Month: February 2011

Hmm

~ susie ~ 3 Comments

They’re right, of course:

Seventy-four House Democrats are asking Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from any health care reform cases, citing reports that his wife financially benefited from efforts to repeal the legislation.

The members, led by Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.), ask that he “maintain the integrity of this court.”

“The appearance of a conflict of interest merits recusal under federal law. From what we have already seen, the line between your impartiality and you and your wife’s financial stake in the overturn of healthcare reform is blurred,” the members wrote.

They cite Thomas’s wife, Virginia, advertising herself as a lobbyist who has “experience and connections” and appeals to clients who want to overturn health reform.

Attack on WikiLeaks

~ susie ~ 8 Comments

And supporters, proposed by a data intelligence firm that was recommended to the banksters by the Department of Justice!

The proposal starts with an overview of WikiLeaks, including some history and employee statistics. From there it moves into a profile of Julian Assange and an organizational chart. The chart lists several people, including volunteers and actual staff.

One of those listed as a volunteer, Salon.com columnist, Glenn Greenwald, was singled out by the proposal. Greenwald, previously a constitutional law and civil rights litigator in New York, has been a vocal supporter of Bradley Manning, who is alleged to have given diplomatic cables and other government information to WikiLeaks. He has yet to be charged in the matter.

Greenwald became a household name in December when he reported on the “inhumane conditions” of Bradley Manning’s confinement at the Marine brig in Quantico, Virginia. Since that report, Greenwald has reported on WikiLeaks and Manning several times.

“Glenn was critical in the Amazon to OVH transition,” the proposal says, referencing the hosting switch WikiLeaks was forced to make after political pressure caused Amazon to drop their domain.

I’ve said before that the average American, much to his disadvantage, is oblivious to the amount of coercive misinformation that’s put out there to mislead us. And even people like us, who pay a lot of attention, are naive when it comes to the sophistication and range of those methods.

We’re a wholly-owned subsidiary of the banksters and their friends. That’s why I can’t wait to see WikiLeaks unleash the banking documents they have.

Goody

~ susie

Bailouts a thing of the past, huh? More presents for AIG! Via Naked Capitalism:

First from Bloomberg, “AIG Has $4.1 Billion Charge on Insufficient Reserves“:

American International Group Inc. said higher-than-forecast claims costs cut fourth-quarter profit by $4.1 billion, and $2 billion previously designated to repay its bailout will be used to bolster the property-casualty unit.

The insurer reached an agreement with the U.S. Treasury Department permitting the company to keep $2 billion of proceeds from the sale of Star Life Insurance Co. and Edison Life Insurance Co., New York-based AIG said today in a statement. Funds will be used by Chartis for losses tied to coverage including workers’ compensation and asbestos liability.

The troubling part is “keep”. Unless the Treasury got some form of consideration back from AIG, this sure looks like a gift.

We see similar ambiguous language at the Journal:

American International Group Inc. said it will book a $4.1 billion charge when it reports results for the fourth quarter, as it adds to reserves at its Chartis property and casualty insurance unit….

AIG also said Wednesday that it signed a letter of agreement with the U.S. Treasury to retain $2 billion of the proceeds from the sale of AIG Star Life Insurance Co. and AIG Edison Life Insurance Co. to support Chartis’ capital.

Now with AIG, a mere two billion must look like mere rounding error, but again, pray tell exactly how this reversal of the TARP payback is being accounted for? We’ve had so much sleight of hand with AIG that nothing would surprise me. And with the Congressional Oversight Panel about to go out of business, any pushback is almost certain to be limited.