Look, lady -- you used to be a libertarian. Then you were advocating for the biggest socialist payout/project in our nation's history. Though, yeah, one that benefited the super rich and Wall Street.
Perhaps that's =, in fact, the best thing that can be done at this time, but you might want to think long and hard about your past views on regulation, finance and, yeah, all the other libertarian talking points.
I guess the plan now is for you to find someone you respect and then regurgitate their views. That seems to be your M.O., frankly.
You come across like a nice person, with some knowledge and some intelligence -- but your limitations have been made all too apparent this week.
The yahoo nature of this post (worthy of a Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh) is particularly pathetic.
Let's take Sen. Chris Dodd, for example. He received two below market mortgages from Countrywide as part of its "VIP" program for well connected politicians. He failed to disclose on his Senate financial disclosure forms that these mortgages gave him a benefit of approximately $75,000 over the life of the loans versus market rate mortgages. That, coincidentally, is exactly the same offense for which Sen. Gravel was recently indicted.
Why did Countrywide give Sen. Dodd this gift? Because he was one of the main protectors in Congress of Fannie and Freddie, which, in turn, were the principal financiers of the no money down, no credit mortgages that Countrywide was busy writing.
So by all means, let the FBI investigate. But they should start with Sen. Dodd.
As I think you pointed out in one of your earlier posts, Lehman's stock price fluctuation looked suspiciously like it may have been influenced by inside information. You mentioned insider trading specifically because the decline seemed to predate the dire news. But since you don't mention what firm is being investigated, and lehman bros is old news now, it's impossible to say. Link? Oh and also, the FBI has this nasty habit of being a little late to the party on certain things, but may have been flooded with "repentant" brokers trying to give them info in exchange for immunity. Remember that the first in line for a bank run get their money out.
I'm guessing accounting fraud, though insider trading is a good possibility, as is offering bribes to government officials. You might think that with all the bonus money flying around, embezzling would be unlikely, but never underestimate the stupidity of the truly greedy.
Megan, I've seen you sell some whoppers here before, but thinking that nothing illegal has been going on at these firms ... wow, this one really takes the cake.
Indeed, we should just suspend law regarding the role of the Fed then in the days that follow rush these people an additional 700 billion and not investigate anything!
After all Megan has "no idea" why any of this should warrant inquiry or brutal inspection!
Well, that's good enough for me!
Afterall, it's only 700 billion spur of the moment!
Congrat on your all time dumbest post, McArdle!
Truly, one for the ages! The harummph tone was an especially nice touch!
Typically you need an allegation of a particular misdeed, or for someone to be caught in flagrante before you can start an investigation. Otherwise the police could investigate anyone, anytime and without cause. So it is certainly a matter of curiosity as to who/what/why the FBI might be investigating. They won't find one person, or a small cabal responsible for the crisis unless they look at Frannie and a few congresscritters...
If they look hard enough everyone is guilty of something. Heck, if the FBI can't find enough evidence to convict someone of a crime they can just charge them with not confessing (obstruction of justice)
Well if they're going to investigate -- how about Fannie and Freddie -- and the execs taking gazillion dollar bonuses when they knew the accounting was fudged?
Megan, I've seen you sell some whoppers here before, but thinking that nothing illegal has been going on at these firms ... wow, this one really takes the cake --Person, and sentiment echoed by others
Are you people morons? She never said she didn't think there was anything illegal going on. Take your strawmen elsewhere, people.
DaveSmith defends: "Are you people morons? She never said she didn't think there was anything illegal going on. Take your strawmen elsewhere, people."
Oh, come on. At best it was a lazy post. And the "when do they investigate congress" bit was especially limp, since they've investigated Congress fairly often and effectively in the past few years. Just ask yardbirds Ney and Cunningham, for instance...
The point is that the problems caused on Wall Street were not the result of illegal activity. I have no doubt they'll find some if they go looking, but the FBI is just grandstanding.
Yeah, somebody was signing those quarterly filings. And?
A year ago, all those mortgages had a market value -- that is, the price someone else would buy them for -- of X, as correctly stated on the filings. And today they have a market value of Y, where Y is much less than X, as correctly stated on the filings. That difference is what caused the insolvency. Lehman Brothers didn't lie and say they had a value of Y*10 then and now it's been discovered they were only worth Y all along; the value changed because the market price changed.
