Categorized | Affiliate Marketing 101

Would Americans Struggling To Find Jobs Object To The Federal Reserve’s $16 Trillion Bailout To Foreign Banks?

The first ever GAO(Government Accountability Office) audit of the Federal Reserve was carried out in the past few months due to the Ron Paul, Alan Grayson Amendment to the Dodd-Frank bill, which passed last year. Jim DeMint, a Republican Senator, and Bernie Sanders, an independent Senator, led the charge for a Federal Reserve audit in the Senate, but watered down the original language of the house bill(HR1207), so that a complete audit would not be carried out. Ben Bernanke(pictured to the right), Alan Greenspan, and various other bankers vehemently opposed the audit and lied to Congress about the effects an audit would have on markets. Nevertheless, the results of the first audit in the Federal Reserve’s nearly 100 year history were posted on Senator Sander’s webpage earlier this morning.
What was revealed in the audit was startling:
$16,000,000,000,000.00 had been secretly given out to US banks and corporations and foreign banks everywhere from France to Scotland. From the period between December 2007 and June 2010, the Federal Reserve had secretly bailed out many of the world’s banks, corporations, and governments. The Federal Reserve likes to refer to these secret bailouts as an all-inclusive loan program, but virtually none of the money has been returned and it was loaned out at 0% interest. Why the Federal Reserve had never been public about this or even informed the United States Congress about the $16 trillion dollar bailout is obvious – the American public would have been outraged to find out that the Federal Reserve bailed out foreign banks while Americans were struggling to find jobs.
To place $16 trillion into perspective, remember that GDP of the United States is only $14.12 trillion. The entire national debt of the United States government spanning its 200+ year history is “only” $14.5 trillion. The budget that is being debated so heavily in Congress and the Senate is “only” $3.5 trillion. Take all of the outrage and debate over the $1.5 trillion deficit into consideration, and swallow this Red pill: There was no debate about whether $16,000,000,000,000 would be given to failing banks and failing corporations around the world.
In late 2008, the TARP Bailout bill was passed and loans of $800 billion were given to failing banks and companies. That was a blatant lie considering the fact that Goldman Sachs alone received 814 billion dollars. As is turns out, the Federal Reserve donated $2.5 trillion to Citigroup, while Morgan Stanley received $2.04 trillion. The Royal Bank of Scotland and Deutsche Bank, a German bank, split about a trillion and numerous other banks received hefty chunks of the $16 trillion.
When you have conservative Republican stalwarts like Jim DeMint(R-SC) and Ron Paul(R-TX) as well as self identified Democratic socialists like Bernie Sanders all fighting against the Federal Reserve, you know that it is no longer an issue of Right versus Left. When you have every single member of the Republican Party in Congress and progressive Congressmen like Dennis Kucinich sponsoring a bill to audit the Federal Reserve, you realize that the Federal Reserve is an entity onto itself, which has no oversight and no accountability.
Americans should be swelled with anger and outrage at the abysmal state of affairs when an unelected group of bankers can create money out of thin air and give it out to megabanks and supercorporations like Halloween candy. If the Federal Reserve and the bankers who control it believe that they can continue to devalue the savings of Americans and continue to destroy the US economy, they will have to face the realization that their trillion dollar printing presses will eventually plunder the world economy.
The list of institutions that received the most money from the Federal Reserve can be found on page 131 of the GAO Audit and are as follows..
Citigroup: $2.5 trillion ($2,500,000,000,000)
Morgan Stanley: $2.04 trillion ($2,040,000,000,000)
Merrill Lynch: $1.949 trillion ($1,949,000,000,000)
Bank of America: $1.344 trillion ($1,344,000,000,000)
Barclays PLC (United Kingdom): $868 billion ($868,000,000,000)
Bear Sterns: $853 billion ($853,000,000,000)
Goldman Sachs: $814 billion ($814,000,000,000)
Royal Bank of Scotland (UK): $541 billion ($541,000,000,000)
JP Morgan Chase: $391 billion ($391,000,000,000)
Deutsche Bank (Germany): $354 billion ($354,000,000,000)
UBS (Switzerland): $287 billion ($287,000,000,000)
Credit Suisse (Switzerland): $262 billion ($262,000,000,000)
Lehman Brothers: $183 billion ($183,000,000,000)
Bank of Scotland (United Kingdom): $181 billion ($181,000,000,000)
BNP Paribas (France): $175 billion ($175,000,000,000)
and many many more including banks in Belgium of all places

No Responses to “Would Americans Struggling To Find Jobs Object To The Federal Reserve’s $16 Trillion Bailout To Foreign Banks?”

