Showing posts with label coverup. Show all posts
Showing posts with label coverup. Show all posts

31 March 2014

Iron Grip of the Credibility Trap: The Ongoing War On Whistleblowers and Transparency


Sam Seder interviews documentary film maker Robert Greenwald on his 2013 film, War On Whistleblowers.

A reader informs me that this documentary is currently available on Netflix streaming.




“Often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse in government is an existing government employee committed to public integrity and willing to speak out. Such acts of courage and patriotism, which can sometimes save lives and often save taxpayer dollars, should be encouraged rather than stifled. We need to empower federal employees as watchdogs of wrongdoing and partners in performance.”

Office of the President-elect Barack Obama, 2008 Transition Project

27 June 2013

Stand and Deliver: How Germany Disrupted the World's Gold Market


Someone asked, 'why would there be a desire to do a stealth confiscation of gold from the public holdings in ETFs and private stores through price manipulation?' Who could have been assigned the task of prying bullion out of the hands of the people, and for what conceivable reason? It appears to be happening, but why?

There are any number of possible reasons. Concerns that an innovative new round of QE and money creation might create a run on the gold price is one possibility. There should be little doubt in those who look into the evidence that central bankers are quite sensitive to gold and silver as alternative currencies and reflections of their own policy initiatives.

And that is quite possible. As I have pointed out, there is some precedent for it. In 1933 Franklin Roosevelt pulled back much of the publicly held gold in the US. And after this was done, the government revalued the gold from $20 to $35 overnight, and then used the gains to recapitalize the banking system.

Although this could happen again, it does not seem likely because it flies in the face of everything the central bank has achieved by putting the US on a purely fiat money regime, the last gold ties being severed by Nixon in the 1970s. They prefer to denigrate gold, even though they still hold it, and certainly speak about it quite a bit often through their intermediaries.

There is definitely a movement to revisit the Bretton Woods Agreement that established the dollar as the world's reserve currency. The BRICs, whose economic power is ascendant, are seeking to establish a new currency for global trade that is owned by no single central bank or entangled in the domestic policies of no single country. And they wish to add gold and possibly silver to that mix. And they are in the process of acquiring substantial reserves to accomplish it.

The Anglo-American banking cartel is resisting this movement with all their diplomatic and political might. One of the sensitivities of the recent spying scandal leaks is the concern that they may be trying to obtain intelligence that could be used in these negotiations which are ongoing, very quietly behind the scenes.

But one has to ask, 'what set off the firestorm of price manipulation against gold that started at the beginning of this year?' Unless one is a shill, or naïve about markets, the market operation to knock the price of gold, and also silver, down is fairly obvious and heavy handed. They are not even trying to hide it. Traders do not dump hundreds or even thousands of contracts at market in quiet periods with any other objective than to take the price down. It really is that simple.

My initial take on this was that this was part of the 'price-setting' negotiation for gold and silver in the basket of currencies that the BRICs are developing. But that seemed a bit thin, unless it was seen as a 'last stand' against including gold and silver by making the argument that they were too volatile.

So I looked back on the chart for what I saw was the pivotal moment, and then checked the news and tried to find some event that may have served as the impetus for it. And the truth of it was staring me right in the face.

How remarkable is it that Germany, at the urging of their citizens and despite the objections of their central banks, has requested the return of its sovereign gold from its custodial storage in New York? And that the Feds said, no. You can't have it, but we will be in position to return your own property in seven years time.

What was up with that? Venezuela had recently requested its gold to be returned, and that helped to push the price of gold up to its all time high, because the request had obviously been floated before it became public knowledge.

So why couldn't Germany have the return of its own property for seven years?

Think about this. And perhaps what is happening now will become more clear. It is all a part of the credibility trap, wherein past actions of officials must be hidden in order to protect careers and ensure the orderly functioning of the status quo, even to its own eventual detriment.

Oh this is wrong? This is some weird theory? Well I admit that part of the problem is that we are left to guess what the central banks and the markets are doing with our money and property far in excess of what might be expected in democratic societies. This is the failure of regulation and oversight, and the corrupting power of big money in politics.

But, ok. If this is just some distraction, then give Germany back its gold, in full, this year.

If you wish to prove your word is good and facts are straight, give Germany back its gold.

And if you wish to restore some level of confidence in the markets, make them more transparent and open so people can conduct their business efficiently and safely without fear of being cheated and defrauded at every turn.

If you wish the trust and respect of the world, redeem what you have pledged to hold in trust.   If you have taken some actions in the past that were made in good faith and for good reasons, but may have gone too far or turned out badly in retrospect, make good on them now.   The way to stem a scandal is to bring the truth to light.  It is never the initial act that brings down government, but the subsequent attempt at coverup that obtains a life of its own.

Do the right thing even if it is not convenient, because it is the right thing to do. 

Prove your full faith and credit to be worthy.  Fulfill your oaths.  Tear down the wall of secrecy that divides the people from their government. End this before it can go any further.

Stand and deliver.

"Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to device."

Sir Walter Scott

"We looked into the abyss if the gold price rose further. A further rise would have taken down one or several trading houses, which might have taken down all the rest in their wake. Therefore at any price, at any cost, the central banks had to quell the gold price, manage it."