We might all actually have been better off if these places had committed sarbox violations by marking these accounts as being worth X still, because then their sheets would still balance and there wouldn't have been nearly as huge a crisis as they got marked down bit by bit later, as the actual losses from defaults were processed.
Of course, that would have carried the potential for fraud. But it sure looks like we regulated ourselves out of future Enrons in exchange for risking a new Depression. I wonder if the liberals around here are going to think long and hard about their past views on regulation, finance and, yeah, all the other liberal talking points.
Bank fraud is a felony! Fudging the books is bank fraud. It's already been acknowledged that FNMA & FHLMC had to redo their books. Huge bonuses get paid to execs based on profits. Fudging the books allows then to steal from the companies, and ruin them at the same time. Not only their own company gets screwed, but those who lent to them, or invested in them, also get screwed. That also makes it a SEC violation, thus McCain's call for Cox' head. This no doubt contributed to the size of the problem, and the people are being asked to pick up the tab for fixing it. There probably should be an investigation, no?
Shearer foxes: "The point is that the problems caused on Wall Street were not the result of illegal activity. I have no doubt they'll find some if they go looking, but the FBI is just grandstanding."
Yeah! That damn DOJ and its minions should spend more time looking at cancer patients who smoke pot and less time looking at good Republicans who suck hundreds of billions out of Dumbya's appointees.
Do we really want the country (EXECUTIVE BRANCH, JUDICIAL BRANCH, AND LEGISLATIVE BRANCH) run by ONLY ONE PARTY?? Where would be the needed checks and balances? They would be voided!
JAL: Read the articles, they ARE investigating Fannie and Freddie as well.
Congress' stupidity and corruption has little bounds, we understand, but that doesn't get any of the execs (starting first and foremost with Fannie/Freddie but continuing across the board) off the hook.
But they're at least smart about one single thing: the mood of the public. There is a massive, bipartisan, populist groundswell of anger going on here. Its real, and its big. The figuring and unwrapping will all come later, but for now the realization on the part of a the majority of the American electorate, which has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with this mess but is being told will have to foot the bill, is anger of an intensity I've not seen in a long time. From where I sit it looks like you've got the corporate/administrative superstate on one end - politicians on the take (yes, Fannie/Freddie), wall street bankers and lawyers and regulators, the Fed, Treasury, etc. etc. - and the rest of America on the other end. I'm not sure if I've seen such a grassroots unifying moment for regular people (from conservative republicans to leftist democrats) in a long time either.
Traditionally police investigation would occur after a crime was known or alleged to have taken place. I don't like the increasing tendency for authorities to choose a target, individual or institutional, and investigate to see if that target might have committed some crime. Especially if you're dealing with financial matters, which are controlled by multiple overlapping vague, ambiguous, and contradictory laws and regulations, you can certainly find something on anyone. The result often does not comport with any intuitive sense of justice or fairness. Indeed, the choice to prosecute and perhaps to send someone to prison often seems to be controlled by the prosecutor's judgment of whether it will advance the prosecutor's career or political agenda.
Unless there is some indication of outright criminal violations, having the FBI investigate a financial house-of-cards is a joke -- a waste of time and resources. It's just another "Spitzer" moment that will ultimately prove worthless window dressing. Certainly though, this type of activity will satiate the primordial howling of MSM "elites" and their less than bright partisan spear carriers, the politicians.
Personally, I would like to see all the senior executives and board of director members of these financial institutions, including elites of the GSEs, be removed from their positions as soon as possible. These elites should never be allowed in any position of influence within a public company; they should be banned from any public office or agency; they should not be allowed to lobby any elected official on any issue or topic; and, they should be banned from any future punditry on any MSM outlet. Once we have flushed these elites out of the system permanently so they can no longer do any damage or potentially influence others, the civil restitution and criminal revenge proceedings can commence.
