Skip to main content

View Diary: Lanny Breuer Resigns from Department of Justice, Joins Wall Street Law Firm (231 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  it seems (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    PBS Frontline broke the unspoken rule that you must not question the public officials on matters of actual importance.

    the public seems to be far more interested in the gaffes and the GRRR red vs. blue BATTLE ROYALE nonsense (i swear, MSNBC, FOX, all that shit reminds me of when i was a pre-teen kid watching WWF !)

    I remember that -- that the DoJ responded by saying they would never speak with any of them again.

    Imagine that, a journalist who actually did his job investigating a major area of incompetence, and an entire executive department has now refused to ever speak with them again.

    I was even thinking about getting into the "investigative journalism" industry. I'm a trained economist, but I feel that I can do journalism better than the journalists i read and even who i know in person.

    But then I saw that an investigative journalist whom i respect a lot was unemployed.  Media companies are laiyng off exactly that type of journalism from their structure.

    So my plan is to try and get as independently wealthy as possible and hopefully in the next decade or so be able to take some meaningful action in this area, perhaps taking a year off to investigate and produce a documentary or something, i dont know.

    Deficits don't matter, jobs do.

    by aguadito on Sun Mar 31, 2013 at 09:49:36 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Getting to financial security is much tougher (0+ / 0-)

      but, I commend you if you get there.

      The Untouchables was a remarkable price of investigative journalism for the time we are living in. The Inside Job was a great start too.

      They had no political friends. Bring up the Banks to the GOP and they think you are a Ron Paul apostate . Bring it up to Democrats and some will respond intelligently but by and large there is a stunning lack of knowledge about finance and economics among Democrats. "If Obama thought it was the right thing to do , then it was the right thing to do and Paul Krugman can never be wrong".

      Today Paul Krugman decides to write about Stockman's NYT OP-ed  on Sunday and it 's huge sensation even though Krugman took a big pass at one of the large salient points of the op-ed and that was the banks. One exchange went like this. Can we clone Krugman? Another responded "We can keep repeating his points until people start to believe him"

      Stockman on the Banks.

      The explosion of the housing market, abetted by phony credit ratings, securitization shenanigans and willful malpractice by mortgage lenders, originators and brokers, has been well documented. Less known is the balance-sheet explosion among the top 10 Wall Street banks during the eight years ending in 2008. Though their tiny sliver of equity capital hardly grew, their dependence on unstable “hot money” soared as the regulatory harness the Glass-Steagall Act had wisely imposed during the Depression was totally dismantled.

      Within weeks of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy in September 2008, Washington, with Wall Street’s gun to its head, propped up the remnants of this financial mess in a panic-stricken melee of bailouts and money-printing that is the single most shameful chapter in American financial history.

      There was never a remote threat of a Great Depression 2.0 or of a financial nuclear winter, contrary to the dire warnings of Ben S. Bernanke, the Fed chairman since 2006. The Great Fear — manifested by the stock market plunge when the House voted down the TARP bailout before caving and passing it — was purely another Wall Street concoction. Had President Bush and his Goldman Sachs adviser (a k a Treasury Secretary) Henry M. Paulson Jr. stood firm, the crisis would have burned out on its own and meted out to speculators the losses they so richly deserved. The Main Street banking system was never in serious jeopardy, ATMs were not going dark and the money market industry was not imploding.

      At the same time as Stockman is accused of being a doom and gloomer for saying the economy is a wasteland, the same people agreed that a Great depression would have occurred if the Banks hadn't been bailed out. They can't tell you why. It's just repetitious , if X wrote it it must be true especially since Y agrees with it. So therefore, I'll repeat it and look smart too.

       I think he makes some hard hitting points that people are desperately trying to fluff off. Bail out the banks was wrong ? My God, Heresy! Slander! Whatever! Off with his Head!.

      If one mentions banks these days, they are quickly marginalized. There is a small group here that think that the banks are a huge problem, but there are just as many who attack and apologize for the Banks. Ultimately Obama has to shoulder  the responsibility for Breuer and Holder's lack of prosecutorial zeal.

       Never mind they should have never been appointed in the first place. Anyone looking down their Partnership at Covington and Burling would have known that nothing was going to happen to the banks.

      That wasn't a coincidence. Not even close.

      Obama also doesn't talk to Krugman. I have no idea how worshipers of Krugman and Obama reconcile that huge gap.

      “ Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men. ” — Demosthenes

      by Dburn on Mon Apr 01, 2013 at 03:23:14 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (122)
  • Community (60)
  • Media (23)
  • Elections (23)
  • Civil Rights (22)
  • Culture (21)
  • Law (21)
  • Environment (21)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (21)
  • Josh Duggar (20)
  • Science (19)
  • Labor (18)
  • Economy (17)
  • Marriage Equality (16)
  • Ireland (16)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Bernie Sanders (15)
  • Hillary Clinton (15)
  • Climate Change (15)
  • Health Care (14)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site