received. If J.P Morgan can not pay, then 

the Fed loses the $10 billion. 

If after all is said and done, the $25 billion primary 

assets or the $30 billion secondary assets are sold for 

more that $25 billion or the $30 billion respectively, the 

difference goes to J.P. No matter how you cut it, 

J.P. Morgan wins 

If the $55 billion assets turn out to be worth only $20

billion when all is said and done, J.P. Morgan owes $1

billion on the $30 billion and the difference between 

$25 billion and the value received on the primary facility. 

The best the FED can do is get their money back with 

interest and the worse they can do is lose 

about $25 -$40 billion. 

The FED would have been far better to just buy the

assets at Bear’s and J.P.Morgan’s valuation.


    The question arises:

Why didn’t the FED just make the $55 billiom loan to Bear Stearns directly? The FED received Bear Stearns assets valued by Bear Stearns as its only collateral for 

the 100% loan. I am sure that Bear Stearns would 

have guaranteed the full $55 billion and would have 

advanced more collateral and accepted a 90% loan 

to value. Everything would have been just fine

 for Bear Stearns and the FED would have had a 

better deal. But the Bear Stearns stock would have 

gone up and all short stock sellers and all put buyers 

would have massive losses instead of massive gains.

The bail-out is a great deal for J.P. Morgan, the illegal insider short sellers got a great deal. Bear Stearns stock holders and employees got 

a very bad deal and the sellers of puts sustained large losses..


This shows, in my view, that J.P. Morgan and the FED

were in collusion with the short sellers and put buyers.

    John Olagues

    *John Olagues is the owner and principal consultant for Truth IN Options and a recognized authority on listed and employee stock options.

    After graduating from Tulane University (where he captained the baseball team and set many of Tulane’s pitching records), John applied his B.A. in mathematics and his competitive spirit to the real world of stock options.

    In 1976, he became a member of the Pacific Stock Exchange in San Francisco trading and managing options positions in scores of different stocks. John joined with Blair Hull to create Options Research, the first service to provide theoretical options values to market-makers and to the general public. In 1980, he became a member of the CBOE, where he personally traded more options in more diverse situations than any other trader.

  51. Here’s the problem with the SEC – the guy who allowed the Madoff exemption just got a new job.

    “Washington, D.C., March 4, 2009 – The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced that James Brigagliano has been named a Deputy Director in the agency’s Division of Trading and Markets.”

    He’s the guy who claimed that fails to deliver and receive combined were only $6 billion, including debt instruments, when their own annual reports prove otherwise.

    According to this filing, fails to deliver increased 69.5% from 26.4 billion in 2005 to 44 billion in 2006. How do I reconcile this with the BS they publish on their SHO page?

    Note that this is cash value after the stocks have been punished into oblivion (note everything tanks towards the Dec. 31 disclosure date) and excludes all fails hidden in Canada and Germany and assumes the thieves are providing the SEC with accurate records even though it appears no one ever audits their FOCUS reports.

    To put the value of fails in perspective, the industry as a whole only had $81.4 billion in cash in 2006.

    All the trading for the entire year of 2006 was $48.2 trillion or approximately $192.8 billion per day. That means the fails we know about equal a little less than 1/3 of the entire value of a typical trading day.

    They claim that complaints against short selling fell from 631 in 2006 to 604 in 2007 and that it is only the 8th most common complaint (implying that since reg. SHO, shorting complaints have slowed down).

  52. As per request, a repeat post.

    Even though hundreds of comment letters begged the SEC to fix SHO, the transcript shows they don’t take the public or failing to deliver seriously.

    This comment shows they don’t understand a supply/demand curve and think it is unnatural for a stock price to rise to a level where supply equals demand

    “there are usually more buys than sells when you look at market depth. Unless the price rises unnaturally, the only way to match it is to increase ask depth by 30% (naked shorting)”

    Transcript of SHO rule making, Sept. 15 2006

    I’d be curious to know where the people on this transcript all work now.

