"FBI Uses Triage to Shift From Terror to Madoff, Subprime Probes "
Dec. 22 (Bloomberg) -- The FBI has engaged in "triage," taking agents off terror and other crimes to respond to a cascade of financial frauds such as the alleged Bernard Madoff Ponzi scheme, the head of the bureau’s New York criminal division said.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation was forced to reallocate its manpower in New York to deal with recent frauds involving subprime mortgages, auction-rate securities and Madoff, who prosecutors said confessed this month to bilking investors out of $50 billion, FBI official David Cardona said in an interview.
"We have to work those cases which we think pose the greatest threat," he said. "In this case, it’s a threat to the financial system and Wall Street."
Read the rest at the link provided.
What does this mean? It means that the financial scandals have become so bad under the Bush administration that we now need FBI investigations to allocate sources away from TERORRISM. It takes not a rocket scientist to see that if you're taking away from terrorism-prevention for something, that something better be big. Much of it speaks for itself. Unexpectedly or not, apparently the anti-terror experience is proving useful.
Some of the FBI’s anti-terror experience has come in handy in investigating financial crime, Cardona said. Agents who were looking at bank-provided "suspicious activity reports" or SARS to track financing of terrorism are now doing so to spot mortgage or other financial fraud, he said.
So what can this tell us about the rest of the financial situation? How much of it is all fraudulent or illegitimate? If people can commit such frauds on such a level, even if everyone else is innocent what does that tell us about what our financial industry is based on? Is it just a fantasy box that finally woke up into a reality of nothing? And where do we go from here? I am no specialist in such matters nor am I someone who follows closely so I will neither answer these questions nor give my non-valuable opinion. You are free to make your own.
If that's not enough for you, how about this?
Banks that have their hands out in Washington this year were handing out multimillion-dollar rewards to their executives last year.
The 116 banks that so far have received taxpayer dollars to boost them through the economic crisis gave their top tier of executives nearly $1.6 billion in salaries, bonuses and other benefits in 2007, an Associated Press analysis found.
That amount, spread among the 600 highest paid bank executives, would cover the bailout money given to 53 of the banks that have shared the $188 billion that Washington has doled out in rescue packages so far.
So we have to help their asses from collapsing the economy yet they still get paid as if nothing happened. Now I'm not saying their executives cannot be compensated, but if their companies aren't working and need bailout loans if not more from the federal government after their own calls for deregulation because of their own incompetence, then they don't deserve a damn "reward" bonus. Hell in the real world, their asses would be fired in a heartbeat.
Or how about this, a NYT article discussing Bush's role in the current economic crisis:
Eight years after arriving in Washington vowing to spread the dream of homeownership, Mr. Bush is leaving office, as he himself said recently, "faced with the prospect of a global meltdown" with roots in the housing sector he so ardently championed.
There are plenty of culprits, like lenders who peddled easy credit, consumers who took on mortgages they could not afford and Wall Street chieftains who loaded up on mortgage-backed securities without regard to the risk.
But the story of how we got here is partly one of Mr. Bush’s own making, according to a review of his tenure that included interviews with dozens of current and former administration officials.
Also discusses other things: Bush's knowledge of Fannie Mae's trouble but wouldn't compromise with his former Treasury Secretary; their misdiagnosis of the housing crisis as early as 2006; Bush's pride in the housing ownership levels and how it clouded his judgment; and details his economic policy and the heads of it since he became President. It's a large article, and I leave out most of the details. On a similar note, while Bush still doesn't see himself as the new Hoover (hey, still too early to judge to be fair), he does say something interesting:
The president declined to be interviewed for this article. But in recent weeks Mr. Bush has shared his views of how the nation came to the brink of economic disaster. He cites corporate greed and market excesses fueled by a flood of foreign cash — "Wall Street got drunk," he has said — and the policies of past administrations. He blames Congress for failing to reform Fannie and Freddie.
So basically the mess is exactly as we see it: corporate greed and deregulation made this crap, and it's another sign that laissez-faire free markets just don't work the way the Republicans have been pushing for the last 40 years. So will we be seeing new regulations once Obama is President? Or will the GOP try to prevent anything that can actually help us with a complicit or incompetent (or both) Democratic party in Congress aiding them? We'll see, you'd think with our numbers we can get SOMETHING done, but I will wait before speaking on the matter any further as I will either be pleasantly surprised or unpleasantly unsurprised.