Sir Eddie George, Bank of England, in private conversation, September 1999


27 January 2010

The Bernanke Deception and the Stirring of American Populism


Chris Whalen captures an interesting aspect of change that not only the august US Senators are missing, but most of the mainstream media in the States as well, at least judging by the discussions on their Sunday political shows. All of them seem equally out of touch, arrogantly aloof and insulated from the mood of the nation.

It is interesting also to hear the financial princes growling from lofty Davos about 'Obama's outburst' regarding the Volcker Rule and the impertinence of the Americans in daring to set national regulations for their banks.

Is this an historic moment? Are the people challenging the rule of a burgeoning financial elite, which is puzzled at the sudden rebellion against their enlightened rule?

I think that the answer might be yes, and this is what Ron Paul alluded to in his video regarding 'revolutionary changes.'

And one can only marvel at the way in which the Democrats are committing political suicide after being handed the reins of power with an overwhelming majority, out of what appears to be sheer, almost incomprehensible arrogance and fundamental incompetence. Watching the toad Geithner testify is painful beyond expression.

Will the Americans lead the storming of the Banking Bastille? And will the cowed Brits dare to defy their ubiquitous surveillance cameras and raise their voices for change?

Surely a politician's worst nightmare, a crisis gone wrong. This is the point at which the people ought to be laying down their liberty for the security of a return to credit lending, and a banking system that defers from crashing their markets.

I also have to wonder how the politicians forget the lessons of the past, and the downfall of once mighty leaders of popular governments. It is never about the first offence, the original act itself which may seem trivial.

What brings down governments is the cover up, the conflicts of interest, the pettiness of tone deaf arrogance, and the ensuing loss of confidence.


Fed Deception of Congress Regarding AIG

"Even as the Senate prepares to vote on the Bernanke nomination, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) has asked the Chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform to subpoena AIG-related documents from the Fed, documents which apparently prove that Chairman Bernanke played a major role in deciding to bail out AIG and, indirectly, Goldman Sachs (GS) and other large bank dealers.

In a January 26, 2010 letter obtained by The IRA, Issa claims that Bernanke overruled a recommendation by Fed staff that AIG be allowed to declare bankruptcy "just like Lehman Brothers" and instead authorized the bailout of the crippled insurance giant over the objections of Fed staff in Washington. The Fed appears to be withholding these documents from Congress until after the Senate votes on the Bernanke nomination.

Rep. Issa, the ranking member of the Committee, refers to a statement by Senator Jim Bunning (R-KY), whose staff has been examining these same documents under strict rules of confidentiality imposed by the Fed's staff, to the effect that Chairman Bernanke overruled the recommendation of his staff and pushed the bailout of AIG. How can the Senate vote on the Bernanke nomination when the Fed is refusing to comde clean on AIG?

Members of the Senate need to ask themselves a question: With the current disclosure by the Fed, what further revelations will surface regarding the central bank, AIG and the bailout of the large New York banks between now and November?

So given the above, why is Chairman Bernanke seemingly en route to confirmation? Why do members of the Senate seem to indifferent to the mounting popular anger at Chairman Bernanke and the Fed? There are several reasons the Senate is making a major political and economic miscalculation in its appraisal of Ben Bernanke's role at the Federal Reserve. The most significant is that Senators think that the Federal Reserve and the bailouts are not voting issues, because there are no traditional organized constituent groups that lobby around them.

Staffers who frame issues for Senators do not know that Fed and its profile in American politics has changed in a way reminiscent of the days of President Jackson and the battle over the Second Bank of the United States. After all, issue groups have an incentive to mislead incumbent Senators in a way biased towards the interest of incumbent financial interests. This is a terrible mistake for the political health of any Senator who wants to get reelected in 2010 or 2012. The bailouts happened from 2008-2009, and voters now understand them and loath them. And this applies equally to Democrats and Republicans in the Senate.

Look at how the Fed and AIG are changing the dynamic for incumbent GOP Senators. Republicans are seeing bailout-themed primary campaigns, where incumbents like Utah Senator Bob Bennett and Arizona Senator John McCain are explicitly attached to the bailouts. As noted above, democrats saw losses in Virginia, New Jersey, and Massachusetts. And Brown voters in Massachusetts showed significant dissatisfaction with Democratic ties to Wall Street. But the same populist wave will carry away Republicans as well.

Bottom line: A "yes" vote for Chairman Bernanke raises the likelihood of defeat for every member of the Senate standing for election in 2010 and 2012. And in any event, the rising tide of popular unhappiness with Washington and Wall Street promises to remake the American political landscape in a way not seen in the post WW II era. The comfortable assumption of stability in American political life is about to be replaced by instability and change, but that is what democracy is all about."

Political Risk: The Bernanke Nomination and the Return of American Populism - Institutional Risk Analyst

17 August 2009

The Great American Bank Robbery


If you suspected that fraud, corruption, incompetence, and coverups at the highest levels are at the heart of our current financial crisis, you're right.

"...ideology enabled criminality and political failure led to economic crisis as Wall Street bought Capitol Hill..."

The Great American Bank Robbery
Video - Lecture
By William K. Black

1. Why do we have repeated, intensifying economic crises?
2. What can white collar criminology add to our understanding of what's going wrong?