    The word “grandfather” didn’t come up once, nor did the phrase “comment letter”. 100% of the people speaking supported naked shorting.

    “But it seems to me that the optimal thing for the market maker to do might be instead of holding a large inventory when somebody comes with a buy to sell to them, you know, if somebody comes to the buy, just short it, just borrow it. It lowers your inventory cost.”

    (SEC study)
    “First of all, it was rather surprising to see how large a percentage of sell orders are short sell orders. As you can see there’s roughly 23 percent of all sell orders are short sell orders, a surprisingly large percentage.”

    “We also found out that short sell orders were much more likely to be canceled or to simply go unfilled and expire than regular sell orders. The reason for that is because of the uptick rule.”

    – allowing prices to rise by reducing shorting will lower average investment returns (for those that bought after prices rose)

    – a higher price encourages companies to raise money and then waste it (this one floored me, they should divert investor funds to naked shorts willing to sell at strike prices below what a company is willing to raise money and dilute shareholders at)

    – “If you look at the history of enforcement actions at the SEC, the number of actions to deal with pump and dumps vastly, vastly exceeds the number associated with bear raids. Bear raids are very uncommon.” (we don’t enforce naked shorting, so it must not occur)

    – shorting protects investors from paying too much “How many traders complained about being sold very high priced stocks in the late 1990s, and then after that lost a lot of money? I think huge numbers of small investors felt in retrospect like they got ripped off.”

    – “So I agree with Larry that the short sellers are the big ally of the SEC in its efforts to protect small investors from schemes that would, essentially, be manipulative.”

    – “the locate rule is an effort to throw a little bit of sand into the gears that would otherwise smoothly allow a market for borrowing and lending securities to operate.”

    – And one of the proposals that I understand is up for discussion is whether buy-ins should be more strictly enforced to eliminate short positions on which traders have failed.
    If you more aggressively force traders to liquidate their short positions, you make it easier for someone to corner the market and squeeze the shorts in the stock market. This would have the bad effect of making the schemes that Larry talked about, the pump and dump schemes, easier to execute and would, I think, therefore, be kind of a bad idea. So rather than have a forced buy-in for short positions that have been failed on for a long period of time I would recommend as an alternative just a series of escalating modest penalties”

    – the cost of naked shorting falls to zero when interest rates are at zero as the only cost is borrowing to cover the margin on the fail

    – “Short sellers are very important parts of our capital markets. Short sellers get pessimistic information into prices. We don’t want just the optimists to have a vote. We want to have pessimists also to express their view.”

    – “I would characterize short sellers as an oppressed minority.”

    – “why we were worried about downward price manipulation but were not worried about upward price manipulation. So it seems an odd, sort of, asymmetrical rule.”

    – “I think banning trade, which is, essentially, what the uptick rule does, is rarely a good idea”

    – “I was getting progressively more sad and more sad going through this discussion here. And I kept thinking poor uptick rule. I mean, it has been with us for 70 years now. Anybody to stand up in defense of the uptick rule? Well, it’s not going to be me. Of course, the other challenge I have I’m the last here, and so how can I make it different and interesting.”

    – “short sellers are already handicapped, a lot of restrictions.”

    – the retail investor “facing the lions and debating whether the ethics of eating someone that’s there to be eaten.”

    – “the smallest stocks right now aren’t subject to the tick test, and you don’t see a lot of people clamoring for it. Of course, those are the ones that are most subject to the pump and dump.”

    – the commissioners get spam emails telling them to buy stock, but they can’t go after the spammers at they have a right to express their opinion from eastern Europe. Naked shorting needs to be allowed to protect unsophisticated investors from paying too much for these scams.

    – retail investors are often confused

    – “But if they were going to be threatened with a buy-in on their 100 percent of the flow, that would eliminate their ability to protect the small investors from exorbitant prices.”