  1. Anonymous says:

    You are misrepresenting what the audit stated. For anyone who is interested, the audit report can be found at http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11696.pdf
    There was nothing secret about the Federal Reserve’s extraordinary lending programs. Each of the programs were discussed in detail in the 2008, 2009, and 2010 annual reports to Congress. Amounts that were outstanding in each program are listed on the Fed’s balance sheet and were shown on the weekly H.4.1 statistical release which are all public information. For example, here is the statistical release from March 5, 2009 http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h…
    Also, there were news reports from the period that specifically covered several of the extraordinary lending programs. Yup, it was so secret that it was announced in the media. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/03/busine… http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2008/03/… http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/10/0… and I can provide dozens of others.
    Second, there was never $16 trillion in loans outstanding. Most of the extraordinary lending were for loans that matured overnight to address temporary liquidity issues. Also, most the extraordinary lending programs required adequate collateral from the borrower. Almost all of the extraordinary programs have now ended and all loans made under those programs were repaid, on-time, and with interest. Of course, you would know that if you had actually read the report. See page 4 of the report.
    Contrary to the blathering of certain politicians and some uninformed people on the Internet, all of the lending programs established minimum interest rates and the terms of the loans. The Primary Dealer Credit Facility only made overnight loans and the interest varied from as low as 0.5% to 3.25%. The Term Auction Facility made loans for 28-day and 84-day periods. The interest rate for those loans varied from 0.25% to 4.65%.
    As for loans to foreign banks and corporations, the law governing the Federal Reserve specifically allows those types of transactions. If Senator Sanders wants to complain about those transactions, he should probably read the law first. It wasn’t that the Federal Reserve did something it wasn’t supposed to do. It did exactly what was allowed by law. Since Congress wrote and enacted that law, it was Congress that allowed those transactions to happen.
    See 12 USC 347c and 12 USC 347d
    TARP was a program handled by the Treasury. The Federal Reserve is setup by law to be independent and has the power under the law to do what it did.
    Finally, the Federal Reserve is independently audited every year. Those audits ARE complete financial audits. What Ben Bernanke and others opposed was releasing to the public the names of who borrowed and how much they borrowed. The independent audits do review those transactions to ensure that the reported outstanding amount shown on the balance sheet is accurate. Also, a risk assessment review is performed to ensure that the Federal Reserve follows its procedures for limiting risk. Ben Bernanke and others were not opposed to an audit, they were opposed to releasing names of those who borrowed for obvious reasons.

  2. Anonymous says:

    It doesn’t matter how many Right Wingers repeat the lie, it’s still a lie. Your charges are completely fabricated and the website you’re referring to is the paranoid fantasy of a right wing basment dweller. Show me one link to this story on a credible financial news website, then we’ll talk.

  3. Anonymous says:


    Oh, H3LL Yeah!!!

  4. Anonymous says:

    What I am mad is that When a British bank fails we bail them out, but when an Icelandic bank fails, the Brits go after and force the Icelandic to give up a quarter of their income to bail out the English who invested in Icelandic bank.
    My opinion, is that either we force England to take responsibility for the failure of Icesave and not pressure Iceland to compensate for the failure, or force their companies to take responsibility for their irresposnible investment and give back the bailout. They can’t have it both ways.
    Hippo, it is true, although, I am not sure of the numbers, and it was plastered on the news, although I won’t say front page. Newspapers are a bit shy in angering banks since they are all going bankrupt.

  5. Anonymous says:

    NAWWWWW!
    No.
    Probably not.
    OK, maybe just a little….

  6. Anonymous says:

    link?
    If this is true, then it should be plastered over front page news. I can’t find any evidence on the web though.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Archives

Powered by Yahoo! Answers