Obama insists that to not prosecute Wall Street after they destroyed millions of lives was honorable & prevented "violence against the social order"

[pknopp]

NO Tarp was NOT paid back with a profit.

You're wrong. By a lot.

Overselling TARP: The Myth of the $15 Billion Profit | National Review

It could additionally be argued that some of the funds paid back aren’t truly “paid back” at all, since they were paid back in a manner that’s equivalent to paying off credit card debt with another credit card.

As noted above much of it was paid back with other government programs that were never paid back or ever intended to be paid back.

You should post the dollar amounts of these "other government programs".
You'd see how small they are compared to the TARP loans.

While size is irrelevant to the point..... We don't even have a clue how much the Fed paid banks in interests because they refuse to be audited.

It was pretty well established that Harp failed to do what it was supposed to do. All of these things add up and are what is noted about by paying off one card with another.

Then you add in things like how the Reserve paid the banks interest on the money they gave the banks to start with.

Where did you get this stupid idea that the Fed "gave" the banks any money at all?

Federal Reserve Board - Interest on Required Reserve Balances and Excess Balances

The Reserve gave the banks money. Made them put some of it back and paid the banks interest on that money. It's not my fault you are clueless as to what went on.

That's a pretty sweet deal. Someone gives you billions and then pays you interest to not use some of it.

It could additionally be argued that some of the funds paid back aren’t truly “paid back” at all, since they were paid back in a manner that’s equivalent to paying off credit card debt with another credit card.

It could, if you're really bad at math.
The bank TARP was $245 billion.

How much were these other programs?

While size is irrelevant to the point.....

Irrelevant? DURR.

If a newer program like HARP, $21 billion, is supposedy used to pay back $245 billion, you're damn
right the size is relevant.

I hate when people argue dishonestly like you. I never said any one program paid back Tarp.

I hate when people argue dishonestly like you

Facts probaly make you feel dizzy.

I never said any one program paid back Tarp.

As noted above much of it was paid back with other government programs that were never paid back or ever intended to be paid back.

Much of it? Over 50%? Be more specific if you can.
Or you could admit you were talking out of your ass.

I posted the links explaining things to you. Read them or not.

Yes, you posted links that didn't help your main claims.
Tell me again about "much of it was paid back with other government programs"

And even better about the Fed "giving" the banks money. Hilarious!!!

I explained that. We have NO idea how much was because the Fed refuses to be audited. No matter how much it was we were lied to.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I explained that. We have NO idea how much was because the Fed refuses to be audited. No matter how much it was we were lied to.

Confusing Fed loans with TARP.......sad.

The Fed is audited every year.

Federal Reserve System Audited Annual Financial Statements

The Federal Reserve Board of Governors in Washington DC.

www.federalreserve.gov

 

[pknopp]

I explained that. We have NO idea how much was because the Fed refuses to be audited. No matter how much it was we were lied to.

Confusing Fed loans with TARP.......sad.

The Fed is audited every year.

Federal Reserve System Audited Annual Financial Statements

The Federal Reserve Board of Governors in Washington DC.

www.federalreserve.gov

No it isn't.



A few years after the 2008 financial collapse, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) got a rare opportunity to peek behind the curtain at the Federal Reserve.

Although the review was limited in scope, the GAO was able to audit the agency's emergency loan programs. What it found was troubling to say the least.

American taxpayers deserve an audit of the Federal Reserve

You know all of this though.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I explained that. We have NO idea how much was because the Fed refuses to be audited. No matter how much it was we were lied to.

Confusing Fed loans with TARP.......sad.

The Fed is audited every year.

Federal Reserve System Audited Annual Financial Statements

The Federal Reserve Board of Governors in Washington DC.

www.federalreserve.gov

No it isn't.



A few years after the 2008 financial collapse, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) got a rare opportunity to peek behind the curtain at the Federal Reserve.

Although the review was limited in scope, the GAO was able to audit the agency's emergency loan programs. What it found was troubling to say the least.

American taxpayers deserve an audit of the Federal Reserve

You know all of this though.

You don't know what an audit is, do you?

Audit: What It Means in Finance and Accounting, and 3 Main Types

An audit is an unbiased examination and evaluation of the financial statements of an organization.

www.investopedia.com

 

[Andylusion]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-book-biden-trump-palin/2020/11/13/36c4828a-25b8-11eb-8599-406466ad1b8e_story.html

can’t stop thinking about Barack Obama insisting that his decision to not prosecute Wall Street executives after they destroyed millions of lives was an honorable and moral defense of the social order

Well... yeah. Obama was right on that. You can't just redefine what is legal and illegal, after the fact, because you don't like the outcome.

Trust me, you don't want to live in a world, where they can make something you did 10 years ago illegal, and go to prison for it today.

Further, that isn't even the truth. What Obama said was simply a cover to avoid the real reason, which is the moment they tried to send bankers to prison for their action between 1997, and 2007, those bankers would have fought that in court, with all the documents showing the US government sued them, and forced them, and encouraged them to do those actions.

Obama himself would be called to witness that he sued banks like citigroup to make bad loans in the 1990s.

The Democrats knew that by dropping this, that left-wingers would be more mindlessly angry at the banks, than the government, and never take the time to find out the government was behind everything.

Obama totally failed us here. He ran on prosecuting the bankers while telling the bankers behind closed doors to ignore his rhetoric.

He is sadly admitting here it was all a lie. And people ask why people accept Trump's lies. Those who do something themselves really have little room to condemn others for the same.

Here's the difference. All politicians say things they wish they could do, and when they get into office, they can't.

But Obama could have. Obama was suppose to be this great law scholar. Are you saying he was ignorant, incapable or a liar?

For example, GWB said he wanted to allow people the freedom and power, to put a portion of their Social Security taxes into private investments.

GWB wanted to do this. It had been done before. It was a reasonable possibility. In the end, Congress refused. GWB didn't lie..... he just flat out couldn't do it.

Yes, he would have needed the House and Senate to go along. Obama needed none of that to prosecute those who broke our laws. He ran the Justice Department and needed no one's approval.

The reason we can logically condemn the left-wing, is because Obama's lies were obvious. More than obvious. It was so ridiculous, as to be willful stupidity, to believe some of the dumb claims he made.

For example, closing Gitmo, and bringing captured enemies to the US and having them tried in court, like they robbed a quicky-mart.

And yet that is exactly what we did before. Why was it now impossible?

1993 World Trade Center Bombing Fast Facts

We are NOT supposed to be the country that arrests people and puts them in prison without ever giving them a trial. Without providing any evidence at all. That is not who we are supposed to be. That is not who we were in the past.

I remember the very day I was watching Obama say he was going to do this, and writing a post (I was on a different forum than this at the time), and saying directly to everyone that Obama lied. He lied. There is no way that he actually believed he could close Gitmo. No way. He might be a dumb left-wing socialist idiot, but he was also a trained lawyer and he absolutely must have known there was no possible way to close gitmo from the start.

But he knew something. He knew that his political supporters were too plain stupid, to realize this obvious lie. And I was dead on right on both accounts. People even into 2016, were saying he was going to close Gitmo on the way out. They bought the obvious lie, and never thought to critically think about it, and Obama used those poor stupid parrots all the way to his very last week in office.

And Gitmo never closed. Of course it never closed. Of course you can't try enemy fighters in a court room. Of course you can't release them so they go right back to shooting and killing our troops. Of course you need a place to detain them. Forest Gump could have figured that out, but Obama lied, and Left-wingers kept repeating the lie even up to his last week in office.

Again, you are wrong. His supporters were wrong for not holding him accountable. Again, you are arguing what is suppose to be the greatest country in the world can not do what it had done in the recent past.

You've thrown in the towel over the US being any better than some third world country.

1993 World Trade Center Bombing Fast Facts

I never once thought Mexico would pay for the wall, but I do believe that Trump thought he could get Mexico to pay for the wall by changing NAFTA and increasing tariffs on imported goods.

Trump doesn't think.

Unlike Obama, who there is no possible way he ever thought he could close Gitmo, I think Trump did believe he could get tariffs to pay for the wall with Mexico.

Same is true with Obama and throwing bankers in jail. One of two things is true. Either A: Obama never once thought that he was really going to throw bankers in jail, and just knew that mindless left-wingers would believe such a lie...... or B: Obama is the fair more ignorant and stupid than ever knew.

Either way, anyone who heard Obama say he was going to send bankers to prison, and believed that.... is an idiot. If you actually think you can toss people in prison, who are doing nothing illegal.... you are a moron. If you actually think that you can send people to prison, for doing EXACTLY WHAT FREDDIE MAC, FANNIE MAE, AND THE US GOVERNMENT DEMANDED THEY DO.... you are idiot.

And for you to be that dumb, that you believed that lie? Yes, I can condemn that. If you are that stupid, you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Again, we did it in the past.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT BOASTS 905 CONVICTIONS IN S&L SCANDAL

And people wonder why I hold the position that we really aren't all that great of a country any longer.

But Obama could have. Obama was suppose to be this great law scholar. Are you saying he was ignorant, incapable or a liar?

No he could not have. And yes, that is exactly what I'm saying. I think he lied, knowing stupid people would believe the lies, and support him. But it is also possible that he is far more ignorant than we thought.

Obama needed none of that to prosecute those who broke our laws.

Again, the banks were selling the exact same loans, that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were selling... and they were sued by Andrew Cuomo in 1998 to make those bad loans.... and Freddie Mac in 1997 guaranteed those bad loans.

So one of two things is true.... Either what the banks did was not against the law, because government itself was the biggest proponent of those actions..... or if they sent those banks to court, they would expose to everyone that the entire government going back to Bill Clinton in 1997, was doing the exact same things, including Obama himself which sued Citigroup to make bad loans.

And yet that is exactly what we did before. Why was it now impossible?
1993 World Trade Center Bombing Fast Facts

Not even close to being comparable. You are comparing a domestic action, to a war action. When we captured POWs in WW2, did we try them in domestic courts? No we did not.

Further, it's not possible to do that. Blowing up a bomb in NYC, where the FBI can investigate it, and collect evidence, and gather data, and create a court case..... is nothing like fighting in Fallujah, Iraq.

Do you really think that insurgent groups are going to stop fighting so that FBI or some other investigators, can come sift through a war zone, to find evidence against captured fighters? Do you really think that?

You really think we'll have some guys with gloves and a trench coat, walking around in a combat area, dusting for finger prints, while dodging bullets and grenades? Maybe they can go interview local combatants who will be happy and smiling to provide them with eye witness accounts?

Completely and entirely different than going through a trade center bombing in 1993. The absurdity of comparing the two is beyond my ability to understand, unless you are just trolling here.

Again, we did it in the past.
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT BOASTS 905 CONVICTIONS IN S&L SCANDAL
And people wonder why I hold the position that we really aren't all that great of a country any longer.

This is one of the ironies of left-wing ideology, because over and over left-wingers promote "co-ops", as being the brilliant alternative to profit-based free-market Capitalism.

You do know that the S&Ls the crashed in the late 70s and early 80s were co-ops, right? Most of the people who went to jail, were left-wingers.

Regardless, again you are comparing apples and oranges. The convictions of the S&L scandals, were for fraud. Clearly defined fraud.

That didn't happen in the sub-prime crash. You think it did, others claim it did, but it didn't. The few times during the crash where there was fraud, people were convicted.

There are examples where people went to prison, when they engaged in clear fraud.

But as whole, during the 2008 crash, there was no fraud involved. The market changed, because of government intervention.

As I said before... you can't just send people to prison, because you don't like them, or you don't like what happened. You have to actually commit a crime. Obama can't just retro-actively declare everything that was perfectly legal from 1997 to 2006, to be a crime, and toss people in prison for it.

So stupid. "Most arrested were "left wingers".

This is why the country is in such a mess and will only get worse. This is the only way you can see the world. I see more and more people like you. It's why I support it all falling apart.

Are you denying they were not-for-profit co-ops? Or are you suggesting that left-wingers haven't been pushing non-profit co-ops? Or are you suggesting that free-market for-profit right-wing Capitalists, were running non-profit co-ops?

It's my opinion, I have right to my opinion, and I don't care what you think. My opinion is, I wager most if not all of the people sent to prison for the S&L scandal, were left-wingers.

Regardless, that was a minor comment in a larger post. You are just using that to avoid answering my other points.

You are the utmost expert on your opinion but you are being untruthful as to what you know are the facts.

Name one fact based claim that I said, that was false?

That Obama could have done nothing to uphold his promises.