    – “What I’m worried about is, you know, you publish stock ABC. It has a lot of short interest, and the CEO of stock ABC, who is a evil pump and dump guy, sees that and uses that information to somehow manipulate the securities lending market.”

    – “Ken Lay’s defense was that Enron was a victim of a bear raid. I didn’t buy it. The jury didn’t buy it. I don’t know if anybody bought it. But the bear raid is the story that a CEO tells when the market is voting against him.”

    – “I think bear raids probably occur hardly ever”

    – “who is going to complain about being able to buy depressed stocks at really cheap prices and earning a great return on that?”

    – “So after September 11th there was a massive manhunt for the alleged — Osama bin Laden was allegedly short selling airline stocks on September 10th. So there was quite a search for nefarious short sellers after that,”

    – “The example of Osama bin Laden is insider trading, not a bear raid. Let’s make sure we have the distinction right.”

    – “Maybe we should have transparency where everybody’s Social Security number is posted on the internet. That would be a form of transparency most of us probably wouldn’t like.”

  53. I agree with Mt. Sinai, the collapse of Bear Stearns allowed JP Morgan to get rid of a competitor and buy the assets at fire sale prices with tax payer money.

    This is a repeat of monopoly bankster strategies from the early 1900’s and again in the depression.

  54. post 61 possible dirty trick sabotage

    it says: ” Send it to World Net Daily,right wing “Americans are not as narrow minded as you may think…”.

    except world net daily is often claimed by r to be communist media.

  55. Diane, On sending this to WND, yes do it! I got into a disscution with Joe Farah, WND Editor and founder, about the naked shorting problem several years back and his response then was he would need lots of evidence to be able to look into it. Then he got tangled in several other issues and I quit emailing him and now can’t seem to get through. He like some others I have ‘Bugged’ may have written me off as a quack or nut.

    Maybe if massive email eveidence was presented to him we could move him onto the problem. He has joined in on the screaming about what is and has gone wrong in the markets and banking. Flood him with this stuff maybe he won’t think it is just ‘Nuts’ bugging him in that case.

    WND is the largest US internet news site and growing.

  56. Question: Why would someone allow massive failures in the clearance system that could be predicted to collapse the American economy?

    Answer: It furthers a globalist bankster agenda of a privately controlled one world fiat currency that doesn’t have to compete with hard currencies backed by resources. By cracking the sole super power, they can create a new world order.

    “Russia earlier put forward a suggestion to the G20 summit which would see the IMF examining possibilities for creating a supra-national reserve currency, and also forcing national banks and international financial institutions to diversify their foreign currency reserves.”

  57. Here is a generic letter I wrote to Congress to anyone to use as is or modify, or not in reference to Judds most outstanding video:

    Dear Honorable XXXXX,

    Some months ago, I sent you an email about NAKED SHORT SELLING and did not receive a response.

    Today I viewed a new video that clearly and precisely explains HOW Naked Short Selling sparked the collapse of the world economies:

    >> <> DELIVER Every Single Share They COUNTERFEITED and Have Refused To Deliver << over the last many, many years!!!!

    Now I read that the Short Selling Hedge Funds, who are the “Financial Terrorists on Wall Street,” and who lit the spark that caused the global economic meltdown want to help craft the new laws Congress will pass to fix our broken regulatory system. This is INSANE!!!! These “Financial Terrorists on Wall Street” need to be prosecuted, convicted, put in prison, and their wealth confiscated, and in NO WAY invited to HELP write the new regulatory rules.

    It was reported in the news that Madoff, the now famous Wall Street Criminal, spent about 30% of his time HELPING the SEC and others create the “best” regulatory rules for the financial industry. This “HELP” by Madoff produced among other things the “Madoff Exemption” which became a favorite tool for the “Wall Street Terrorists” to counterfeit shares of publicly traded stocks which led to the destruction of Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and our Global Economies. So you see, it is INSANE to ask Wall Street Terrorist Members to HELP write the new financial rules governing themselves. You should NOT ask the Wall Street Criminals to write the new laws to govern THEIR criminal activity.

