New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Geithner retires from Treasury . . . with million dollar book deal !!!

And I’m all for it. Free enterprisein its most pure incarnation. Why else would an Ivy League patrician decended from Mayflower pilgrimsl work in the government for a pittance, compared to what he could earn on wall street? He has every right to a lucrative book deal, and to “tell all”.

Fox news this morning challenged viewers to come up with a helpful title for Timmy’s tattle tale tome. Although I could easily serve up a sardonic top 10 list in this regard, I refrain from doing so, owing to the proven risk of derailment to some of the narrow gauge PJ minds. Rather – and more importantly – I’ll suggest a few topics Professor Geithner should enlighten us on, before some wikileaker hacks in and renders his upcoming book of secrets moot . . .

First things first – How did you get confirmed to become Secretary of the Treasury, after admitting to tax fraud in a congressional hearing? You defrauded the government of tens of thousands of dollars (which probably seemed irresistable, as a pootly Fed Governor) after receiving both written and oral tax guidance on how to do it right. Although this would seem more egregious than hiring an undocumented domestic worker (Kimba Wood) or renting horror DVDs from blockbuster (Robert Bork), you were confirmed anyway. Were favors promised and delivered for this amazing feat? Some people actually believe that being a tax scofflaw should bar one from public service, you know. That old “public trust” and ethics thing.

The Wall Street Bailout – same question. Why promote a patently extra-legal course of action that drains the US treasury by bailing out virtually every big name on Wall Street during the Bush administration? This may not be unconstitutional, despite what some claim, but there were actual laws in place governing how such financial meltdowns are supposed to be handled. You know – things like FDIC insurance, which reimburses the depositors in the event that bad loans render a bank insolvent. Bankruptcy courts. Full disclosure of assets and debts to the investment public. You completely disregarded those laws, risked hundreds of billions, and the very CEOs who drove the bus over the cliff kept their jobs. WTF? Do they have pictures of you frolicking with some underage Dominican hookers at a Federal Reserve office party or something?

QE-XLVII – sorry, I don’t know what quantitative easing we’re actually on right now. I’m just assuming the edition coincides with the super bowl. But since the only result of printing money non stop has been to prop up bank profits (they get to borrow from the Fed at near zero rates), and we have HIGHER unemployment than 4 years ago, I’m interested in your position. Has QE been a success, or failure? And no fair saying its Bernankes fault. He can’t do it without your collusion. Since banks are the only apparent winners in QE, and you’re the biggest friend a banker ever had, we naturally assume this was your idea, all along.

Euro-stash – your new book would be an ideal time to reveal the secret programs we have to prop up the European union and its comatose minor league economies. By some estimates we’ve sent them over $600 billion in various packages and loans, to keep them afloat. Since these are our tax dollars at work (actually not, we’re running a huge deficit) and will someday have to be repaid by our childrens’ children, a full accounting of this situation seems in order. My attitude is that when something is stamped TOP SECRET, and it’s not waterboarding a guy with a turban to find out where Bin Laden is hiding, then the reason it’s secret is because the public would object strenuously if they knew the truth. For that matter, the public objects to waterboarding too, you know.

I don’t actually expect Geithner to answer any of these questions in his book, of course. Instead, we will no doubt all be reassured that every action taken since his ascent to the top levels of unelected government bureaucracy-dom were necessary and prudent, and the USA would have immediately suffered a tragic collapse had he not done exactly as he had, when he had. After all, he has an Ivy League degree, and the backing of the full faith and credit of US Government and Wall Street Billionaires. In this regard Geithner’s memoirs are going to be every bit helpful and compelling as those of Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Carter and Nixon.

But wait . .. they keep finding old documents from the Nixon era, that prove just how ignorant he was, and ill advised in his policy decisions. Do you think that could ever happen to Geithner, under the FOI act?

“Don’t you bet against it.” (alert – this is a famous movie quote – guess which film). Even though I’m not holding my breath waiting for some wikileaker to hack into this stuff – it’s not as sexy as state department intrigue and enemies lists – there are enough people outraged by the wall street bailouts to stoke the embers of the bailout fest for years and years.

Enjoy your money Mr. Geithner. And your new job as, being announced later this year, as some wall street CEO. You’ve earned every penny!

Full disclosure – “as seen on tv” has never worked for the federal government, wall street, or H&R block. But she recognizes tax fraud and government malfeasance when she sees it, even if congress and the media pretend not to.