So you actually think Obama can change something that was completely legal,

I explained what was illegal.

I explained how it wasn't.

 

[Andylusion]

I explained that. We have NO idea how much was because the Fed refuses to be audited. No matter how much it was we were lied to.

Confusing Fed loans with TARP.......sad.

The Fed is audited every year.

Federal Reserve System Audited Annual Financial Statements

The Federal Reserve Board of Governors in Washington DC.

www.federalreserve.gov

No it isn't.



A few years after the 2008 financial collapse, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) got a rare opportunity to peek behind the curtain at the Federal Reserve.

Although the review was limited in scope, the GAO was able to audit the agency's emergency loan programs. What it found was troubling to say the least.

American taxpayers deserve an audit of the Federal Reserve

You know all of this though.

This is the nature of all government run systems.

Remember how they caught Fannie Mae completely fabricating profits to trigger automatic bonuses?

Remember how Franklin Raines, the guy appointed to Fannie Mae by Bill Clinton, said that those assets were "risk-less"?

Remember how Maxine waters said that Franklin Raines had done an "outstanding job" of providing more loans to unqualified buyers?

Do you need a history refresher?



Watch the video. Here you see democrat after democrat attacking the regulators. FHEO was created by the government to regulate Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. FHEO correctly saw that Fannie and Freddie were engaged in all kinds of clear fabrication of numbers, and the Democrats attacked them for it.

You even have Franklin Raines saying "These assets are so risk-less". You even have a clip of Bill Clinton, saying that Democrats need to resist any attempt by Republicans to tight up controls on Fannie and Freddie.



You even have Barney Frank claiming there is no housing bubble in 2005.

The irony is, you are focused on the Federal Reserve.... which is fine, let's have another audit of the Federal Reserve.....

But you ignore the actual players in the game that crashed the system. Fannie and Freddie were directly involved in the 2008 crash. It was their actions, and others in government, that caused the entire implosion, and the Democrats defended it right up to the crash.

 

[pknopp]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-book-biden-trump-palin/2020/11/13/36c4828a-25b8-11eb-8599-406466ad1b8e_story.html

can’t stop thinking about Barack Obama insisting that his decision to not prosecute Wall Street executives after they destroyed millions of lives was an honorable and moral defense of the social order

Well... yeah. Obama was right on that. You can't just redefine what is legal and illegal, after the fact, because you don't like the outcome.

Trust me, you don't want to live in a world, where they can make something you did 10 years ago illegal, and go to prison for it today.

Further, that isn't even the truth. What Obama said was simply a cover to avoid the real reason, which is the moment they tried to send bankers to prison for their action between 1997, and 2007, those bankers would have fought that in court, with all the documents showing the US government sued them, and forced them, and encouraged them to do those actions.

Obama himself would be called to witness that he sued banks like citigroup to make bad loans in the 1990s.

The Democrats knew that by dropping this, that left-wingers would be more mindlessly angry at the banks, than the government, and never take the time to find out the government was behind everything.

Obama totally failed us here. He ran on prosecuting the bankers while telling the bankers behind closed doors to ignore his rhetoric.

He is sadly admitting here it was all a lie. And people ask why people accept Trump's lies. Those who do something themselves really have little room to condemn others for the same.

Here's the difference. All politicians say things they wish they could do, and when they get into office, they can't.

But Obama could have. Obama was suppose to be this great law scholar. Are you saying he was ignorant, incapable or a liar?

For example, GWB said he wanted to allow people the freedom and power, to put a portion of their Social Security taxes into private investments.

GWB wanted to do this. It had been done before. It was a reasonable possibility. In the end, Congress refused. GWB didn't lie..... he just flat out couldn't do it.

Yes, he would have needed the House and Senate to go along. Obama needed none of that to prosecute those who broke our laws. He ran the Justice Department and needed no one's approval.

The reason we can logically condemn the left-wing, is because Obama's lies were obvious. More than obvious. It was so ridiculous, as to be willful stupidity, to believe some of the dumb claims he made.

For example, closing Gitmo, and bringing captured enemies to the US and having them tried in court, like they robbed a quicky-mart.

And yet that is exactly what we did before. Why was it now impossible?

1993 World Trade Center Bombing Fast Facts

We are NOT supposed to be the country that arrests people and puts them in prison without ever giving them a trial. Without providing any evidence at all. That is not who we are supposed to be. That is not who we were in the past.

I remember the very day I was watching Obama say he was going to do this, and writing a post (I was on a different forum than this at the time), and saying directly to everyone that Obama lied. He lied. There is no way that he actually believed he could close Gitmo. No way. He might be a dumb left-wing socialist idiot, but he was also a trained lawyer and he absolutely must have known there was no possible way to close gitmo from the start.

But he knew something. He knew that his political supporters were too plain stupid, to realize this obvious lie. And I was dead on right on both accounts. People even into 2016, were saying he was going to close Gitmo on the way out. They bought the obvious lie, and never thought to critically think about it, and Obama used those poor stupid parrots all the way to his very last week in office.

And Gitmo never closed. Of course it never closed. Of course you can't try enemy fighters in a court room. Of course you can't release them so they go right back to shooting and killing our troops. Of course you need a place to detain them. Forest Gump could have figured that out, but Obama lied, and Left-wingers kept repeating the lie even up to his last week in office.

Again, you are wrong. His supporters were wrong for not holding him accountable. Again, you are arguing what is suppose to be the greatest country in the world can not do what it had done in the recent past.

You've thrown in the towel over the US being any better than some third world country.

1993 World Trade Center Bombing Fast Facts

I never once thought Mexico would pay for the wall, but I do believe that Trump thought he could get Mexico to pay for the wall by changing NAFTA and increasing tariffs on imported goods.

Trump doesn't think.

Unlike Obama, who there is no possible way he ever thought he could close Gitmo, I think Trump did believe he could get tariffs to pay for the wall with Mexico.

Same is true with Obama and throwing bankers in jail. One of two things is true. Either A: Obama never once thought that he was really going to throw bankers in jail, and just knew that mindless left-wingers would believe such a lie...... or B: Obama is the fair more ignorant and stupid than ever knew.

Either way, anyone who heard Obama say he was going to send bankers to prison, and believed that.... is an idiot. If you actually think you can toss people in prison, who are doing nothing illegal.... you are a moron. If you actually think that you can send people to prison, for doing EXACTLY WHAT FREDDIE MAC, FANNIE MAE, AND THE US GOVERNMENT DEMANDED THEY DO.... you are idiot.

And for you to be that dumb, that you believed that lie? Yes, I can condemn that. If you are that stupid, you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Again, we did it in the past.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT BOASTS 905 CONVICTIONS IN S&L SCANDAL

And people wonder why I hold the position that we really aren't all that great of a country any longer.

But Obama could have. Obama was suppose to be this great law scholar. Are you saying he was ignorant, incapable or a liar?

No he could not have. And yes, that is exactly what I'm saying. I think he lied, knowing stupid people would believe the lies, and support him. But it is also possible that he is far more ignorant than we thought.

Obama needed none of that to prosecute those who broke our laws.

Again, the banks were selling the exact same loans, that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were selling... and they were sued by Andrew Cuomo in 1998 to make those bad loans.... and Freddie Mac in 1997 guaranteed those bad loans.

So one of two things is true.... Either what the banks did was not against the law, because government itself was the biggest proponent of those actions..... or if they sent those banks to court, they would expose to everyone that the entire government going back to Bill Clinton in 1997, was doing the exact same things, including Obama himself which sued Citigroup to make bad loans.

And yet that is exactly what we did before. Why was it now impossible?
1993 World Trade Center Bombing Fast Facts

Not even close to being comparable. You are comparing a domestic action, to a war action. When we captured POWs in WW2, did we try them in domestic courts? No we did not.

Further, it's not possible to do that. Blowing up a bomb in NYC, where the FBI can investigate it, and collect evidence, and gather data, and create a court case..... is nothing like fighting in Fallujah, Iraq.

Do you really think that insurgent groups are going to stop fighting so that FBI or some other investigators, can come sift through a war zone, to find evidence against captured fighters? Do you really think that?

You really think we'll have some guys with gloves and a trench coat, walking around in a combat area, dusting for finger prints, while dodging bullets and grenades? Maybe they can go interview local combatants who will be happy and smiling to provide them with eye witness accounts?

Completely and entirely different than going through a trade center bombing in 1993. The absurdity of comparing the two is beyond my ability to understand, unless you are just trolling here.

Again, we did it in the past.
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT BOASTS 905 CONVICTIONS IN S&L SCANDAL
And people wonder why I hold the position that we really aren't all that great of a country any longer.

This is one of the ironies of left-wing ideology, because over and over left-wingers promote "co-ops", as being the brilliant alternative to profit-based free-market Capitalism.

You do know that the S&Ls the crashed in the late 70s and early 80s were co-ops, right? Most of the people who went to jail, were left-wingers.

Regardless, again you are comparing apples and oranges. The convictions of the S&L scandals, were for fraud. Clearly defined fraud.

That didn't happen in the sub-prime crash. You think it did, others claim it did, but it didn't. The few times during the crash where there was fraud, people were convicted.

There are examples where people went to prison, when they engaged in clear fraud.

But as whole, during the 2008 crash, there was no fraud involved. The market changed, because of government intervention.

As I said before... you can't just send people to prison, because you don't like them, or you don't like what happened. You have to actually commit a crime. Obama can't just retro-actively declare everything that was perfectly legal from 1997 to 2006, to be a crime, and toss people in prison for it.

So stupid. "Most arrested were "left wingers".

This is why the country is in such a mess and will only get worse. This is the only way you can see the world. I see more and more people like you. It's why I support it all falling apart.

Are you denying they were not-for-profit co-ops? Or are you suggesting that left-wingers haven't been pushing non-profit co-ops? Or are you suggesting that free-market for-profit right-wing Capitalists, were running non-profit co-ops?

It's my opinion, I have right to my opinion, and I don't care what you think. My opinion is, I wager most if not all of the people sent to prison for the S&L scandal, were left-wingers.

Regardless, that was a minor comment in a larger post. You are just using that to avoid answering my other points.

You are the utmost expert on your opinion but you are being untruthful as to what you know are the facts.

Name one fact based claim that I said, that was false?

That Obama could have done nothing to uphold his promises.

So you actually think Obama can change something that was completely legal,

I explained what was illegal.

I explained how it wasn't.

You stated an opinion............

 

[pknopp]

I explained that. We have NO idea how much was because the Fed refuses to be audited. No matter how much it was we were lied to.

Confusing Fed loans with TARP.......sad.

The Fed is audited every year.

Federal Reserve System Audited Annual Financial Statements

The Federal Reserve Board of Governors in Washington DC.

www.federalreserve.gov

No it isn't.



A few years after the 2008 financial collapse, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) got a rare opportunity to peek behind the curtain at the Federal Reserve.

Although the review was limited in scope, the GAO was able to audit the agency's emergency loan programs. What it found was troubling to say the least.

American taxpayers deserve an audit of the Federal Reserve

You know all of this though.

This is the nature of all government run systems.

Remember how they caught Fannie Mae completely fabricating profits to trigger automatic bonuses?

Remember how Franklin Raines, the guy appointed to Fannie Mae by Bill Clinton, said that those assets were "risk-less"?

Remember how Maxine waters said that Franklin Raines had done an "outstanding job" of providing more loans to unqualified buyers?

Do you need a history refresher?



Watch the video. Here you see democrat after democrat attacking the regulators. FHEO was created by the government to regulate Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. FHEO correctly saw that Fannie and Freddie were engaged in all kinds of clear fabrication of numbers, and the Democrats attacked them for it.

You even have Franklin Raines saying "These assets are so risk-less". You even have a clip of Bill Clinton, saying that Democrats need to resist any attempt by Republicans to tight up controls on Fannie and Freddie.



You even have Barney Frank claiming there is no housing bubble in 2005.

The irony is, you are focused on the Federal Reserve.... which is fine, let's have another audit of the Federal Reserve.....

But you ignore the actual players in the game that crashed the system. Fannie and Freddie were directly involved in the 2008 crash. It was their actions, and others in government, that caused the entire implosion, and the Democrats defended it right up to the crash.

This is one of those lame retorts where one thinks that if you didn't support one thing you must have supported the other. F&F needs shut down.

 

[Andylusion]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-book-biden-trump-palin/2020/11/13/36c4828a-25b8-11eb-8599-406466ad1b8e_story.html

can’t stop thinking about Barack Obama insisting that his decision to not prosecute Wall Street executives after they destroyed millions of lives was an honorable and moral defense of the social order

Well... yeah. Obama was right on that. You can't just redefine what is legal and illegal, after the fact, because you don't like the outcome.