    I have also read that the “Wall Street Terrorist” were NOT content to counterfeit just stock shares, but instead branched out to counterfeiting “U. S. Treasury Bonds” to the tune of 2 Trillion Dollars, among other financil instruments. And no one has be arrested yet for counterfeiting 2 Trillion Dollars of “U. S. Treasury Bonds”? And no one has been arrested for counterfeiting Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers stock shares? Do you see the same pattern I see here?

    I hope you see that immediate action is needed, and I look forward to seeing you actively engaged in shutting down the “Wall Street Counterfeit Machine, the Financial Terrorist” who have terrorized all American Citizens and the Citizens of the World by destroying our savings, our jobs, and our world economies.



    House Reps:

    Senate: ???

  58. ERROR: The software DID NOT POST my letter correctly….

    THis happened yesterday to me also. I suspect one of the special characters I am using is causing this issue – maybe the “>>” characters….

    I will try again without using “>”

  59. Dear Honorable xxxxx,

    Some months ago, I sent you an email about NAKED SHORT SELLING and did not receive a response.

    Today I viewed a new video that clearly and precisely explains HOW Naked Short Selling sparked the collapse of the world economies:

    After viewing this clear explanation of the role NAKED SHORT SELLING played in putting us American Citizens in our present bad economic situation, it is now Ultra CLEAR that Congress can no longer sit on their hands, look the other way and pretend there is nothing wrong on Wall Street.

    The SEC completely failed us American Citizens by allowing the “Financial Terrorists on Wall Street – the Wall Street Counterfeiters” to use Naked Short Selling (counterfeiting) to destroy Bear Stearns and then Lehman Brothers. For many years, the SEC has placed mere “band-aids” on the known illegal activities of the NAKED SHORT SELLING Hedge Funds who used the “Madoff Exemption” of Market Makers to “legally” engage in “Counterfeiting” to feed their greed which has resulted in the destruction of our children’s college funds and retirement funds, and the destruction of thousands of other smaller companies.

    After you view this video by Judd Bagley entitled “Hedge Funds and the Global Economic Meltdown” (, I think you will agree that every American Citizen is going to feel angry, and upset with you Congress and the SEC after viewing this video themselves.

    I can tell you that I am angry and upset that even AFTER the world economies were brought to their knees, you Congress and the SEC have done nothing to completely stop the “Financial Terrorists on Wall Street – the Wall Street Counterfeiters.” For example, no one in Washington DC has yet demanded that “Financial Terrorist” in the Shorting Hedge Fund Industry – DELIVER Every Single Share They COUNTERFEITED and Have Refused To Deliver – over the last many, many years!!!!

    Now I read that the Short Selling Hedge Funds, who are the “Financial Terrorists on Wall Street,” and who lit the spark that caused the global economic meltdown want to help craft the new laws Congress will pass to fix our broken regulatory system. This is INSANE!!!! These “Financial Terrorists on Wall Street” need to be prosecuted, convicted, put in prison, and their wealth confiscated, and in NO WAY invited to HELP write the new regulatory rules.

    It was reported in the news that Madoff, the now famous Wall Street Criminal, spent about 30% of his time HELPING the SEC and others create the “best” regulatory rules for the financial industry. This “HELP” by Madoff produced among other things the “Madoff Exemption” which became a favorite tool for the “Wall Street Terrorists” to counterfeit shares of publicly traded stocks which led to the destruction of Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and our Global Economies. So you see, it is INSANE to ask Wall Street Terrorist Members to HELP write the new financial rules governing themselves. You should NOT ask the Wall Street Criminals to write the new laws to govern THEIR criminal activity.