Now that we got that part taken care of, let's turn the focus on the "root cause." More than likely, the strong political supporters of the Community Reinvestment Act and the GSEs were bought off in some manner. These politicians, of all stripes, need to be forensically investigated now, and then charged with crimes if the evidence reveals a pattern of political corruption. If these politicians are still in office currently, at minimum, impeachment proceedings should be initiated. By flushing out the majority of corrupt political elites from the premier hallways of power, this country's future will be significantly improved. All politicians should be viewed as corrupt hacks until proven innocent -- let's address this root cause.
But with billions of taxpayer money at stake, why wouldn't the FBI take a look? Why wouldn't you want them to?
The possibility that all of the fallout is happening right now, all at once, and NOBODY saw AIG, Lehman, Merrill, etc., failing, should raise some eyebrows. Seems like someone was lying to the government for a while? I'm all for investigating Congress too.
A thought occurred to me. My brother shared the rant letter he sent to his Congresscritters, objecting at the huge bill being passed on to his children and grandchildren.
It occurs to me, I didn't have kids, so I guess I'm off the hook.
It further occurs to me, that if we have more children, each person will have to pay less.
So either don't have kids or have more. The taxpayer's side of the solution.
You really think "I'm sure they've done something illegal" is a legitimate rebuttal here? If we replaced the story with "police to raid local houses of poor black people", the reaction would be indignation - "Why? What law did they break? What probable cause is there?"
Yes, I suppose we could respond sarcastically to that indignation with "Yeah, there's never anything illegal going on in [poor black neighborhoods]. Everything's on the up and up." And I imagine we would be right - they would find criminal activity. As they would if they "investigated Congress", as Megan mentions. But that's not the point.
This smacks of "something must be done". Something has gone wrong here. Don't worry, we're investigating. I'm sure we'll find the evil men who contracted your credit and over-leveraged your investments. An example will be made, and once these few criminals have been punished, the world can return to risk-free investments.
Meagan is right. I was a federal bank examiner in 1986 and 1987, and while there was fraud in many loans underwritten then--particularly in Texas--the vast majority of the damage was done by outright stupidity. Most of the devastating losses in Texas were caused by the collaspe of the oil & gas industry, as unemployed oilfield workers couldn't pay their mortgages and renters left the state looking for work. Meanwhile, unneeded projects were being completed only because the developer had a guaranteed take-out mortgage for the construction loan. In New England, it was the collapse of computer companies such as Wang Labs and Data General that burst the overpriced housing market and led to a glut of newly completed Class A office properties from South Boston to route 128. All of those see-through properties were built based on appraisals that projected 95% occupancy rates. Many banks also felt pressure to buy into dicy syndicated development loans because all of their competition was doing so. They didn't want to miss the boat, even if it was the Titanic.
You really think "I'm sure they've done something illegal" is a legitimate rebuttal here? If we replaced the story with "police to raid local houses of poor black people", the reaction would be indignation - "Why? What law did they break? What probable cause is there?"
I think it's legitimate because we're about to save their assses. It'd be completely inappropriate otherwise. But if they're gonna get billions of taxpayer money, it's appropriate to make sure they haven't done things wrong, or if they have, then to punish them.
the other Geoff says: "You really think "I'm sure they've done something illegal" is a legitimate rebuttal here? If we replaced the story with "police to raid local houses of poor black people", the reaction would be indignation - "Why? What law did they break? What probable cause is there?"
Yes, I suppose we could respond sarcastically to that indignation with "Yeah, there's never anything illegal going on in [poor black neighborhoods]. Everything's on the up and up." And I imagine we would be right - they would find criminal activity."
Police raid the houses of poor black people every single day and it doesn't seem to bother conservatives even a little bit.
In this case I suspect there have already been indications and allegations of fraud - remember that we're dealing with huge numbers of pissed-off yupsters who have lost their jobs. I'll bet the DOJ has heard from some of them about shabby and possibly illegal practices. And I'm 100% sure that some things have gone on that were criminal, because most of these people are Republicans.
That said, there won't be any "raiding of houses" going on. There will be accountants and forensic accountants with briefcases entering offices rather politely. And this time conservatives WILL squeal a bit, because that's what they do.
ML&J - Are you saying that you feel there's definitely criminal activity at these large banks and at Fannie & Freddie because most of the employees there are Republican?
Because all of the evidence I've seen indicates that the vast majority of political giving by employees at all of these firms went to the Democrats.