Trust me, you don't want to live in a world, where they can make something you did 10 years ago illegal, and go to prison for it today.

Further, that isn't even the truth. What Obama said was simply a cover to avoid the real reason, which is the moment they tried to send bankers to prison for their action between 1997, and 2007, those bankers would have fought that in court, with all the documents showing the US government sued them, and forced them, and encouraged them to do those actions.

Obama himself would be called to witness that he sued banks like citigroup to make bad loans in the 1990s.

The Democrats knew that by dropping this, that left-wingers would be more mindlessly angry at the banks, than the government, and never take the time to find out the government was behind everything.

Obama totally failed us here. He ran on prosecuting the bankers while telling the bankers behind closed doors to ignore his rhetoric.

He is sadly admitting here it was all a lie. And people ask why people accept Trump's lies. Those who do something themselves really have little room to condemn others for the same.

Here's the difference. All politicians say things they wish they could do, and when they get into office, they can't.

But Obama could have. Obama was suppose to be this great law scholar. Are you saying he was ignorant, incapable or a liar?

For example, GWB said he wanted to allow people the freedom and power, to put a portion of their Social Security taxes into private investments.

GWB wanted to do this. It had been done before. It was a reasonable possibility. In the end, Congress refused. GWB didn't lie..... he just flat out couldn't do it.

Yes, he would have needed the House and Senate to go along. Obama needed none of that to prosecute those who broke our laws. He ran the Justice Department and needed no one's approval.

The reason we can logically condemn the left-wing, is because Obama's lies were obvious. More than obvious. It was so ridiculous, as to be willful stupidity, to believe some of the dumb claims he made.

For example, closing Gitmo, and bringing captured enemies to the US and having them tried in court, like they robbed a quicky-mart.

And yet that is exactly what we did before. Why was it now impossible?

1993 World Trade Center Bombing Fast Facts

We are NOT supposed to be the country that arrests people and puts them in prison without ever giving them a trial. Without providing any evidence at all. That is not who we are supposed to be. That is not who we were in the past.

I remember the very day I was watching Obama say he was going to do this, and writing a post (I was on a different forum than this at the time), and saying directly to everyone that Obama lied. He lied. There is no way that he actually believed he could close Gitmo. No way. He might be a dumb left-wing socialist idiot, but he was also a trained lawyer and he absolutely must have known there was no possible way to close gitmo from the start.

But he knew something. He knew that his political supporters were too plain stupid, to realize this obvious lie. And I was dead on right on both accounts. People even into 2016, were saying he was going to close Gitmo on the way out. They bought the obvious lie, and never thought to critically think about it, and Obama used those poor stupid parrots all the way to his very last week in office.

And Gitmo never closed. Of course it never closed. Of course you can't try enemy fighters in a court room. Of course you can't release them so they go right back to shooting and killing our troops. Of course you need a place to detain them. Forest Gump could have figured that out, but Obama lied, and Left-wingers kept repeating the lie even up to his last week in office.

Again, you are wrong. His supporters were wrong for not holding him accountable. Again, you are arguing what is suppose to be the greatest country in the world can not do what it had done in the recent past.

You've thrown in the towel over the US being any better than some third world country.

1993 World Trade Center Bombing Fast Facts

I never once thought Mexico would pay for the wall, but I do believe that Trump thought he could get Mexico to pay for the wall by changing NAFTA and increasing tariffs on imported goods.

Trump doesn't think.

Unlike Obama, who there is no possible way he ever thought he could close Gitmo, I think Trump did believe he could get tariffs to pay for the wall with Mexico.

Same is true with Obama and throwing bankers in jail. One of two things is true. Either A: Obama never once thought that he was really going to throw bankers in jail, and just knew that mindless left-wingers would believe such a lie...... or B: Obama is the fair more ignorant and stupid than ever knew.

Either way, anyone who heard Obama say he was going to send bankers to prison, and believed that.... is an idiot. If you actually think you can toss people in prison, who are doing nothing illegal.... you are a moron. If you actually think that you can send people to prison, for doing EXACTLY WHAT FREDDIE MAC, FANNIE MAE, AND THE US GOVERNMENT DEMANDED THEY DO.... you are idiot.

And for you to be that dumb, that you believed that lie? Yes, I can condemn that. If you are that stupid, you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Again, we did it in the past.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT BOASTS 905 CONVICTIONS IN S&L SCANDAL

And people wonder why I hold the position that we really aren't all that great of a country any longer.

But Obama could have. Obama was suppose to be this great law scholar. Are you saying he was ignorant, incapable or a liar?

No he could not have. And yes, that is exactly what I'm saying. I think he lied, knowing stupid people would believe the lies, and support him. But it is also possible that he is far more ignorant than we thought.

Obama needed none of that to prosecute those who broke our laws.

Again, the banks were selling the exact same loans, that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were selling... and they were sued by Andrew Cuomo in 1998 to make those bad loans.... and Freddie Mac in 1997 guaranteed those bad loans.

So one of two things is true.... Either what the banks did was not against the law, because government itself was the biggest proponent of those actions..... or if they sent those banks to court, they would expose to everyone that the entire government going back to Bill Clinton in 1997, was doing the exact same things, including Obama himself which sued Citigroup to make bad loans.

And yet that is exactly what we did before. Why was it now impossible?
1993 World Trade Center Bombing Fast Facts

Not even close to being comparable. You are comparing a domestic action, to a war action. When we captured POWs in WW2, did we try them in domestic courts? No we did not.

Further, it's not possible to do that. Blowing up a bomb in NYC, where the FBI can investigate it, and collect evidence, and gather data, and create a court case..... is nothing like fighting in Fallujah, Iraq.

Do you really think that insurgent groups are going to stop fighting so that FBI or some other investigators, can come sift through a war zone, to find evidence against captured fighters? Do you really think that?

You really think we'll have some guys with gloves and a trench coat, walking around in a combat area, dusting for finger prints, while dodging bullets and grenades? Maybe they can go interview local combatants who will be happy and smiling to provide them with eye witness accounts?

Completely and entirely different than going through a trade center bombing in 1993. The absurdity of comparing the two is beyond my ability to understand, unless you are just trolling here.

Again, we did it in the past.
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT BOASTS 905 CONVICTIONS IN S&L SCANDAL
And people wonder why I hold the position that we really aren't all that great of a country any longer.

This is one of the ironies of left-wing ideology, because over and over left-wingers promote "co-ops", as being the brilliant alternative to profit-based free-market Capitalism.

You do know that the S&Ls the crashed in the late 70s and early 80s were co-ops, right? Most of the people who went to jail, were left-wingers.

Regardless, again you are comparing apples and oranges. The convictions of the S&L scandals, were for fraud. Clearly defined fraud.

That didn't happen in the sub-prime crash. You think it did, others claim it did, but it didn't. The few times during the crash where there was fraud, people were convicted.

There are examples where people went to prison, when they engaged in clear fraud.

But as whole, during the 2008 crash, there was no fraud involved. The market changed, because of government intervention.

As I said before... you can't just send people to prison, because you don't like them, or you don't like what happened. You have to actually commit a crime. Obama can't just retro-actively declare everything that was perfectly legal from 1997 to 2006, to be a crime, and toss people in prison for it.

So stupid. "Most arrested were "left wingers".

This is why the country is in such a mess and will only get worse. This is the only way you can see the world. I see more and more people like you. It's why I support it all falling apart.

Are you denying they were not-for-profit co-ops? Or are you suggesting that left-wingers haven't been pushing non-profit co-ops? Or are you suggesting that free-market for-profit right-wing Capitalists, were running non-profit co-ops?

It's my opinion, I have right to my opinion, and I don't care what you think. My opinion is, I wager most if not all of the people sent to prison for the S&L scandal, were left-wingers.

Regardless, that was a minor comment in a larger post. You are just using that to avoid answering my other points.

You are the utmost expert on your opinion but you are being untruthful as to what you know are the facts.

Name one fact based claim that I said, that was false?

That Obama could have done nothing to uphold his promises.

So you actually think Obama can change something that was completely legal,

I explained what was illegal.

I explained how it wasn't.

You stated an opinion............

And I stated a bunch of undeniable facts.......... that my opinion was based on.

 

[pknopp]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-book-biden-trump-palin/2020/11/13/36c4828a-25b8-11eb-8599-406466ad1b8e_story.html

can’t stop thinking about Barack Obama insisting that his decision to not prosecute Wall Street executives after they destroyed millions of lives was an honorable and moral defense of the social order

Well... yeah. Obama was right on that. You can't just redefine what is legal and illegal, after the fact, because you don't like the outcome.

Trust me, you don't want to live in a world, where they can make something you did 10 years ago illegal, and go to prison for it today.

Further, that isn't even the truth. What Obama said was simply a cover to avoid the real reason, which is the moment they tried to send bankers to prison for their action between 1997, and 2007, those bankers would have fought that in court, with all the documents showing the US government sued them, and forced them, and encouraged them to do those actions.

Obama himself would be called to witness that he sued banks like citigroup to make bad loans in the 1990s.

The Democrats knew that by dropping this, that left-wingers would be more mindlessly angry at the banks, than the government, and never take the time to find out the government was behind everything.

Obama totally failed us here. He ran on prosecuting the bankers while telling the bankers behind closed doors to ignore his rhetoric.

He is sadly admitting here it was all a lie. And people ask why people accept Trump's lies. Those who do something themselves really have little room to condemn others for the same.

Here's the difference. All politicians say things they wish they could do, and when they get into office, they can't.

But Obama could have. Obama was suppose to be this great law scholar. Are you saying he was ignorant, incapable or a liar?

For example, GWB said he wanted to allow people the freedom and power, to put a portion of their Social Security taxes into private investments.

GWB wanted to do this. It had been done before. It was a reasonable possibility. In the end, Congress refused. GWB didn't lie..... he just flat out couldn't do it.

Yes, he would have needed the House and Senate to go along. Obama needed none of that to prosecute those who broke our laws. He ran the Justice Department and needed no one's approval.

The reason we can logically condemn the left-wing, is because Obama's lies were obvious. More than obvious. It was so ridiculous, as to be willful stupidity, to believe some of the dumb claims he made.

For example, closing Gitmo, and bringing captured enemies to the US and having them tried in court, like they robbed a quicky-mart.

And yet that is exactly what we did before. Why was it now impossible?

1993 World Trade Center Bombing Fast Facts

We are NOT supposed to be the country that arrests people and puts them in prison without ever giving them a trial. Without providing any evidence at all. That is not who we are supposed to be. That is not who we were in the past.

I remember the very day I was watching Obama say he was going to do this, and writing a post (I was on a different forum than this at the time), and saying directly to everyone that Obama lied. He lied. There is no way that he actually believed he could close Gitmo. No way. He might be a dumb left-wing socialist idiot, but he was also a trained lawyer and he absolutely must have known there was no possible way to close gitmo from the start.

But he knew something. He knew that his political supporters were too plain stupid, to realize this obvious lie. And I was dead on right on both accounts. People even into 2016, were saying he was going to close Gitmo on the way out. They bought the obvious lie, and never thought to critically think about it, and Obama used those poor stupid parrots all the way to his very last week in office.

And Gitmo never closed. Of course it never closed. Of course you can't try enemy fighters in a court room. Of course you can't release them so they go right back to shooting and killing our troops. Of course you need a place to detain them. Forest Gump could have figured that out, but Obama lied, and Left-wingers kept repeating the lie even up to his last week in office.

Again, you are wrong. His supporters were wrong for not holding him accountable. Again, you are arguing what is suppose to be the greatest country in the world can not do what it had done in the recent past.

You've thrown in the towel over the US being any better than some third world country.

1993 World Trade Center Bombing Fast Facts

I never once thought Mexico would pay for the wall, but I do believe that Trump thought he could get Mexico to pay for the wall by changing NAFTA and increasing tariffs on imported goods.

Trump doesn't think.

Unlike Obama, who there is no possible way he ever thought he could close Gitmo, I think Trump did believe he could get tariffs to pay for the wall with Mexico.

Same is true with Obama and throwing bankers in jail. One of two things is true. Either A: Obama never once thought that he was really going to throw bankers in jail, and just knew that mindless left-wingers would believe such a lie...... or B: Obama is the fair more ignorant and stupid than ever knew.