    I have also read that the “Wall Street Terrorist” were NOT content to counterfeit just stock shares, but instead branched out to counterfeiting “U. S. Treasury Bonds” to the tune of 2 Trillion Dollars, among other financial instruments. And no one has be arrested yet for counterfeiting 2 Trillion Dollars of “U. S. Treasury Bonds”? And no one has been arrested for counterfeiting Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers stock shares? Do you see the same pattern I see here?

    I hope you see that immediate action is needed, and I look forward to seeing you actively engaged in shutting down the “Wall Street Counterfeit Machine, the Financial Terrorist” who have terrorized all American Citizens and the Citizens of the World by destroying our savings, our jobs, and our world economies.


  60. iStandup:

    Yes, I agree with you on your solutions.

    I agree that this issue isn’t right or left, that’s why I was concerned that Moore was mentioned. The mention of his name doesn’t sway me from what I know, but as a member of the right, I’m trying to turn more people on to Deep Capture and I see his name as a stumbling block as I know some visitors may rush to judgment that this is some kind of leftist movement.

    Deep Capture is above the politics. The problems we’re seeing are truly bi-partisan as you have said, and deeply systemic. And both parties have a hand as enablers at the least and co-conspirators at worst.

  61. Let’s not ask for any wallstreet input on whatever new uptick rule is proposed.

    Let’s ram it down their throats!

    No more ass kissing.

    10-25 cents and no less.

  62. Isn’t it ironic that the initial bill would have halted these WS (AIG) bonuses that have enraged the US Citizens, but only after the bailout in general had enraged us.
    Congress was the one’s behind closed doors last month that put in to allow for those bonuses. Does Congress now sound more like Wall Street to you yet? They are no better. In fact, they are part of the problem. Yes AMERICA….CONGRESS GIVES SPECIAL FAVORS TO WALL STREET FOR CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS and other MONIES…LIKE OUR MONEY !!!! YEP, CONGRESS IS GIVING OUR TAX DOLLARS TO WALL STREET CROOKS !!

  63. OK Judd,

    I figured out HOW to get the BUTTONS back….

    All one has to do is PLACE YOUR CURSOR OVER THE MOVIE, and then like magic the Buttons re-appear!

  64. Tuesday, March 17. 2009
    Posted by Karl Denninger in Editorial at 18:10 “What SCHEME Is AIG”, specifically.

    This is what I said in May of 2008:

    The solution to this entire mess is the same that it was (but not taken) back when the Bank of England was essentially looted, and when our banking system was looted in the early 1900s – find the market participants who have engaged in fraud via various forms, whether they be mortgage bankers handing out liar loans and misrepresenting them as “AAA Prime” paper or whether they be people in the marketplace who initiated the plethora of (false) rumors over the last many years about various companies, irrespective of whether the intent was to drive prices up or down, and prosecute them.

    We have existing laws that make that conduct illegal. Investigate the activity, charge the wrongdoers, prosecute them, get your convictions and toss the lot of ’em in prison with a bunch of 7′ tall rapists in the exercise yard, no guards, and a $100 video camera in the guard shack.

    Then post the “results” on YouTube as a warning to the world – try that again in this country and this is the consequence you will receive.

    That will be the last time it happens.

    But until we take that sort of step and hold people to account, this sort of “looting operation” will continue, and we the people will continue to get screwed.

    And specifically with regards to CDS, in the same article:

    The entire claim and chain of events rests on the fact that market participants, up to and including Ben Bernanke at The Federal Reserve, were and are aware that these CDS contracts are in fact fraudulent in that there is no way performance can take place, yet everyone up and down the line is allowing these “assets” to be counted as “money good” on the books of banks and other financial institutions!

    THIS is the key item in the debate folks.

    The rest of this noise making is mental masturbation and intentional misdirection intended to keep you from asking the tough questions and demanding that existing law be enforced.