Perhaps it was those few outnumbered Republicans who perpetrated their foul crimes without the majority of sainted Democrats noticing. Or perhaps they were all Republicans who disguised the fact by giving massive amounts of money to Democratic politicians -- probably to steer away the penetrating gaze of Democratic holiness.
Clearly, though, there's no way that this was primiarly caused by stupidity. It had to be venality. It's just as impossible that any Democrats were involved in wrongdoing. Except, maybe, to the extent that some evil Republicans tricked them.
After all, Republicans are the source of all evil. That's a scientific fact.
No, stupidity is not a federal offense, nor is greed, which in fact is one of the cornerstones of capitalism. As Gordon Gekko famously observed, "Greed is good."
blighter writes: "Are you saying that you feel there's definitely criminal activity at these large banks and at Fannie & Freddie because most of the employees there are Republican?
Because all of the evidence I've seen indicates that the vast majority of political giving by employees at all of these firms went to the Democrats."
I'm sure that since the Republicans got their asses kicked in 2006 that the Dems have gotten the majority of the contributions - just as I'm sure that it was the opposite before that.
As for the employees at those firms, they tend to be evil greedheads, so I'm guessing 75% of them were two-time Bush voters.
I think both of Megan's points are valid. The financial instruments that were being traded were so large and so complex that a lot of "smart people" were convinced that they had mastered the art of divination pertaining to evaluating and monetizing risk. They were wrong on an incredibly monstrous scale.
But the social engineering, corporate welfare and political opportunism demonstrated in the current crisis by the two ring circus that is the executive and legislative branches of the government and from both sides of the aisle, the costs of which will be inflicted on us all, truly seem criminal.
Yeah, there's never anything illegal going on in such companies. Everything's on the up and up.
Spoken like a true indignant yahoo, Megan.
Look, lady -- you used to be a libertarian. Then you were advocating for the biggest socialist payout/project in our nation's history. Though, yeah, one that benefited the super rich and Wall Street.
Perhaps that's =, in fact, the best thing that can be done at this time, but you might want to think long and hard about your past views on regulation, finance and, yeah, all the other libertarian talking points.
I guess the plan now is for you to find someone you respect and then regurgitate their views. That seems to be your M.O., frankly.
You come across like a nice person, with some knowledge and some intelligence -- but your limitations have been made all too apparent this week.
The yahoo nature of this post (worthy of a Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh) is particularly pathetic.
Well said, Megan.
Let's take Sen. Chris Dodd, for example. He received two below market mortgages from Countrywide as part of its "VIP" program for well connected politicians. He failed to disclose on his Senate financial disclosure forms that these mortgages gave him a benefit of approximately $75,000 over the life of the loans versus market rate mortgages. That, coincidentally, is exactly the same offense for which Sen. Gravel was recently indicted.
Why did Countrywide give Sen. Dodd this gift? Because he was one of the main protectors in Congress of Fannie and Freddie, which, in turn, were the principal financiers of the no money down, no credit mortgages that Countrywide was busy writing.
So by all means, let the FBI investigate. But they should start with Sen. Dodd.
They're guilty of something.
As I think you pointed out in one of your earlier posts, Lehman's stock price fluctuation looked suspiciously like it may have been influenced by inside information. You mentioned insider trading specifically because the decline seemed to predate the dire news. But since you don't mention what firm is being investigated, and lehman bros is old news now, it's impossible to say. Link? Oh and also, the FBI has this nasty habit of being a little late to the party on certain things, but may have been flooded with "repentant" brokers trying to give them info in exchange for immunity. Remember that the first in line for a bank run get their money out.
I'm guessing accounting fraud, though insider trading is a good possibility, as is offering bribes to government officials. You might think that with all the bonus money flying around, embezzling would be unlikely, but never underestimate the stupidity of the truly greedy.
Megan, I've seen you sell some whoppers here before, but thinking that nothing illegal has been going on at these firms ... wow, this one really takes the cake.
Indeed, we should just suspend law regarding the role of the Fed then in the days that follow rush these people an additional 700 billion and not investigate anything!
After all Megan has "no idea" why any of this should warrant inquiry or brutal inspection!