Either way, anyone who heard Obama say he was going to send bankers to prison, and believed that.... is an idiot. If you actually think you can toss people in prison, who are doing nothing illegal.... you are a moron. If you actually think that you can send people to prison, for doing EXACTLY WHAT FREDDIE MAC, FANNIE MAE, AND THE US GOVERNMENT DEMANDED THEY DO.... you are idiot.

And for you to be that dumb, that you believed that lie? Yes, I can condemn that. If you are that stupid, you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Again, we did it in the past.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT BOASTS 905 CONVICTIONS IN S&L SCANDAL

And people wonder why I hold the position that we really aren't all that great of a country any longer.

But Obama could have. Obama was suppose to be this great law scholar. Are you saying he was ignorant, incapable or a liar?

No he could not have. And yes, that is exactly what I'm saying. I think he lied, knowing stupid people would believe the lies, and support him. But it is also possible that he is far more ignorant than we thought.

Obama needed none of that to prosecute those who broke our laws.

Again, the banks were selling the exact same loans, that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were selling... and they were sued by Andrew Cuomo in 1998 to make those bad loans.... and Freddie Mac in 1997 guaranteed those bad loans.

So one of two things is true.... Either what the banks did was not against the law, because government itself was the biggest proponent of those actions..... or if they sent those banks to court, they would expose to everyone that the entire government going back to Bill Clinton in 1997, was doing the exact same things, including Obama himself which sued Citigroup to make bad loans.

And yet that is exactly what we did before. Why was it now impossible?
1993 World Trade Center Bombing Fast Facts

Not even close to being comparable. You are comparing a domestic action, to a war action. When we captured POWs in WW2, did we try them in domestic courts? No we did not.

Further, it's not possible to do that. Blowing up a bomb in NYC, where the FBI can investigate it, and collect evidence, and gather data, and create a court case..... is nothing like fighting in Fallujah, Iraq.

Do you really think that insurgent groups are going to stop fighting so that FBI or some other investigators, can come sift through a war zone, to find evidence against captured fighters? Do you really think that?

You really think we'll have some guys with gloves and a trench coat, walking around in a combat area, dusting for finger prints, while dodging bullets and grenades? Maybe they can go interview local combatants who will be happy and smiling to provide them with eye witness accounts?

Completely and entirely different than going through a trade center bombing in 1993. The absurdity of comparing the two is beyond my ability to understand, unless you are just trolling here.

Again, we did it in the past.
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT BOASTS 905 CONVICTIONS IN S&L SCANDAL
And people wonder why I hold the position that we really aren't all that great of a country any longer.

This is one of the ironies of left-wing ideology, because over and over left-wingers promote "co-ops", as being the brilliant alternative to profit-based free-market Capitalism.

You do know that the S&Ls the crashed in the late 70s and early 80s were co-ops, right? Most of the people who went to jail, were left-wingers.

Regardless, again you are comparing apples and oranges. The convictions of the S&L scandals, were for fraud. Clearly defined fraud.

That didn't happen in the sub-prime crash. You think it did, others claim it did, but it didn't. The few times during the crash where there was fraud, people were convicted.

There are examples where people went to prison, when they engaged in clear fraud.

But as whole, during the 2008 crash, there was no fraud involved. The market changed, because of government intervention.

As I said before... you can't just send people to prison, because you don't like them, or you don't like what happened. You have to actually commit a crime. Obama can't just retro-actively declare everything that was perfectly legal from 1997 to 2006, to be a crime, and toss people in prison for it.

So stupid. "Most arrested were "left wingers".

This is why the country is in such a mess and will only get worse. This is the only way you can see the world. I see more and more people like you. It's why I support it all falling apart.

Are you denying they were not-for-profit co-ops? Or are you suggesting that left-wingers haven't been pushing non-profit co-ops? Or are you suggesting that free-market for-profit right-wing Capitalists, were running non-profit co-ops?

It's my opinion, I have right to my opinion, and I don't care what you think. My opinion is, I wager most if not all of the people sent to prison for the S&L scandal, were left-wingers.

Regardless, that was a minor comment in a larger post. You are just using that to avoid answering my other points.

You are the utmost expert on your opinion but you are being untruthful as to what you know are the facts.

Name one fact based claim that I said, that was false?

That Obama could have done nothing to uphold his promises.

So you actually think Obama can change something that was completely legal,

I explained what was illegal.

I explained how it wasn't.

You stated an opinion............

And I stated a bunch of undeniable facts.......... that my opinion was based on.

You stated the lying governments facts.

 

[Andylusion]

I explained that. We have NO idea how much was because the Fed refuses to be audited. No matter how much it was we were lied to.

Confusing Fed loans with TARP.......sad.

The Fed is audited every year.

Federal Reserve System Audited Annual Financial Statements

The Federal Reserve Board of Governors in Washington DC.

www.federalreserve.gov

No it isn't.



A few years after the 2008 financial collapse, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) got a rare opportunity to peek behind the curtain at the Federal Reserve.

Although the review was limited in scope, the GAO was able to audit the agency's emergency loan programs. What it found was troubling to say the least.

American taxpayers deserve an audit of the Federal Reserve

You know all of this though.

This is the nature of all government run systems.

Remember how they caught Fannie Mae completely fabricating profits to trigger automatic bonuses?

Remember how Franklin Raines, the guy appointed to Fannie Mae by Bill Clinton, said that those assets were "risk-less"?

Remember how Maxine waters said that Franklin Raines had done an "outstanding job" of providing more loans to unqualified buyers?

Do you need a history refresher?



Watch the video. Here you see democrat after democrat attacking the regulators. FHEO was created by the government to regulate Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. FHEO correctly saw that Fannie and Freddie were engaged in all kinds of clear fabrication of numbers, and the Democrats attacked them for it.

You even have Franklin Raines saying "These assets are so risk-less". You even have a clip of Bill Clinton, saying that Democrats need to resist any attempt by Republicans to tight up controls on Fannie and Freddie.



You even have Barney Frank claiming there is no housing bubble in 2005.

The irony is, you are focused on the Federal Reserve.... which is fine, let's have another audit of the Federal Reserve.....

But you ignore the actual players in the game that crashed the system. Fannie and Freddie were directly involved in the 2008 crash. It was their actions, and others in government, that caused the entire implosion, and the Democrats defended it right up to the crash.

This is one of those lame retorts where one thinks that if you didn't support one thing you must have supported the other. F&F needs shut down.

Impossible. You might as well, say "The US government needs shut down".

Yeah, and I need to win the lottery three times over, or have a fabulously wealthy extremely attractive woman decide to marry me and let me sleep in her lap every night, and never have to work again.

The problem is, it is absolutely impossible to go back to a commodity backed currency.

The moment we do that, foreign countries will exchange dollars for whatever the commodity is, until we are bankrupt.

Because they can exchange their currency, say the Yuan for Dollars. We won't be able to trade those Yuan for gold or whatever commodity.

But they will be able to trade in our Dollars for gold or whatever commodity.

So we'll end up shipping the commodity out of the country for dollars... but we won't be able to do anything with their Yuan but buy goods and products from them, or exchange them for other currency.

It would end up being a one way flow of wealth, out of the country, which would then devalue our currency, worse than inflation today.

And I don't know of any other method for having a national currency, that wouldn't involve it being controlled by a banking agency of the Federal Government. I don't see an alternative.

 

[Andylusion]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-book-biden-trump-palin/2020/11/13/36c4828a-25b8-11eb-8599-406466ad1b8e_story.html

can’t stop thinking about Barack Obama insisting that his decision to not prosecute Wall Street executives after they destroyed millions of lives was an honorable and moral defense of the social order

Well... yeah. Obama was right on that. You can't just redefine what is legal and illegal, after the fact, because you don't like the outcome.

Trust me, you don't want to live in a world, where they can make something you did 10 years ago illegal, and go to prison for it today.

Further, that isn't even the truth. What Obama said was simply a cover to avoid the real reason, which is the moment they tried to send bankers to prison for their action between 1997, and 2007, those bankers would have fought that in court, with all the documents showing the US government sued them, and forced them, and encouraged them to do those actions.

Obama himself would be called to witness that he sued banks like citigroup to make bad loans in the 1990s.

The Democrats knew that by dropping this, that left-wingers would be more mindlessly angry at the banks, than the government, and never take the time to find out the government was behind everything.

Obama totally failed us here. He ran on prosecuting the bankers while telling the bankers behind closed doors to ignore his rhetoric.

He is sadly admitting here it was all a lie. And people ask why people accept Trump's lies. Those who do something themselves really have little room to condemn others for the same.

Here's the difference. All politicians say things they wish they could do, and when they get into office, they can't.

But Obama could have. Obama was suppose to be this great law scholar. Are you saying he was ignorant, incapable or a liar?

For example, GWB said he wanted to allow people the freedom and power, to put a portion of their Social Security taxes into private investments.

GWB wanted to do this. It had been done before. It was a reasonable possibility. In the end, Congress refused. GWB didn't lie..... he just flat out couldn't do it.

Yes, he would have needed the House and Senate to go along. Obama needed none of that to prosecute those who broke our laws. He ran the Justice Department and needed no one's approval.

The reason we can logically condemn the left-wing, is because Obama's lies were obvious. More than obvious. It was so ridiculous, as to be willful stupidity, to believe some of the dumb claims he made.

For example, closing Gitmo, and bringing captured enemies to the US and having them tried in court, like they robbed a quicky-mart.

And yet that is exactly what we did before. Why was it now impossible?

1993 World Trade Center Bombing Fast Facts

We are NOT supposed to be the country that arrests people and puts them in prison without ever giving them a trial. Without providing any evidence at all. That is not who we are supposed to be. That is not who we were in the past.

I remember the very day I was watching Obama say he was going to do this, and writing a post (I was on a different forum than this at the time), and saying directly to everyone that Obama lied. He lied. There is no way that he actually believed he could close Gitmo. No way. He might be a dumb left-wing socialist idiot, but he was also a trained lawyer and he absolutely must have known there was no possible way to close gitmo from the start.

But he knew something. He knew that his political supporters were too plain stupid, to realize this obvious lie. And I was dead on right on both accounts. People even into 2016, were saying he was going to close Gitmo on the way out. They bought the obvious lie, and never thought to critically think about it, and Obama used those poor stupid parrots all the way to his very last week in office.

And Gitmo never closed. Of course it never closed. Of course you can't try enemy fighters in a court room. Of course you can't release them so they go right back to shooting and killing our troops. Of course you need a place to detain them. Forest Gump could have figured that out, but Obama lied, and Left-wingers kept repeating the lie even up to his last week in office.

Again, you are wrong. His supporters were wrong for not holding him accountable. Again, you are arguing what is suppose to be the greatest country in the world can not do what it had done in the recent past.

You've thrown in the towel over the US being any better than some third world country.

1993 World Trade Center Bombing Fast Facts

I never once thought Mexico would pay for the wall, but I do believe that Trump thought he could get Mexico to pay for the wall by changing NAFTA and increasing tariffs on imported goods.

Trump doesn't think.

Unlike Obama, who there is no possible way he ever thought he could close Gitmo, I think Trump did believe he could get tariffs to pay for the wall with Mexico.

Same is true with Obama and throwing bankers in jail. One of two things is true. Either A: Obama never once thought that he was really going to throw bankers in jail, and just knew that mindless left-wingers would believe such a lie...... or B: Obama is the fair more ignorant and stupid than ever knew.

Either way, anyone who heard Obama say he was going to send bankers to prison, and believed that.... is an idiot. If you actually think you can toss people in prison, who are doing nothing illegal.... you are a moron. If you actually think that you can send people to prison, for doing EXACTLY WHAT FREDDIE MAC, FANNIE MAE, AND THE US GOVERNMENT DEMANDED THEY DO.... you are idiot.

And for you to be that dumb, that you believed that lie? Yes, I can condemn that. If you are that stupid, you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Again, we did it in the past.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT BOASTS 905 CONVICTIONS IN S&L SCANDAL

And people wonder why I hold the position that we really aren't all that great of a country any longer.

But Obama could have. Obama was suppose to be this great law scholar. Are you saying he was ignorant, incapable or a liar?

No he could not have. And yes, that is exactly what I'm saying. I think he lied, knowing stupid people would believe the lies, and support him. But it is also possible that he is far more ignorant than we thought.

Obama needed none of that to prosecute those who broke our laws.

Again, the banks were selling the exact same loans, that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were selling... and they were sued by Andrew Cuomo in 1998 to make those bad loans.... and Freddie Mac in 1997 guaranteed those bad loans.