    Congress and prosecutors across the board, both State and Federal, need to start bringing indictments, starting with the fraudulent accounting.

    You can’t value something at “par” when you are well-aware that the underlying credit quality has gone straight in the toilet and that there is not a snowball’s chance in hell that the “insurance” you bought to protect yourself has no chance of being “money good.” As soon as you become aware of the impairment under the law you are required to reserve against it!

    While any one company could claim that its insurance is “money good” that’s not the point.

    Everyone in the marketplace today now has proof that these swaps in aggregate are worthless, with proof of this found in the fact that The Fed claimed under oath exactly that as justification for the Bear Stearns bailout!

    So you have a situation here where the entire banking regulatory system has declared these contracts worthless in the aggregate and yet company after company continues to claim in their financial statements and results that these contracts are “money good”!

    This is out and out fraud and must be stopped.

    We the people are being systematically looted by these people and our prosecutorial apparatus sits on its butt and sips Starbucks Lattes instead of doing their job!

    It is time for we the people to say ENOUGH.

    Call Congress and demand that they stop this charade here and now. Every firm that has claimed their paper is “protected” by these wraps must be forced to identify the counterparty that currently holds the risk and those parties must be forced to prove that they can pay any and all claims against those policies.

    If they can’t (and the default case must be “they can’t”, since that was in fact Bernanke’s and Geithner’s position under oath!) then those wraps must be considered “doubtful” and reserves must be taken against the underlying credit quality.

    Do this and we immediately identify who is broke and who is not, the market finds its proper price for these assets, and as a consequence the market will clear.

    Everyone wants to make this whole mess complicated.

    Its not.

    It is in fact very simple.

    The only “complication” is that there are thousands of people who are ripping the American People off wholesale, waving their arms around in the hope that you’ll let them get away with it.

    Don’t fall for it.

    Nearly a year ago folks.

    There it was, laid out for everyone both in government and here.

    In plain, black (digital) ink.

    Now I want answers. You should want answers. And if you think that the answer is to flood AIG’s derivatives desk with threatening calls, it is not.

    It is to flood CONGRESS with calls demanding that this crap STOP.

    Right now.

    Specifically, we must insist that:

    Every person involved with an identifiable criminal offense embedded in here (and I bet we can find plenty) be investigated, indicted, prosecuted AND if found guilty IMPRISONED.

    Every firm that was unjustly enriched be told that they either return the funds or face a suit for that unjust enrichment and, in the case of a bank (or bank holding company) immediate confiscation by the FDIC and decertification of their federal banking charter.

    The Federal Reserve be told that either IT cooperates in this matter and both disgorges its garbage on the balance sheet back to its originators, ceases all non-lending actions and opens its kimono here and forward or its charter will be revoked by Congress and The Fed’s function will be subsumed by Treasury.

    What I laid forth as my postulate has now been proved correct in the fullness of time.

    Gee, Eliot Spitzer is back and says the same thing:

    The appearance that this was all an inside job is overwhelming. AIG was nothing more than a conduit for huge capital flows to the same old suspects, with no reason or explanation. (No really? – me)

    So here are several questions that should be answered, in public, under oath, to clear the air:

    What was the precise conversation among Bernanke, Geithner, Paulson, and Blankfein that preceded the initial $80 billion grant?

    Was it already known who the counterparties were and what the exposure was for each of the counterparties?

    What did Goldman, and all the other counterparties, know about AIG’s financial condition at the time they executed the swaps or other contracts? Had they done adequate due diligence to see whether they were buying real protection? And why shouldn’t they bear a percentage of the risk of failure of their own counterparty?

    What is the deeper relationship between Goldman and AIG? Didn’t they almost merge a few years ago but did not because Goldman couldn’t get its arms around the black box that is AIG? If that is true, why should Goldman get bailed out? After all, they should have known as well as anybody that a big part of AIG’s business model was not to pay on insurance it had issued.