Well, that's good enough for me!
Afterall, it's only 700 billion spur of the moment!
Congrat on your all time dumbest post, McArdle!
Truly, one for the ages! The harummph tone was an especially nice touch!
I stand in gape-jawed awe.
With all the laws and regulations we have, I'm sure we can find something illegal they've done.
Sarbox - someone was signing those quarterly filings.
Typically you need an allegation of a particular misdeed, or for someone to be caught in flagrante before you can start an investigation. Otherwise the police could investigate anyone, anytime and without cause. So it is certainly a matter of curiosity as to who/what/why the FBI might be investigating. They won't find one person, or a small cabal responsible for the crisis unless they look at Frannie and a few congresscritters...
"They're guilty of something."
If they look hard enough everyone is guilty of something. Heck, if the FBI can't find enough evidence to convict someone of a crime they can just charge them with not confessing (obstruction of justice)
Well if they're going to investigate -- how about Fannie and Freddie -- and the execs taking gazillion dollar bonuses when they knew the accounting was fudged?
Megan, I've seen you sell some whoppers here before, but thinking that nothing illegal has been going on at these firms ... wow, this one really takes the cake --Person, and sentiment echoed by others
Are you people morons? She never said she didn't think there was anything illegal going on. Take your strawmen elsewhere, people.
DaveSmith defends: "Are you people morons? She never said she didn't think there was anything illegal going on. Take your strawmen elsewhere, people."
Oh, come on. At best it was a lazy post. And the "when do they investigate congress" bit was especially limp, since they've investigated Congress fairly often and effectively in the past few years. Just ask yardbirds Ney and Cunningham, for instance...
The point is that the problems caused on Wall Street were not the result of illegal activity. I have no doubt they'll find some if they go looking, but the FBI is just grandstanding.
Yeah, somebody was signing those quarterly filings. And?
A year ago, all those mortgages had a market value -- that is, the price someone else would buy them for -- of X, as correctly stated on the filings. And today they have a market value of Y, where Y is much less than X, as correctly stated on the filings. That difference is what caused the insolvency. Lehman Brothers didn't lie and say they had a value of Y*10 then and now it's been discovered they were only worth Y all along; the value changed because the market price changed.
We might all actually have been better off if these places had committed sarbox violations by marking these accounts as being worth X still, because then their sheets would still balance and there wouldn't have been nearly as huge a crisis as they got marked down bit by bit later, as the actual losses from defaults were processed.
Of course, that would have carried the potential for fraud. But it sure looks like we regulated ourselves out of future Enrons in exchange for risking a new Depression. I wonder if the liberals around here are going to think long and hard about their past views on regulation, finance and, yeah, all the other liberal talking points.
Bank fraud is a felony! Fudging the books is bank fraud. It's already been acknowledged that FNMA & FHLMC had to redo their books. Huge bonuses get paid to execs based on profits. Fudging the books allows then to steal from the companies, and ruin them at the same time. Not only their own company gets screwed, but those who lent to them, or invested in them, also get screwed. That also makes it a SEC violation, thus McCain's call for Cox' head. This no doubt contributed to the size of the problem, and the people are being asked to pick up the tab for fixing it. There probably should be an investigation, no?
Any more stupid questions?
Shearer foxes: "The point is that the problems caused on Wall Street were not the result of illegal activity. I have no doubt they'll find some if they go looking, but the FBI is just grandstanding."
Yeah! That damn DOJ and its minions should spend more time looking at cancer patients who smoke pot and less time looking at good Republicans who suck hundreds of billions out of Dumbya's appointees.
LET'S START WITH SENATORS DODD AND OBAMA!
Do we really want the country (EXECUTIVE BRANCH, JUDICIAL BRANCH, AND LEGISLATIVE BRANCH) run by ONLY ONE PARTY?? Where would be the needed checks and balances? They would be voided!
JAL: Read the articles, they ARE investigating Fannie and Freddie as well.
Congress' stupidity and corruption has little bounds, we understand, but that doesn't get any of the execs (starting first and foremost with Fannie/Freddie but continuing across the board) off the hook.