So one of two things is true.... Either what the banks did was not against the law, because government itself was the biggest proponent of those actions..... or if they sent those banks to court, they would expose to everyone that the entire government going back to Bill Clinton in 1997, was doing the exact same things, including Obama himself which sued Citigroup to make bad loans.

And yet that is exactly what we did before. Why was it now impossible?
1993 World Trade Center Bombing Fast Facts

Not even close to being comparable. You are comparing a domestic action, to a war action. When we captured POWs in WW2, did we try them in domestic courts? No we did not.

Further, it's not possible to do that. Blowing up a bomb in NYC, where the FBI can investigate it, and collect evidence, and gather data, and create a court case..... is nothing like fighting in Fallujah, Iraq.

Do you really think that insurgent groups are going to stop fighting so that FBI or some other investigators, can come sift through a war zone, to find evidence against captured fighters? Do you really think that?

You really think we'll have some guys with gloves and a trench coat, walking around in a combat area, dusting for finger prints, while dodging bullets and grenades? Maybe they can go interview local combatants who will be happy and smiling to provide them with eye witness accounts?

Completely and entirely different than going through a trade center bombing in 1993. The absurdity of comparing the two is beyond my ability to understand, unless you are just trolling here.

Again, we did it in the past.
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT BOASTS 905 CONVICTIONS IN S&L SCANDAL
And people wonder why I hold the position that we really aren't all that great of a country any longer.

This is one of the ironies of left-wing ideology, because over and over left-wingers promote "co-ops", as being the brilliant alternative to profit-based free-market Capitalism.

You do know that the S&Ls the crashed in the late 70s and early 80s were co-ops, right? Most of the people who went to jail, were left-wingers.

Regardless, again you are comparing apples and oranges. The convictions of the S&L scandals, were for fraud. Clearly defined fraud.

That didn't happen in the sub-prime crash. You think it did, others claim it did, but it didn't. The few times during the crash where there was fraud, people were convicted.

There are examples where people went to prison, when they engaged in clear fraud.

But as whole, during the 2008 crash, there was no fraud involved. The market changed, because of government intervention.

As I said before... you can't just send people to prison, because you don't like them, or you don't like what happened. You have to actually commit a crime. Obama can't just retro-actively declare everything that was perfectly legal from 1997 to 2006, to be a crime, and toss people in prison for it.

So stupid. "Most arrested were "left wingers".

This is why the country is in such a mess and will only get worse. This is the only way you can see the world. I see more and more people like you. It's why I support it all falling apart.

Are you denying they were not-for-profit co-ops? Or are you suggesting that left-wingers haven't been pushing non-profit co-ops? Or are you suggesting that free-market for-profit right-wing Capitalists, were running non-profit co-ops?

It's my opinion, I have right to my opinion, and I don't care what you think. My opinion is, I wager most if not all of the people sent to prison for the S&L scandal, were left-wingers.

Regardless, that was a minor comment in a larger post. You are just using that to avoid answering my other points.

You are the utmost expert on your opinion but you are being untruthful as to what you know are the facts.

Name one fact based claim that I said, that was false?

That Obama could have done nothing to uphold his promises.

So you actually think Obama can change something that was completely legal,

I explained what was illegal.

I explained how it wasn't.

You stated an opinion............

And I stated a bunch of undeniable facts.......... that my opinion was based on.

You stated the lying governments facts.

Prove one fact I said, that was a lie. Feel free.

 

[pknopp]

I explained that. We have NO idea how much was because the Fed refuses to be audited. No matter how much it was we were lied to.

Confusing Fed loans with TARP.......sad.

The Fed is audited every year.

Federal Reserve System Audited Annual Financial Statements

The Federal Reserve Board of Governors in Washington DC.

www.federalreserve.gov

No it isn't.



A few years after the 2008 financial collapse, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) got a rare opportunity to peek behind the curtain at the Federal Reserve.

Although the review was limited in scope, the GAO was able to audit the agency's emergency loan programs. What it found was troubling to say the least.

American taxpayers deserve an audit of the Federal Reserve

You know all of this though.

This is the nature of all government run systems.

Remember how they caught Fannie Mae completely fabricating profits to trigger automatic bonuses?

Remember how Franklin Raines, the guy appointed to Fannie Mae by Bill Clinton, said that those assets were "risk-less"?

Remember how Maxine waters said that Franklin Raines had done an "outstanding job" of providing more loans to unqualified buyers?

Do you need a history refresher?



Watch the video. Here you see democrat after democrat attacking the regulators. FHEO was created by the government to regulate Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. FHEO correctly saw that Fannie and Freddie were engaged in all kinds of clear fabrication of numbers, and the Democrats attacked them for it.

You even have Franklin Raines saying "These assets are so risk-less". You even have a clip of Bill Clinton, saying that Democrats need to resist any attempt by Republicans to tight up controls on Fannie and Freddie.



You even have Barney Frank claiming there is no housing bubble in 2005.

The irony is, you are focused on the Federal Reserve.... which is fine, let's have another audit of the Federal Reserve.....

But you ignore the actual players in the game that crashed the system. Fannie and Freddie were directly involved in the 2008 crash. It was their actions, and others in government, that caused the entire implosion, and the Democrats defended it right up to the crash.

This is one of those lame retorts where one thinks that if you didn't support one thing you must have supported the other. F&F needs shut down.

Impossible. You might as well, say "The US government needs shut down".

Yeah, and I need to win the lottery three times over, or have a fabulously wealthy extremely attractive woman decide to marry me and let me sleep in her lap every night, and never have to work again.

The problem is, it is absolutely impossible to go back to a commodity backed currency.

The moment we do that, foreign countries will exchange dollars for whatever the commodity is, until we are bankrupt.

Because they can exchange their currency, say the Yuan for Dollars. We won't be able to trade those Yuan for gold or whatever commodity.

But they will be able to trade in our Dollars for gold or whatever commodity.

So we'll end up shipping the commodity out of the country for dollars... but we won't be able to do anything with their Yuan but buy goods and products from them, or exchange them for other currency.

It would end up being a one way flow of wealth, out of the country, which would then devalue our currency, worse than inflation today.

And I don't know of any other method for having a national currency, that wouldn't involve it being controlled by a banking agency of the Federal Government. I don't see an alternative.

Impossible or not it is what it is. It's why I've said in the past I support it all falling apart. Too many accept a corrupt lying government because they want their new cell phone every year.

 

[pknopp]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-book-biden-trump-palin/2020/11/13/36c4828a-25b8-11eb-8599-406466ad1b8e_story.html

can’t stop thinking about Barack Obama insisting that his decision to not prosecute Wall Street executives after they destroyed millions of lives was an honorable and moral defense of the social order

Well... yeah. Obama was right on that. You can't just redefine what is legal and illegal, after the fact, because you don't like the outcome.

Trust me, you don't want to live in a world, where they can make something you did 10 years ago illegal, and go to prison for it today.

Further, that isn't even the truth. What Obama said was simply a cover to avoid the real reason, which is the moment they tried to send bankers to prison for their action between 1997, and 2007, those bankers would have fought that in court, with all the documents showing the US government sued them, and forced them, and encouraged them to do those actions.

Obama himself would be called to witness that he sued banks like citigroup to make bad loans in the 1990s.

The Democrats knew that by dropping this, that left-wingers would be more mindlessly angry at the banks, than the government, and never take the time to find out the government was behind everything.

Obama totally failed us here. He ran on prosecuting the bankers while telling the bankers behind closed doors to ignore his rhetoric.

He is sadly admitting here it was all a lie. And people ask why people accept Trump's lies. Those who do something themselves really have little room to condemn others for the same.

Here's the difference. All politicians say things they wish they could do, and when they get into office, they can't.

But Obama could have. Obama was suppose to be this great law scholar. Are you saying he was ignorant, incapable or a liar?

For example, GWB said he wanted to allow people the freedom and power, to put a portion of their Social Security taxes into private investments.

GWB wanted to do this. It had been done before. It was a reasonable possibility. In the end, Congress refused. GWB didn't lie..... he just flat out couldn't do it.

Yes, he would have needed the House and Senate to go along. Obama needed none of that to prosecute those who broke our laws. He ran the Justice Department and needed no one's approval.

The reason we can logically condemn the left-wing, is because Obama's lies were obvious. More than obvious. It was so ridiculous, as to be willful stupidity, to believe some of the dumb claims he made.

For example, closing Gitmo, and bringing captured enemies to the US and having them tried in court, like they robbed a quicky-mart.

And yet that is exactly what we did before. Why was it now impossible?

1993 World Trade Center Bombing Fast Facts

We are NOT supposed to be the country that arrests people and puts them in prison without ever giving them a trial. Without providing any evidence at all. That is not who we are supposed to be. That is not who we were in the past.

I remember the very day I was watching Obama say he was going to do this, and writing a post (I was on a different forum than this at the time), and saying directly to everyone that Obama lied. He lied. There is no way that he actually believed he could close Gitmo. No way. He might be a dumb left-wing socialist idiot, but he was also a trained lawyer and he absolutely must have known there was no possible way to close gitmo from the start.

But he knew something. He knew that his political supporters were too plain stupid, to realize this obvious lie. And I was dead on right on both accounts. People even into 2016, were saying he was going to close Gitmo on the way out. They bought the obvious lie, and never thought to critically think about it, and Obama used those poor stupid parrots all the way to his very last week in office.

And Gitmo never closed. Of course it never closed. Of course you can't try enemy fighters in a court room. Of course you can't release them so they go right back to shooting and killing our troops. Of course you need a place to detain them. Forest Gump could have figured that out, but Obama lied, and Left-wingers kept repeating the lie even up to his last week in office.

Again, you are wrong. His supporters were wrong for not holding him accountable. Again, you are arguing what is suppose to be the greatest country in the world can not do what it had done in the recent past.

You've thrown in the towel over the US being any better than some third world country.

1993 World Trade Center Bombing Fast Facts

I never once thought Mexico would pay for the wall, but I do believe that Trump thought he could get Mexico to pay for the wall by changing NAFTA and increasing tariffs on imported goods.

Trump doesn't think.

Unlike Obama, who there is no possible way he ever thought he could close Gitmo, I think Trump did believe he could get tariffs to pay for the wall with Mexico.

Same is true with Obama and throwing bankers in jail. One of two things is true. Either A: Obama never once thought that he was really going to throw bankers in jail, and just knew that mindless left-wingers would believe such a lie...... or B: Obama is the fair more ignorant and stupid than ever knew.

Either way, anyone who heard Obama say he was going to send bankers to prison, and believed that.... is an idiot. If you actually think you can toss people in prison, who are doing nothing illegal.... you are a moron. If you actually think that you can send people to prison, for doing EXACTLY WHAT FREDDIE MAC, FANNIE MAE, AND THE US GOVERNMENT DEMANDED THEY DO.... you are idiot.

And for you to be that dumb, that you believed that lie? Yes, I can condemn that. If you are that stupid, you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Again, we did it in the past.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT BOASTS 905 CONVICTIONS IN S&L SCANDAL

And people wonder why I hold the position that we really aren't all that great of a country any longer.

But Obama could have. Obama was suppose to be this great law scholar. Are you saying he was ignorant, incapable or a liar?

No he could not have. And yes, that is exactly what I'm saying. I think he lied, knowing stupid people would believe the lies, and support him. But it is also possible that he is far more ignorant than we thought.

Obama needed none of that to prosecute those who broke our laws.

Again, the banks were selling the exact same loans, that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were selling... and they were sued by Andrew Cuomo in 1998 to make those bad loans.... and Freddie Mac in 1997 guaranteed those bad loans.

So one of two things is true.... Either what the banks did was not against the law, because government itself was the biggest proponent of those actions..... or if they sent those banks to court, they would expose to everyone that the entire government going back to Bill Clinton in 1997, was doing the exact same things, including Obama himself which sued Citigroup to make bad loans.

And yet that is exactly what we did before. Why was it now impossible?
1993 World Trade Center Bombing Fast Facts

Not even close to being comparable. You are comparing a domestic action, to a war action. When we captured POWs in WW2, did we try them in domestic courts? No we did not.

Further, it's not possible to do that. Blowing up a bomb in NYC, where the FBI can investigate it, and collect evidence, and gather data, and create a court case..... is nothing like fighting in Fallujah, Iraq.

Do you really think that insurgent groups are going to stop fighting so that FBI or some other investigators, can come sift through a war zone, to find evidence against captured fighters? Do you really think that?