Now for some good news, the economy may be going down the toilet but some places still are thriving or seeing growth:
The U.S. economy is sinking deeper into recession and companies are shedding hundreds of thousands of jobs, but the technology firms that Santa Fe, N.M., venture capitalist Trevor Loy invests in haven't stopped growing.
In fact, they're still adding to their payrolls, and they plan to continue doing so next year. The firms that Loy is funding are developing products such as state-of-the-art water purification systems and the next generation of construction site surveying cameras.
They're part of a select swath of the U.S. economy that's been protected — so far — from the bad economic weather. They're schools and health-care providers, information-technology firms and green energy start-ups and other firms that, while not thriving, are at least still hiring.
Much of this probably should not be a surprise, as the demands for such services and products are either inelastic or are always required and thus expected. It does however give an idea of where the jobs will be and where to make investments for the next few years. I can guarantee one thing, Obama's focus on energy may just prove to be a very valuable thing many times more than most initially considered.
If all you care about is the information I provided, skip the next part, as this is rant mode, and yes I am aware that it is likely not necessary but well I'm doing it anyway
As some of you may know, I wrote a GBCW diary without providing reasons. It were a mix of personal reasons but as a hard habit to break I lurked the last few days. If anything, I have lost all faith in this website. Instead of seeing diaries that matter like this, all I see are reiterations of the same rants about Rick Warren which frankly just replaced the rants about Obama's cabinet choices which frankly replaced FISA or anything else. Frankly I think the reaction is juvenile and disgusting, not because you harbor some personal resentment to Obama (which I find personally silly but you're free to hold it) but the way it's being handled (I admit to laughing about the threats to put his email messages on the spam filter, must be difficult when there aren't donations or votes to withhold). Do I agree with him being there giving a short prayer for Obama's upcoming Presidency (no folks he isn't there to "spew hatred and bigotry", honestly I bet he doesn't mention LGBTs once up there)? No, but honestly it's more because I think religion is silly period than my disagreement with Warren on social matters (hell, find me a preacher who I do NOT disagree with.) but I do feel that while I am diametrically opposed to what Warren stands for, he still represents such a large percent of the country that I no longer see any positive in telling half the country to SYFPH and go under a rock and never come out. I was sick of this shit under the Bush administration with all this purity triangulation crap the Republicans did and pushed us into irrelevancy effectively for 6 years, and to be honest I'm sick of it when my own side does it. I apologize but if the netroots can only show itself to be a whiny bunch of disjoint rabble-rousers who act more bipolar than my diagnosed self (gee, how many times have I seen the community go from loving someone to wanting to get rid of them and back again?), I don't see how it can be viable for myself.
No I am not the kind of person who says we cannot criticize "oh holy Obama", but I am not the kind of person who thinks stomping your feet around at every thing you disapprove of is an effective strategy (especially given the purity standards I see way too often, for a site that is supposed to hold people with a wide variety of ideology from the rational side of the far left to the moderate/conservative side of the democratic party). If you want to keep your image as a rabid fringe wing of the party full of purists and ex-Naderites go right ahead; just don't wonder why Obama or anyone else sees you as a thorn in their side as opposed to someone to work with; from a devil's advocate perspective I have no idea why a politician would want to depend on someone who is passionate but very quick to abandon you based on, say, your views on Lieberman caucusing with the Democrats. All it does is keep the ideology pure and the relevance weakened.
Perhaps I am just not meant for this site; not that I'm conservative by any means, but because we differ too much on the path we feel we need to take. I can live with that, I don't mind drifting around until I finally settle down somewhere. I guess if anything I am disappointed once again at what I see. Maybe I just am conflict-avoidant, maybe I just have a hard time understanding what happens when all persons are given a soapbox and a megaphone. Either way, for those who will only focus on my diary history than my message, I promise this is my last diary here as well as my final log on(honestly this site hierarchy b.s. is annoying but I don't care anymore).