But they're at least smart about one single thing: the mood of the public. There is a massive, bipartisan, populist groundswell of anger going on here. Its real, and its big. The figuring and unwrapping will all come later, but for now the realization on the part of a the majority of the American electorate, which has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with this mess but is being told will have to foot the bill, is anger of an intensity I've not seen in a long time. From where I sit it looks like you've got the corporate/administrative superstate on one end - politicians on the take (yes, Fannie/Freddie), wall street bankers and lawyers and regulators, the Fed, Treasury, etc. etc. - and the rest of America on the other end. I'm not sure if I've seen such a grassroots unifying moment for regular people (from conservative republicans to leftist democrats) in a long time either.
Traditionally police investigation would occur after a crime was known or alleged to have taken place. I don't like the increasing tendency for authorities to choose a target, individual or institutional, and investigate to see if that target might have committed some crime. Especially if you're dealing with financial matters, which are controlled by multiple overlapping vague, ambiguous, and contradictory laws and regulations, you can certainly find something on anyone. The result often does not comport with any intuitive sense of justice or fairness. Indeed, the choice to prosecute and perhaps to send someone to prison often seems to be controlled by the prosecutor's judgment of whether it will advance the prosecutor's career or political agenda.
Unless there is some indication of outright criminal violations, having the FBI investigate a financial house-of-cards is a joke -- a waste of time and resources. It's just another "Spitzer" moment that will ultimately prove worthless window dressing. Certainly though, this type of activity will satiate the primordial howling of MSM "elites" and their less than bright partisan spear carriers, the politicians.
Personally, I would like to see all the senior executives and board of director members of these financial institutions, including elites of the GSEs, be removed from their positions as soon as possible. These elites should never be allowed in any position of influence within a public company; they should be banned from any public office or agency; they should not be allowed to lobby any elected official on any issue or topic; and, they should be banned from any future punditry on any MSM outlet. Once we have flushed these elites out of the system permanently so they can no longer do any damage or potentially influence others, the civil restitution and criminal revenge proceedings can commence.
Now that we got that part taken care of, let's turn the focus on the "root cause." More than likely, the strong political supporters of the Community Reinvestment Act and the GSEs were bought off in some manner. These politicians, of all stripes, need to be forensically investigated now, and then charged with crimes if the evidence reveals a pattern of political corruption. If these politicians are still in office currently, at minimum, impeachment proceedings should be initiated. By flushing out the majority of corrupt political elites from the premier hallways of power, this country's future will be significantly improved. All politicians should be viewed as corrupt hacks until proven innocent -- let's address this root cause.
Okay, enough dreaming....back to work.
But with billions of taxpayer money at stake, why wouldn't the FBI take a look? Why wouldn't you want them to?
The possibility that all of the fallout is happening right now, all at once, and NOBODY saw AIG, Lehman, Merrill, etc., failing, should raise some eyebrows. Seems like someone was lying to the government for a while? I'm all for investigating Congress too.
A thought occurred to me. My brother shared the rant letter he sent to his Congresscritters, objecting at the huge bill being passed on to his children and grandchildren.
It occurs to me, I didn't have kids, so I guess I'm off the hook.
It further occurs to me, that if we have more children, each person will have to pay less.
So either don't have kids or have more. The taxpayer's side of the solution.
ML&J et al,
You really think "I'm sure they've done something illegal" is a legitimate rebuttal here? If we replaced the story with "police to raid local houses of poor black people", the reaction would be indignation - "Why? What law did they break? What probable cause is there?"
Yes, I suppose we could respond sarcastically to that indignation with "Yeah, there's never anything illegal going on in [poor black neighborhoods]. Everything's on the up and up." And I imagine we would be right - they would find criminal activity. As they would if they "investigated Congress", as Megan mentions. But that's not the point.
This smacks of "something must be done". Something has gone wrong here. Don't worry, we're investigating. I'm sure we'll find the evil men who contracted your credit and over-leveraged your investments. An example will be made, and once these few criminals have been punished, the world can return to risk-free investments.