Ps – thanks for reading this far. My top 10 suggestions for Geithners new book are: “Tax Avoidance for Dummies”; “Catch 22 Billion”; “The Golden Spigot”; “From Here to Insolvency”; “Atlas Shirked”; “A Tale of Two Fed Governors”; “Zen and the Art of Quantitative Easing”; “Fifty Shades of Red Ink”; “Guns, Germs, and TBills”; and "Bury my Debt at Wounded Knee”
 
Fact-check time, Part One: Unemployment is NOT higher than it was four years ago. In February 2009, the unemployment rate was 8.3%. The unemployment for February 2013 has not yet been released (DUH!), but in January 2013, it was 7.8%.

Fact-check time, Part Two: The Wall Street banks bailed out during the financial crisis were investment banks, not depository banks, so the FDIC had nothing to do with them. Those banks were all part of the 'shadow banking' system, almost completely unregulated, because that is how Republicans wanted it. But letting them fail would have almost certainly plunged the entire world economy into a very nasty depression. That said, you are certainly right that we did not need to reward those banksters in the process. Arguably, we should have hung a few of them from lamp-posts along Pennsylvania Avenue, as a salutary message to any potential future miscreants.
 
I checked it, and it does pass the Google test.

Oh, no, she's quite capable of stringing together seven or eight paragraphs. Mind you, most of it will be the Typical RW Talking Points, supposition, insinuation, etc. And it'll have about as much factual and intelluctual gravitas....as her Top Ten lists have humor.

:)
 
Fact-check time, Part One: Unemployment is NOT higher than it was four years ago. In February 2009, the unemployment rate was 8.3%. The unemployment for February 2013 has not yet been released (DUH!), but in January 2013, it was 7.8%.

Fact-check time, Part Two: The Wall Street banks bailed out during the financial crisis were investment banks, not depository banks, so the FDIC had nothing to do with them. Those banks were all part of the 'shadow banking' system, almost completely unregulated, because that is how Republicans wanted it. But letting them fail would have almost certainly plunged the entire world economy into a very nasty depression. That said, you are certainly right that we did not need to reward those banksters in the process. Arguably, we should have hung a few of them from lamp-posts along Pennsylvania Avenue, as a salutary message to any potential future miscreants.

Fact check from a previous post years ago?.....Senator Lindsey Graham is not female. :)
 
I'm hoping not to read another of her top 10s. Much prefer Letterman. :D

Top Ten Questions To Ask Before Sending Your Monkey Into Space

10. "Is this one of those scams where they steal your monkey?"

9. "Will my monkey know how to rehydrate a banana?"

8. "Will he be better off in space than living with the kind of person who owns a monkey?"

7. "How is it that my monkey's career is more impressive than mine?"

6. "Would it be easier to send a guy in a monkey suit?"

5. "What's the catch?"

4. "Will he miss daddy?"

3. "Has the space capsule been monkey-proofed?"

2. "While he's away, can I get a loaner monkey?"

1. "Is it one-way or round-trip?"

Oh, no, she's quite capable of stringing together seven or eight paragraphs. Mind you, most of it will be the Typical RW Talking Points, supposition, insinuation, etc. And it'll have about as much factual and intelluctual gravitas....as her Top Ten lists have humor.

:)
 
ASOT/ba ACTUALLY thinks her Top Tens are funny...and that she's some "undiscovered talent" just waiting for Fox News to find and give her a writing spot or that she can become some kind of cross between S.E. Cupp and Jimmy Kimmell or Dave.
 
Oh, no, she's quite capable of stringing together seven or eight paragraphs. Mind you, most of it will be the Typical RW Talking Points, supposition, insinuation, etc. And it'll have about as much factual and intelluctual gravitas....as her Top Ten lists have humor.

:)

She says she is a regular reader of The Economist. She must have been shocked and dismayed when The Economist endorsed Barack Obama for President in 2008......and then again in 2012.....
 
I just hope he pays his 'fair share' of the profits this time.

You know...if he doesn't pay AT LEAST 50%...he'll be a 'whiner'.
 
Really?

Just this morning someone mentioned that Mickelson pays 50% (rather than the 62% he claims) and he was referred by a liberal on this very board as a whiner.

I'm just keeping with left-wing talking points.
 
Back
Top