You really think we'll have some guys with gloves and a trench coat, walking around in a combat area, dusting for finger prints, while dodging bullets and grenades? Maybe they can go interview local combatants who will be happy and smiling to provide them with eye witness accounts?

Completely and entirely different than going through a trade center bombing in 1993. The absurdity of comparing the two is beyond my ability to understand, unless you are just trolling here.

Again, we did it in the past.
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT BOASTS 905 CONVICTIONS IN S&L SCANDAL
And people wonder why I hold the position that we really aren't all that great of a country any longer.

This is one of the ironies of left-wing ideology, because over and over left-wingers promote "co-ops", as being the brilliant alternative to profit-based free-market Capitalism.

You do know that the S&Ls the crashed in the late 70s and early 80s were co-ops, right? Most of the people who went to jail, were left-wingers.

Regardless, again you are comparing apples and oranges. The convictions of the S&L scandals, were for fraud. Clearly defined fraud.

That didn't happen in the sub-prime crash. You think it did, others claim it did, but it didn't. The few times during the crash where there was fraud, people were convicted.

There are examples where people went to prison, when they engaged in clear fraud.

But as whole, during the 2008 crash, there was no fraud involved. The market changed, because of government intervention.

As I said before... you can't just send people to prison, because you don't like them, or you don't like what happened. You have to actually commit a crime. Obama can't just retro-actively declare everything that was perfectly legal from 1997 to 2006, to be a crime, and toss people in prison for it.

So stupid. "Most arrested were "left wingers".

This is why the country is in such a mess and will only get worse. This is the only way you can see the world. I see more and more people like you. It's why I support it all falling apart.

Are you denying they were not-for-profit co-ops? Or are you suggesting that left-wingers haven't been pushing non-profit co-ops? Or are you suggesting that free-market for-profit right-wing Capitalists, were running non-profit co-ops?

It's my opinion, I have right to my opinion, and I don't care what you think. My opinion is, I wager most if not all of the people sent to prison for the S&L scandal, were left-wingers.

Regardless, that was a minor comment in a larger post. You are just using that to avoid answering my other points.

You are the utmost expert on your opinion but you are being untruthful as to what you know are the facts.

Name one fact based claim that I said, that was false?

That Obama could have done nothing to uphold his promises.

So you actually think Obama can change something that was completely legal,

I explained what was illegal.

I explained how it wasn't.

You stated an opinion............

And I stated a bunch of undeniable facts.......... that my opinion was based on.

You stated the lying governments facts.

Prove one fact I said, that was a lie. Feel free.

I've already provided the links.

 

[Andylusion]

I explained that. We have NO idea how much was because the Fed refuses to be audited. No matter how much it was we were lied to.

Confusing Fed loans with TARP.......sad.

The Fed is audited every year.

Federal Reserve System Audited Annual Financial Statements

The Federal Reserve Board of Governors in Washington DC.

www.federalreserve.gov

No it isn't.



A few years after the 2008 financial collapse, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) got a rare opportunity to peek behind the curtain at the Federal Reserve.

Although the review was limited in scope, the GAO was able to audit the agency's emergency loan programs. What it found was troubling to say the least.

American taxpayers deserve an audit of the Federal Reserve

You know all of this though.

This is the nature of all government run systems.

Remember how they caught Fannie Mae completely fabricating profits to trigger automatic bonuses?

Remember how Franklin Raines, the guy appointed to Fannie Mae by Bill Clinton, said that those assets were "risk-less"?

Remember how Maxine waters said that Franklin Raines had done an "outstanding job" of providing more loans to unqualified buyers?

Do you need a history refresher?



Watch the video. Here you see democrat after democrat attacking the regulators. FHEO was created by the government to regulate Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. FHEO correctly saw that Fannie and Freddie were engaged in all kinds of clear fabrication of numbers, and the Democrats attacked them for it.

You even have Franklin Raines saying "These assets are so risk-less". You even have a clip of Bill Clinton, saying that Democrats need to resist any attempt by Republicans to tight up controls on Fannie and Freddie.



You even have Barney Frank claiming there is no housing bubble in 2005.

The irony is, you are focused on the Federal Reserve.... which is fine, let's have another audit of the Federal Reserve.....

But you ignore the actual players in the game that crashed the system. Fannie and Freddie were directly involved in the 2008 crash. It was their actions, and others in government, that caused the entire implosion, and the Democrats defended it right up to the crash.

This is one of those lame retorts where one thinks that if you didn't support one thing you must have supported the other. F&F needs shut down.

Impossible. You might as well, say "The US government needs shut down".

Yeah, and I need to win the lottery three times over, or have a fabulously wealthy extremely attractive woman decide to marry me and let me sleep in her lap every night, and never have to work again.

The problem is, it is absolutely impossible to go back to a commodity backed currency.

The moment we do that, foreign countries will exchange dollars for whatever the commodity is, until we are bankrupt.

Because they can exchange their currency, say the Yuan for Dollars. We won't be able to trade those Yuan for gold or whatever commodity.

But they will be able to trade in our Dollars for gold or whatever commodity.

So we'll end up shipping the commodity out of the country for dollars... but we won't be able to do anything with their Yuan but buy goods and products from them, or exchange them for other currency.

It would end up being a one way flow of wealth, out of the country, which would then devalue our currency, worse than inflation today.

And I don't know of any other method for having a national currency, that wouldn't involve it being controlled by a banking agency of the Federal Government. I don't see an alternative.

Impossible or not it is what it is. It's why I've said in the past I support it all falling apart. Too many accept a corrupt lying government because they want their new cell phone every year.

I explained that. We have NO idea how much was because the Fed refuses to be audited. No matter how much it was we were lied to.

Confusing Fed loans with TARP.......sad.

The Fed is audited every year.

Federal Reserve System Audited Annual Financial Statements

The Federal Reserve Board of Governors in Washington DC.

www.federalreserve.gov

No it isn't.



A few years after the 2008 financial collapse, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) got a rare opportunity to peek behind the curtain at the Federal Reserve.

Although the review was limited in scope, the GAO was able to audit the agency's emergency loan programs. What it found was troubling to say the least.

American taxpayers deserve an audit of the Federal Reserve

You know all of this though.

This is the nature of all government run systems.

Remember how they caught Fannie Mae completely fabricating profits to trigger automatic bonuses?

Remember how Franklin Raines, the guy appointed to Fannie Mae by Bill Clinton, said that those assets were "risk-less"?

Remember how Maxine waters said that Franklin Raines had done an "outstanding job" of providing more loans to unqualified buyers?

Do you need a history refresher?



Watch the video. Here you see democrat after democrat attacking the regulators. FHEO was created by the government to regulate Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. FHEO correctly saw that Fannie and Freddie were engaged in all kinds of clear fabrication of numbers, and the Democrats attacked them for it.

You even have Franklin Raines saying "These assets are so risk-less". You even have a clip of Bill Clinton, saying that Democrats need to resist any attempt by Republicans to tight up controls on Fannie and Freddie.



You even have Barney Frank claiming there is no housing bubble in 2005.

The irony is, you are focused on the Federal Reserve.... which is fine, let's have another audit of the Federal Reserve.....

But you ignore the actual players in the game that crashed the system. Fannie and Freddie were directly involved in the 2008 crash. It was their actions, and others in government, that caused the entire implosion, and the Democrats defended it right up to the crash.

This is one of those lame retorts where one thinks that if you didn't support one thing you must have supported the other. F&F needs shut down.

Impossible. You might as well, say "The US government needs shut down".

Yeah, and I need to win the lottery three times over, or have a fabulously wealthy extremely attractive woman decide to marry me and let me sleep in her lap every night, and never have to work again.

The problem is, it is absolutely impossible to go back to a commodity backed currency.

The moment we do that, foreign countries will exchange dollars for whatever the commodity is, until we are bankrupt.

Because they can exchange their currency, say the Yuan for Dollars. We won't be able to trade those Yuan for gold or whatever commodity.

But they will be able to trade in our Dollars for gold or whatever commodity.

So we'll end up shipping the commodity out of the country for dollars... but we won't be able to do anything with their Yuan but buy goods and products from them, or exchange them for other currency.

It would end up being a one way flow of wealth, out of the country, which would then devalue our currency, worse than inflation today.

And I don't know of any other method for having a national currency, that wouldn't involve it being controlled by a banking agency of the Federal Government. I don't see an alternative.

Impossible or not it is what it is. It's why I've said in the past I support it all falling apart. Too many accept a corrupt lying government because they want their new cell phone every year.

Ecclesiastes 7:16

"Do not be over-righteous, neither be over-wise-- why destroy yourself?"

There is no "corruption-free" system anywhere in this world, or at any time in all human history.

Saying that you support it all falling apart..... is very dumb and unwise statement.

I've been to Europe. It's not better than the US. And certainly places outside of Europe and the US, are not better.

Saying you want it to fall apart, is basically saying you wish harm and misery to yourself, your family, your children, and their children.

Because if this system falls apart, it won't be replaced by a better one. I promise you. There is no 'better one'.

 

[Andylusion]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-book-biden-trump-palin/2020/11/13/36c4828a-25b8-11eb-8599-406466ad1b8e_story.html

can’t stop thinking about Barack Obama insisting that his decision to not prosecute Wall Street executives after they destroyed millions of lives was an honorable and moral defense of the social order

Well... yeah. Obama was right on that. You can't just redefine what is legal and illegal, after the fact, because you don't like the outcome.

Trust me, you don't want to live in a world, where they can make something you did 10 years ago illegal, and go to prison for it today.

Further, that isn't even the truth. What Obama said was simply a cover to avoid the real reason, which is the moment they tried to send bankers to prison for their action between 1997, and 2007, those bankers would have fought that in court, with all the documents showing the US government sued them, and forced them, and encouraged them to do those actions.

Obama himself would be called to witness that he sued banks like citigroup to make bad loans in the 1990s.

The Democrats knew that by dropping this, that left-wingers would be more mindlessly angry at the banks, than the government, and never take the time to find out the government was behind everything.

Obama totally failed us here. He ran on prosecuting the bankers while telling the bankers behind closed doors to ignore his rhetoric.

He is sadly admitting here it was all a lie. And people ask why people accept Trump's lies. Those who do something themselves really have little room to condemn others for the same.

Here's the difference. All politicians say things they wish they could do, and when they get into office, they can't.

But Obama could have. Obama was suppose to be this great law scholar. Are you saying he was ignorant, incapable or a liar?

For example, GWB said he wanted to allow people the freedom and power, to put a portion of their Social Security taxes into private investments.

GWB wanted to do this. It had been done before. It was a reasonable possibility. In the end, Congress refused. GWB didn't lie..... he just flat out couldn't do it.

Yes, he would have needed the House and Senate to go along. Obama needed none of that to prosecute those who broke our laws. He ran the Justice Department and needed no one's approval.

The reason we can logically condemn the left-wing, is because Obama's lies were obvious. More than obvious. It was so ridiculous, as to be willful stupidity, to believe some of the dumb claims he made.

For example, closing Gitmo, and bringing captured enemies to the US and having them tried in court, like they robbed a quicky-mart.

And yet that is exactly what we did before. Why was it now impossible?

1993 World Trade Center Bombing Fast Facts

We are NOT supposed to be the country that arrests people and puts them in prison without ever giving them a trial. Without providing any evidence at all. That is not who we are supposed to be. That is not who we were in the past.

I remember the very day I was watching Obama say he was going to do this, and writing a post (I was on a different forum than this at the time), and saying directly to everyone that Obama lied. He lied. There is no way that he actually believed he could close Gitmo. No way. He might be a dumb left-wing socialist idiot, but he was also a trained lawyer and he absolutely must have known there was no possible way to close gitmo from the start.

But he knew something. He knew that his political supporters were too plain stupid, to realize this obvious lie. And I was dead on right on both accounts. People even into 2016, were saying he was going to close Gitmo on the way out. They bought the obvious lie, and never thought to critically think about it, and Obama used those poor stupid parrots all the way to his very last week in office.

And Gitmo never closed. Of course it never closed. Of course you can't try enemy fighters in a court room. Of course you can't release them so they go right back to shooting and killing our troops. Of course you need a place to detain them. Forest Gump could have figured that out, but Obama lied, and Left-wingers kept repeating the lie even up to his last week in office.

Again, you are wrong. His supporters were wrong for not holding him accountable. Again, you are arguing what is suppose to be the greatest country in the world can not do what it had done in the recent past.

You've thrown in the towel over the US being any better than some third world country.