    Why weren’t the counterparties immediately and fully disclosed?

    No kidding.

    These bonuses aren’t “news” to Geithner (who was at the NY Fed, remember, when this entire AIG mess started) or to anyone else:

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Cue the outrage. For months, the Obama administration and members of Congress have known that insurance giant AIG was getting ready to pay huge bonuses while living off government bailouts. It wasn’t until the money was flowing and news was trickling out to the public that official Washington rose up in anger and vowed to yank the money back.

    Cut the crap Mr. President, Mr. Geithner and Congress. You are lying and this entire “bonus” game is a smokescreen to try to divert attention from the real theft – nearly $100 billion dollars of taxpayer money that has gone to Goldman and other banks, including foreign banks, to pay off Credit Default Swaps written by AIG that were worthless as the company had no capital behind them. This in turn means that the accounting of these firms has in fact fraudulently overstated earnings – perhaps for years – and still is!

    The Fed, OTS and OCC have and had jurisdiction over American banks that bought these products, and were clearly derelict in their duty to prevent these regulated entities from purchasing these CDS from a firm that was unable to prove capital adequacy to cover its bets.

    The European regulators have similar jurisdiction over those institutions and similarly have been derelict in their duty.

    What the hell are we doing bailing out FOREIGN REGULATORS AND GOVERNMENTS who were derelict in their duty with regards to the institutions under their control?

    Finally, TurboTimmy, it is not acceptable for you to simply “deduct” the amount of the bonuses from AIG’s “aid package”. Uh uh. This entire bonus question is a smokescreen for the massive conflicts of interest where an investment bank buys billions of dollars of “credit protection” from a company, then the CEO goes to work for Treasury and makes sure those contracts are good by siphoning off money from the taxpayer to cover them when the seller turns out to be insolvent.

    It is time to hold people to account, here and now, for what certainly looks to me like an intentional and outrageous looting operation conducted against the American Taxpayer for the benefit of covering up the outrageous malfeasance and misfeasance by both American and foreign governments and regulatory bodies.

    I refuse to believe this has all been some big accident.

    I firmly believe it has been an intentional series of actions and it is time for America and stand up and say NOT THIS TIME YOU WON’T.

    How long will you sit for this America before you either obtain proper redress for these actions or go purchase these two items

    and prepare to use them?

    No more excuses Mr. President, Mr. Bernanke, Mr. Geithner and Mr. Summers.

    It is time to cut the crap, because if we don’t do the right thing here and now foreigners will do it for us:

    Foreigners sold a net $60.9 billion in long-dated U.S. securities in January, after buying $24.3 billion in December. Including changes in banks’ dollar holdings, short-term securities and nonmarket transactions, net foreign capital outflows totaled a record $148.9 billion in January, compared with $86.2 billion in inflows in the previous month.

    Michael Woolfolk, senior currency strategist at the Bank of New York Mellon Corp., said the big outflows are a concern and could represent a trend away from the flight to quality that has boosted purchases in U.S. assets in recent months.

    “This was a truly awful report, throwing into question the funding of the U.S. current-account deficit,” he said in a statement.

    Mr. Woolfolk misses the essence of this signal from foreigners. That signal is, quite simply, one of disgust with what is happening over here in the realm of outright theft and fraud, and is best summarized thus:

    Stop the looting and start the prosecuting right now or we will take our ball and bat and depart, leaving you with an un-fundable government budget that will be forced to contract by more than 75% within days, along with a smoking hole where your capital markets and economy once were.

    Need I remind Ticker readers that I predicted exactly this potential course of action by our government and the potential outcome back when these “bailouts” and “handouts” first began over a year ago?

    Time’s up folks.