Meagan is right. I was a federal bank examiner in 1986 and 1987, and while there was fraud in many loans underwritten then--particularly in Texas--the vast majority of the damage was done by outright stupidity. Most of the devastating losses in Texas were caused by the collaspe of the oil & gas industry, as unemployed oilfield workers couldn't pay their mortgages and renters left the state looking for work. Meanwhile, unneeded projects were being completed only because the developer had a guaranteed take-out mortgage for the construction loan. In New England, it was the collapse of computer companies such as Wang Labs and Data General that burst the overpriced housing market and led to a glut of newly completed Class A office properties from South Boston to route 128. All of those see-through properties were built based on appraisals that projected 95% occupancy rates. Many banks also felt pressure to buy into dicy syndicated development loans because all of their competition was doing so. They didn't want to miss the boat, even if it was the Titanic.
You really think "I'm sure they've done something illegal" is a legitimate rebuttal here? If we replaced the story with "police to raid local houses of poor black people", the reaction would be indignation - "Why? What law did they break? What probable cause is there?"
I think it's legitimate because we're about to save their assses. It'd be completely inappropriate otherwise. But if they're gonna get billions of taxpayer money, it's appropriate to make sure they haven't done things wrong, or if they have, then to punish them.
the other Geoff says: "You really think "I'm sure they've done something illegal" is a legitimate rebuttal here? If we replaced the story with "police to raid local houses of poor black people", the reaction would be indignation - "Why? What law did they break? What probable cause is there?"
Yes, I suppose we could respond sarcastically to that indignation with "Yeah, there's never anything illegal going on in [poor black neighborhoods]. Everything's on the up and up." And I imagine we would be right - they would find criminal activity."
Police raid the houses of poor black people every single day and it doesn't seem to bother conservatives even a little bit.
In this case I suspect there have already been indications and allegations of fraud - remember that we're dealing with huge numbers of pissed-off yupsters who have lost their jobs. I'll bet the DOJ has heard from some of them about shabby and possibly illegal practices. And I'm 100% sure that some things have gone on that were criminal, because most of these people are Republicans.
That said, there won't be any "raiding of houses" going on. There will be accountants and forensic accountants with briefcases entering offices rather politely. And this time conservatives WILL squeal a bit, because that's what they do.
The FBI should investigate Congress for stupidity just after they investigate the Atlantic's blog staff for the same crime.
ML&J - Are you saying that you feel there's definitely criminal activity at these large banks and at Fannie & Freddie because most of the employees there are Republican?
Because all of the evidence I've seen indicates that the vast majority of political giving by employees at all of these firms went to the Democrats.
Perhaps it was those few outnumbered Republicans who perpetrated their foul crimes without the majority of sainted Democrats noticing. Or perhaps they were all Republicans who disguised the fact by giving massive amounts of money to Democratic politicians -- probably to steer away the penetrating gaze of Democratic holiness.
Clearly, though, there's no way that this was primiarly caused by stupidity. It had to be venality. It's just as impossible that any Democrats were involved in wrongdoing. Except, maybe, to the extent that some evil Republicans tricked them.
After all, Republicans are the source of all evil. That's a scientific fact.
You don't know they're investigating for no reason. You just don't know the reason.
Of course we know the reason. They are hunting for scapegoats.
No, stupidity is not a federal offense, nor is greed, which in fact is one of the cornerstones of capitalism. As Gordon Gekko famously observed, "Greed is good."
Fraud, however, is a different story.
blighter writes: "Are you saying that you feel there's definitely criminal activity at these large banks and at Fannie & Freddie because most of the employees there are Republican?
Because all of the evidence I've seen indicates that the vast majority of political giving by employees at all of these firms went to the Democrats."
I'm sure that since the Republicans got their asses kicked in 2006 that the Dems have gotten the majority of the contributions - just as I'm sure that it was the opposite before that.
As for the employees at those firms, they tend to be evil greedheads, so I'm guessing 75% of them were two-time Bush voters.
I think both of Megan's points are valid. The financial instruments that were being traded were so large and so complex that a lot of "smart people" were convinced that they had mastered the art of divination pertaining to evaluating and monetizing risk. They were wrong on an incredibly monstrous scale.
But the social engineering, corporate welfare and political opportunism demonstrated in the current crisis by the two ring circus that is the executive and legislative branches of the government and from both sides of the aisle, the costs of which will be inflicted on us all, truly seem criminal.
Steve the Fat Triplet