1993 World Trade Center Bombing Fast Facts

I never once thought Mexico would pay for the wall, but I do believe that Trump thought he could get Mexico to pay for the wall by changing NAFTA and increasing tariffs on imported goods.

Trump doesn't think.

Unlike Obama, who there is no possible way he ever thought he could close Gitmo, I think Trump did believe he could get tariffs to pay for the wall with Mexico.

Same is true with Obama and throwing bankers in jail. One of two things is true. Either A: Obama never once thought that he was really going to throw bankers in jail, and just knew that mindless left-wingers would believe such a lie...... or B: Obama is the fair more ignorant and stupid than ever knew.

Either way, anyone who heard Obama say he was going to send bankers to prison, and believed that.... is an idiot. If you actually think you can toss people in prison, who are doing nothing illegal.... you are a moron. If you actually think that you can send people to prison, for doing EXACTLY WHAT FREDDIE MAC, FANNIE MAE, AND THE US GOVERNMENT DEMANDED THEY DO.... you are idiot.

And for you to be that dumb, that you believed that lie? Yes, I can condemn that. If you are that stupid, you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Again, we did it in the past.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT BOASTS 905 CONVICTIONS IN S&L SCANDAL

And people wonder why I hold the position that we really aren't all that great of a country any longer.

But Obama could have. Obama was suppose to be this great law scholar. Are you saying he was ignorant, incapable or a liar?

No he could not have. And yes, that is exactly what I'm saying. I think he lied, knowing stupid people would believe the lies, and support him. But it is also possible that he is far more ignorant than we thought.

Obama needed none of that to prosecute those who broke our laws.

Again, the banks were selling the exact same loans, that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were selling... and they were sued by Andrew Cuomo in 1998 to make those bad loans.... and Freddie Mac in 1997 guaranteed those bad loans.

So one of two things is true.... Either what the banks did was not against the law, because government itself was the biggest proponent of those actions..... or if they sent those banks to court, they would expose to everyone that the entire government going back to Bill Clinton in 1997, was doing the exact same things, including Obama himself which sued Citigroup to make bad loans.

And yet that is exactly what we did before. Why was it now impossible?
1993 World Trade Center Bombing Fast Facts

Not even close to being comparable. You are comparing a domestic action, to a war action. When we captured POWs in WW2, did we try them in domestic courts? No we did not.

Further, it's not possible to do that. Blowing up a bomb in NYC, where the FBI can investigate it, and collect evidence, and gather data, and create a court case..... is nothing like fighting in Fallujah, Iraq.

Do you really think that insurgent groups are going to stop fighting so that FBI or some other investigators, can come sift through a war zone, to find evidence against captured fighters? Do you really think that?

You really think we'll have some guys with gloves and a trench coat, walking around in a combat area, dusting for finger prints, while dodging bullets and grenades? Maybe they can go interview local combatants who will be happy and smiling to provide them with eye witness accounts?

Completely and entirely different than going through a trade center bombing in 1993. The absurdity of comparing the two is beyond my ability to understand, unless you are just trolling here.

Again, we did it in the past.
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT BOASTS 905 CONVICTIONS IN S&L SCANDAL
And people wonder why I hold the position that we really aren't all that great of a country any longer.

This is one of the ironies of left-wing ideology, because over and over left-wingers promote "co-ops", as being the brilliant alternative to profit-based free-market Capitalism.

You do know that the S&Ls the crashed in the late 70s and early 80s were co-ops, right? Most of the people who went to jail, were left-wingers.

Regardless, again you are comparing apples and oranges. The convictions of the S&L scandals, were for fraud. Clearly defined fraud.

That didn't happen in the sub-prime crash. You think it did, others claim it did, but it didn't. The few times during the crash where there was fraud, people were convicted.

There are examples where people went to prison, when they engaged in clear fraud.

But as whole, during the 2008 crash, there was no fraud involved. The market changed, because of government intervention.

As I said before... you can't just send people to prison, because you don't like them, or you don't like what happened. You have to actually commit a crime. Obama can't just retro-actively declare everything that was perfectly legal from 1997 to 2006, to be a crime, and toss people in prison for it.

So stupid. "Most arrested were "left wingers".

This is why the country is in such a mess and will only get worse. This is the only way you can see the world. I see more and more people like you. It's why I support it all falling apart.

Are you denying they were not-for-profit co-ops? Or are you suggesting that left-wingers haven't been pushing non-profit co-ops? Or are you suggesting that free-market for-profit right-wing Capitalists, were running non-profit co-ops?

It's my opinion, I have right to my opinion, and I don't care what you think. My opinion is, I wager most if not all of the people sent to prison for the S&L scandal, were left-wingers.

Regardless, that was a minor comment in a larger post. You are just using that to avoid answering my other points.

You are the utmost expert on your opinion but you are being untruthful as to what you know are the facts.

Name one fact based claim that I said, that was false?

That Obama could have done nothing to uphold his promises.

So you actually think Obama can change something that was completely legal,

I explained what was illegal.

I explained how it wasn't.

You stated an opinion............

And I stated a bunch of undeniable facts.......... that my opinion was based on.

You stated the lying governments facts.

Prove one fact I said, that was a lie. Feel free.

I've already provided the links.

So have I.

 

[pknopp]

I explained that. We have NO idea how much was because the Fed refuses to be audited. No matter how much it was we were lied to.

Confusing Fed loans with TARP.......sad.

The Fed is audited every year.

Federal Reserve System Audited Annual Financial Statements

The Federal Reserve Board of Governors in Washington DC.

www.federalreserve.gov

No it isn't.



A few years after the 2008 financial collapse, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) got a rare opportunity to peek behind the curtain at the Federal Reserve.

Although the review was limited in scope, the GAO was able to audit the agency's emergency loan programs. What it found was troubling to say the least.

American taxpayers deserve an audit of the Federal Reserve

You know all of this though.

This is the nature of all government run systems.

Remember how they caught Fannie Mae completely fabricating profits to trigger automatic bonuses?

Remember how Franklin Raines, the guy appointed to Fannie Mae by Bill Clinton, said that those assets were "risk-less"?

Remember how Maxine waters said that Franklin Raines had done an "outstanding job" of providing more loans to unqualified buyers?

Do you need a history refresher?



Watch the video. Here you see democrat after democrat attacking the regulators. FHEO was created by the government to regulate Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. FHEO correctly saw that Fannie and Freddie were engaged in all kinds of clear fabrication of numbers, and the Democrats attacked them for it.

You even have Franklin Raines saying "These assets are so risk-less". You even have a clip of Bill Clinton, saying that Democrats need to resist any attempt by Republicans to tight up controls on Fannie and Freddie.



You even have Barney Frank claiming there is no housing bubble in 2005.

The irony is, you are focused on the Federal Reserve.... which is fine, let's have another audit of the Federal Reserve.....

But you ignore the actual players in the game that crashed the system. Fannie and Freddie were directly involved in the 2008 crash. It was their actions, and others in government, that caused the entire implosion, and the Democrats defended it right up to the crash.

This is one of those lame retorts where one thinks that if you didn't support one thing you must have supported the other. F&F needs shut down.

Impossible. You might as well, say "The US government needs shut down".

Yeah, and I need to win the lottery three times over, or have a fabulously wealthy extremely attractive woman decide to marry me and let me sleep in her lap every night, and never have to work again.

The problem is, it is absolutely impossible to go back to a commodity backed currency.

The moment we do that, foreign countries will exchange dollars for whatever the commodity is, until we are bankrupt.

Because they can exchange their currency, say the Yuan for Dollars. We won't be able to trade those Yuan for gold or whatever commodity.

But they will be able to trade in our Dollars for gold or whatever commodity.

So we'll end up shipping the commodity out of the country for dollars... but we won't be able to do anything with their Yuan but buy goods and products from them, or exchange them for other currency.

It would end up being a one way flow of wealth, out of the country, which would then devalue our currency, worse than inflation today.

And I don't know of any other method for having a national currency, that wouldn't involve it being controlled by a banking agency of the Federal Government. I don't see an alternative.

Impossible or not it is what it is. It's why I've said in the past I support it all falling apart. Too many accept a corrupt lying government because they want their new cell phone every year.

I explained that. We have NO idea how much was because the Fed refuses to be audited. No matter how much it was we were lied to.

Confusing Fed loans with TARP.......sad.

The Fed is audited every year.

Federal Reserve System Audited Annual Financial Statements

The Federal Reserve Board of Governors in Washington DC.

www.federalreserve.gov

No it isn't.



A few years after the 2008 financial collapse, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) got a rare opportunity to peek behind the curtain at the Federal Reserve.

Although the review was limited in scope, the GAO was able to audit the agency's emergency loan programs. What it found was troubling to say the least.

American taxpayers deserve an audit of the Federal Reserve

You know all of this though.

This is the nature of all government run systems.

Remember how they caught Fannie Mae completely fabricating profits to trigger automatic bonuses?

Remember how Franklin Raines, the guy appointed to Fannie Mae by Bill Clinton, said that those assets were "risk-less"?

Remember how Maxine waters said that Franklin Raines had done an "outstanding job" of providing more loans to unqualified buyers?

Do you need a history refresher?



Watch the video. Here you see democrat after democrat attacking the regulators. FHEO was created by the government to regulate Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. FHEO correctly saw that Fannie and Freddie were engaged in all kinds of clear fabrication of numbers, and the Democrats attacked them for it.

You even have Franklin Raines saying "These assets are so risk-less". You even have a clip of Bill Clinton, saying that Democrats need to resist any attempt by Republicans to tight up controls on Fannie and Freddie.



You even have Barney Frank claiming there is no housing bubble in 2005.

The irony is, you are focused on the Federal Reserve.... which is fine, let's have another audit of the Federal Reserve.....

But you ignore the actual players in the game that crashed the system. Fannie and Freddie were directly involved in the 2008 crash. It was their actions, and others in government, that caused the entire implosion, and the Democrats defended it right up to the crash.

This is one of those lame retorts where one thinks that if you didn't support one thing you must have supported the other. F&F needs shut down.

Impossible. You might as well, say "The US government needs shut down".

Yeah, and I need to win the lottery three times over, or have a fabulously wealthy extremely attractive woman decide to marry me and let me sleep in her lap every night, and never have to work again.

The problem is, it is absolutely impossible to go back to a commodity backed currency.

The moment we do that, foreign countries will exchange dollars for whatever the commodity is, until we are bankrupt.

Because they can exchange their currency, say the Yuan for Dollars. We won't be able to trade those Yuan for gold or whatever commodity.

But they will be able to trade in our Dollars for gold or whatever commodity.

So we'll end up shipping the commodity out of the country for dollars... but we won't be able to do anything with their Yuan but buy goods and products from them, or exchange them for other currency.

It would end up being a one way flow of wealth, out of the country, which would then devalue our currency, worse than inflation today.

And I don't know of any other method for having a national currency, that wouldn't involve it being controlled by a banking agency of the Federal Government. I don't see an alternative.

Impossible or not it is what it is. It's why I've said in the past I support it all falling apart. Too many accept a corrupt lying government because they want their new cell phone every year.

Ecclesiastes 7:16

"Do not be over-righteous, neither be over-wise-- why destroy yourself?"

There is no "corruption-free" system anywhere in this world, or at any time in all human history.

Saying that you support it all falling apart..... is very dumb and unwise statement.

I've been to Europe. It's not better than the US. And certainly places outside of Europe and the US, are not better.

Saying you want it to fall apart, is basically saying you wish harm and misery to yourself, your family, your children, and their children.

Because if this system falls apart, it won't be replaced by a better one. I promise you. There is no 'better one'.

I'm not interested in your promises. Your promises get us a lying corrupt government.

 

[Andylusion]

I explained that. We have NO idea how much was because the Fed refuses to be audited. No matter how much it was we were lied to.

Confusing Fed loans with TARP.......sad.

The Fed is audited every year.

Federal Reserve System Audited Annual Financial Statements

The Federal Reserve Board of Governors in Washington DC.

www.federalreserve.gov

No it isn't.



A few years after the 2008 financial collapse, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) got a rare opportunity to peek behind the curtain at the Federal Reserve.

Although the review was limited in scope, the GAO was able to audit the agency's emergency loan programs. What it found was troubling to say the least.

American taxpayers deserve an audit of the Federal Reserve

You know all of this though.

This is the nature of all government run systems.

Remember how they caught Fannie Mae completely fabricating profits to trigger automatic bonuses?

Remember how Franklin Raines, the guy appointed to Fannie Mae by Bill Clinton, said that those assets were "risk-less"?