  65. calltoaccount,
    I Agree with you but there is one MAJOR problem here. It would appear if most of Congress were to hold these crooks to account, it would indeed implicate many of the protectors. The thieving Lying Nutcases are guarding the asylum. Unless you can clean up and clean out the corruption within our own government, “NO ONE” will come to the rescue of the financial Terrorism against the American People, much less hand down indictments. It would appear the lack of law enforcement and rounding up the crooks only means to do so would implement those in charge of the law. Does this mean ALL, no, but there are enough involved to open up a co-ed new prison so these politicial prisoners who have invested in companies who run prisons can make money on their own incarcerations.

  66. Patrick I’m guessing that you’re feeling bad because you took a serious tack and didn’t participate in a lighthearted comedic romp with Ms. (Bzzz?) Honey Bee. You seemed to tense up there at the last while she was doing her faux mocking routine.

    Well, don’t! Feel bad that is. My first and continuing impression is that the spot came off perfectly. They wove in enough humor to make the piece palatable to their audience while making a serious point about those who would seek to destroy enterprise for profit. Your sober contribution was a nice contrast to the silly stuff.

    These Comedy Central folks are smart, they really get it, and are now attempting to persuade others. Congratulations.

  67. No one needed to know that a few years back that a fire caused by Pyrotechics was due to NEGLIGENCE. The question was whether it was WILLFUL to which it was determined it was. Yet over 100 people lost their lives. We don’t need to be told what the problem was with a BSC or a LEH. Yes the article is a very good one. WHAT we NEED is ACTION and its really that simple. No one is going to bring back the lives of the 100 lost and the lifelong harm done to the families. And NO one is going to reimburse the investors/unemployed and businesses affected by the PERMITTED nefarious acts of those who were nelgigent or WILLFULLY NEGILGENT. What can be done and will be done if the MASSES FINALLY SCREAM ENOUGH, is to put those in JAIL who were guitly or complicit in that fire and ALSO those GUITLY and COMPLICIT in the FAILURE to ENFORCE the LAW. And that goes LONG before BSC. KEEP the PRESSURE ON and do NOT allow these SOB’S to continue with the same. Or the next time there’s a building on fire due to buidling code violations it may be YOU or your kids in that buidling. Just like the NEXT time there’s a BSC collapse or similar it may be YOU or your children in those securities. STEWART got it for there were those he knew were affected. KEEP feeding him and others the details and let their CONCIENCE BE THEIR GUIDE. There are some with a concience. Just don’t expect it from those identified on the blacklist.

  68. Dr. DeCosta, You are building a mountain info that the crimminal SEC has in it’s possesion that will counter the excusees later that they did not know how this was all going on. They won’t alway be able to depend on the crooks in the Government being able to hold off the rage and hold it back by the normal shuffle.

    When the time comes the Congressmen and women who are complicit in covering will turn to self preservation and roll on the crooks now in and those who have left.

    I look for a day when this gets so bad that the penalty for treason is again the death penalty and we have the ones who have criminally destroyed our markets start to pay the price. If that does not happen you may see those tea parties take on a whole new deadly direction. Then the reference Thomas Jefferson made to the blood of tyrants and patriots needing to water liberty occationaly happen in real time.

  69. I have posted the link to
    in every article on Huffington Post that I think is appropriate.

    So far, I have not noticed any other poster responding to my invitation to view the video.

    If any others of you have access to Huffington Post
    maybe you can get on there and backup my efforts.

    Others of you should do the same posting on other web sites that you frequent.

  70. If these are ineffective, alternative medication may be tried, or they
    may refer the child to yahoo 1560 eatt more. School psychologists are
    special people who always try to make our own lives more whole through our children.
    Let The Doctors DiagnoseDO NOT ASSUME that because your child or teen suffers from
    antisocial personality disorder they are typically healthier and more fertile.

  71. Excellent blog you have here but I was curious if you knew of any
    user discussion forums that cover the same topics talked about here?

    I’d really love to be a part of online community where I can get
    comments from other knowledgeable individuals that share the same interest.
    If you have any suggestions, please let me
    know. Thanks!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.