Remember how Maxine waters said that Franklin Raines had done an "outstanding job" of providing more loans to unqualified buyers?

Do you need a history refresher?



Watch the video. Here you see democrat after democrat attacking the regulators. FHEO was created by the government to regulate Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. FHEO correctly saw that Fannie and Freddie were engaged in all kinds of clear fabrication of numbers, and the Democrats attacked them for it.

You even have Franklin Raines saying "These assets are so risk-less". You even have a clip of Bill Clinton, saying that Democrats need to resist any attempt by Republicans to tight up controls on Fannie and Freddie.



You even have Barney Frank claiming there is no housing bubble in 2005.

The irony is, you are focused on the Federal Reserve.... which is fine, let's have another audit of the Federal Reserve.....

But you ignore the actual players in the game that crashed the system. Fannie and Freddie were directly involved in the 2008 crash. It was their actions, and others in government, that caused the entire implosion, and the Democrats defended it right up to the crash.

This is one of those lame retorts where one thinks that if you didn't support one thing you must have supported the other. F&F needs shut down.

Impossible. You might as well, say "The US government needs shut down".

Yeah, and I need to win the lottery three times over, or have a fabulously wealthy extremely attractive woman decide to marry me and let me sleep in her lap every night, and never have to work again.

The problem is, it is absolutely impossible to go back to a commodity backed currency.

The moment we do that, foreign countries will exchange dollars for whatever the commodity is, until we are bankrupt.

Because they can exchange their currency, say the Yuan for Dollars. We won't be able to trade those Yuan for gold or whatever commodity.

But they will be able to trade in our Dollars for gold or whatever commodity.

So we'll end up shipping the commodity out of the country for dollars... but we won't be able to do anything with their Yuan but buy goods and products from them, or exchange them for other currency.

It would end up being a one way flow of wealth, out of the country, which would then devalue our currency, worse than inflation today.

And I don't know of any other method for having a national currency, that wouldn't involve it being controlled by a banking agency of the Federal Government. I don't see an alternative.

Impossible or not it is what it is. It's why I've said in the past I support it all falling apart. Too many accept a corrupt lying government because they want their new cell phone every year.

I explained that. We have NO idea how much was because the Fed refuses to be audited. No matter how much it was we were lied to.

Confusing Fed loans with TARP.......sad.

The Fed is audited every year.

Federal Reserve System Audited Annual Financial Statements

The Federal Reserve Board of Governors in Washington DC.

www.federalreserve.gov

No it isn't.



A few years after the 2008 financial collapse, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) got a rare opportunity to peek behind the curtain at the Federal Reserve.

Although the review was limited in scope, the GAO was able to audit the agency's emergency loan programs. What it found was troubling to say the least.

American taxpayers deserve an audit of the Federal Reserve

You know all of this though.

This is the nature of all government run systems.

Remember how they caught Fannie Mae completely fabricating profits to trigger automatic bonuses?

Remember how Franklin Raines, the guy appointed to Fannie Mae by Bill Clinton, said that those assets were "risk-less"?

Remember how Maxine waters said that Franklin Raines had done an "outstanding job" of providing more loans to unqualified buyers?

Do you need a history refresher?



Watch the video. Here you see democrat after democrat attacking the regulators. FHEO was created by the government to regulate Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. FHEO correctly saw that Fannie and Freddie were engaged in all kinds of clear fabrication of numbers, and the Democrats attacked them for it.

You even have Franklin Raines saying "These assets are so risk-less". You even have a clip of Bill Clinton, saying that Democrats need to resist any attempt by Republicans to tight up controls on Fannie and Freddie.



You even have Barney Frank claiming there is no housing bubble in 2005.

The irony is, you are focused on the Federal Reserve.... which is fine, let's have another audit of the Federal Reserve.....

But you ignore the actual players in the game that crashed the system. Fannie and Freddie were directly involved in the 2008 crash. It was their actions, and others in government, that caused the entire implosion, and the Democrats defended it right up to the crash.

This is one of those lame retorts where one thinks that if you didn't support one thing you must have supported the other. F&F needs shut down.

Impossible. You might as well, say "The US government needs shut down".

Yeah, and I need to win the lottery three times over, or have a fabulously wealthy extremely attractive woman decide to marry me and let me sleep in her lap every night, and never have to work again.

The problem is, it is absolutely impossible to go back to a commodity backed currency.

The moment we do that, foreign countries will exchange dollars for whatever the commodity is, until we are bankrupt.

Because they can exchange their currency, say the Yuan for Dollars. We won't be able to trade those Yuan for gold or whatever commodity.

But they will be able to trade in our Dollars for gold or whatever commodity.

So we'll end up shipping the commodity out of the country for dollars... but we won't be able to do anything with their Yuan but buy goods and products from them, or exchange them for other currency.

It would end up being a one way flow of wealth, out of the country, which would then devalue our currency, worse than inflation today.

And I don't know of any other method for having a national currency, that wouldn't involve it being controlled by a banking agency of the Federal Government. I don't see an alternative.

Impossible or not it is what it is. It's why I've said in the past I support it all falling apart. Too many accept a corrupt lying government because they want their new cell phone every year.

Ecclesiastes 7:16

"Do not be over-righteous, neither be over-wise-- why destroy yourself?"

There is no "corruption-free" system anywhere in this world, or at any time in all human history.

Saying that you support it all falling apart..... is very dumb and unwise statement.

I've been to Europe. It's not better than the US. And certainly places outside of Europe and the US, are not better.

Saying you want it to fall apart, is basically saying you wish harm and misery to yourself, your family, your children, and their children.

Because if this system falls apart, it won't be replaced by a better one. I promise you. There is no 'better one'.

I'm not interested in your promises. Your promises get us a lying corrupt government.

Then I'm not interested in your promises either, since we've heard your side for decades, and it got us where we are.

So are you done here on this forum? Since you don't want to hear what I have to say, and I don't care anymore what you have to say... how about you remove yourself from the discussion, since you are not adult enough to handle it?

 

[pknopp]

I explained that. We have NO idea how much was because the Fed refuses to be audited. No matter how much it was we were lied to.

Confusing Fed loans with TARP.......sad.

The Fed is audited every year.

Federal Reserve System Audited Annual Financial Statements

The Federal Reserve Board of Governors in Washington DC.

www.federalreserve.gov

No it isn't.



A few years after the 2008 financial collapse, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) got a rare opportunity to peek behind the curtain at the Federal Reserve.

Although the review was limited in scope, the GAO was able to audit the agency's emergency loan programs. What it found was troubling to say the least.

American taxpayers deserve an audit of the Federal Reserve

You know all of this though.

This is the nature of all government run systems.

Remember how they caught Fannie Mae completely fabricating profits to trigger automatic bonuses?

Remember how Franklin Raines, the guy appointed to Fannie Mae by Bill Clinton, said that those assets were "risk-less"?

Remember how Maxine waters said that Franklin Raines had done an "outstanding job" of providing more loans to unqualified buyers?

Do you need a history refresher?



Watch the video. Here you see democrat after democrat attacking the regulators. FHEO was created by the government to regulate Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. FHEO correctly saw that Fannie and Freddie were engaged in all kinds of clear fabrication of numbers, and the Democrats attacked them for it.

You even have Franklin Raines saying "These assets are so risk-less". You even have a clip of Bill Clinton, saying that Democrats need to resist any attempt by Republicans to tight up controls on Fannie and Freddie.



You even have Barney Frank claiming there is no housing bubble in 2005.

The irony is, you are focused on the Federal Reserve.... which is fine, let's have another audit of the Federal Reserve.....

But you ignore the actual players in the game that crashed the system. Fannie and Freddie were directly involved in the 2008 crash. It was their actions, and others in government, that caused the entire implosion, and the Democrats defended it right up to the crash.

This is one of those lame retorts where one thinks that if you didn't support one thing you must have supported the other. F&F needs shut down.

Impossible. You might as well, say "The US government needs shut down".

Yeah, and I need to win the lottery three times over, or have a fabulously wealthy extremely attractive woman decide to marry me and let me sleep in her lap every night, and never have to work again.

The problem is, it is absolutely impossible to go back to a commodity backed currency.

The moment we do that, foreign countries will exchange dollars for whatever the commodity is, until we are bankrupt.

Because they can exchange their currency, say the Yuan for Dollars. We won't be able to trade those Yuan for gold or whatever commodity.

But they will be able to trade in our Dollars for gold or whatever commodity.

So we'll end up shipping the commodity out of the country for dollars... but we won't be able to do anything with their Yuan but buy goods and products from them, or exchange them for other currency.

It would end up being a one way flow of wealth, out of the country, which would then devalue our currency, worse than inflation today.

And I don't know of any other method for having a national currency, that wouldn't involve it being controlled by a banking agency of the Federal Government. I don't see an alternative.

Impossible or not it is what it is. It's why I've said in the past I support it all falling apart. Too many accept a corrupt lying government because they want their new cell phone every year.

I explained that. We have NO idea how much was because the Fed refuses to be audited. No matter how much it was we were lied to.

Confusing Fed loans with TARP.......sad.

The Fed is audited every year.

Federal Reserve System Audited Annual Financial Statements

The Federal Reserve Board of Governors in Washington DC.

www.federalreserve.gov

No it isn't.



A few years after the 2008 financial collapse, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) got a rare opportunity to peek behind the curtain at the Federal Reserve.

Although the review was limited in scope, the GAO was able to audit the agency's emergency loan programs. What it found was troubling to say the least.

American taxpayers deserve an audit of the Federal Reserve

You know all of this though.

This is the nature of all government run systems.

Remember how they caught Fannie Mae completely fabricating profits to trigger automatic bonuses?

Remember how Franklin Raines, the guy appointed to Fannie Mae by Bill Clinton, said that those assets were "risk-less"?

Remember how Maxine waters said that Franklin Raines had done an "outstanding job" of providing more loans to unqualified buyers?

Do you need a history refresher?



Watch the video. Here you see democrat after democrat attacking the regulators. FHEO was created by the government to regulate Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. FHEO correctly saw that Fannie and Freddie were engaged in all kinds of clear fabrication of numbers, and the Democrats attacked them for it.

You even have Franklin Raines saying "These assets are so risk-less". You even have a clip of Bill Clinton, saying that Democrats need to resist any attempt by Republicans to tight up controls on Fannie and Freddie.



You even have Barney Frank claiming there is no housing bubble in 2005.

The irony is, you are focused on the Federal Reserve.... which is fine, let's have another audit of the Federal Reserve.....

But you ignore the actual players in the game that crashed the system. Fannie and Freddie were directly involved in the 2008 crash. It was their actions, and others in government, that caused the entire implosion, and the Democrats defended it right up to the crash.

This is one of those lame retorts where one thinks that if you didn't support one thing you must have supported the other. F&F needs shut down.

Impossible. You might as well, say "The US government needs shut down".

Yeah, and I need to win the lottery three times over, or have a fabulously wealthy extremely attractive woman decide to marry me and let me sleep in her lap every night, and never have to work again.

The problem is, it is absolutely impossible to go back to a commodity backed currency.

The moment we do that, foreign countries will exchange dollars for whatever the commodity is, until we are bankrupt.

Because they can exchange their currency, say the Yuan for Dollars. We won't be able to trade those Yuan for gold or whatever commodity.

But they will be able to trade in our Dollars for gold or whatever commodity.

So we'll end up shipping the commodity out of the country for dollars... but we won't be able to do anything with their Yuan but buy goods and products from them, or exchange them for other currency.

It would end up being a one way flow of wealth, out of the country, which would then devalue our currency, worse than inflation today.

And I don't know of any other method for having a national currency, that wouldn't involve it being controlled by a banking agency of the Federal Government. I don't see an alternative.

Impossible or not it is what it is. It's why I've said in the past I support it all falling apart. Too many accept a corrupt lying government because they want their new cell phone every year.

Ecclesiastes 7:16

"Do not be over-righteous, neither be over-wise-- why destroy yourself?"

There is no "corruption-free" system anywhere in this world, or at any time in all human history.

Saying that you support it all falling apart..... is very dumb and unwise statement.

I've been to Europe. It's not better than the US. And certainly places outside of Europe and the US, are not better.

Saying you want it to fall apart, is basically saying you wish harm and misery to yourself, your family, your children, and their children.

Because if this system falls apart, it won't be replaced by a better one. I promise you. There is no 'better one'.

I'm not interested in your promises. Your promises get us a lying corrupt government.

Then I'm not interested in your promises either,

I made no promises.