Who/What is this creature, Henry Paulson ?
Posted 6 weeks 6 days ago byThe original request/demand from Paulson said: "Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency"
WOW! Chump change I guess, 700 billion dollars. Maybe it's not so much when your own assets are estimated at 700 million dollars ... I wonder how much of that was at stake?
Paulson is a former CEO of Goldman Sach's. And yes he is a member of IMF Board of Governors.
Those are two more good reasons that I simply don't trust him.
He left Goldman Sachs in 1998 where he had been CEO since 1994, four years. In 2005 his parachute was 37 million, in 2006 it was over 16 million. Nice gig, Paulson.
In July 2008 it was reported by The Daily Telegraph that: "Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson has intimate relations with the Chinese elite, dating from his days at Goldman Sachs when he visited the country more than 70 times." You remember all the funny Clinton business with the Chinese in those days!
Tell me you trust this man:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Henry...
This is strictly a NWO type of guy. He gives a rat's ass about America. That's what I say.
Here is another article to support my contention:
Is it safe to trust a Wall Street veteran with a Wall Street bailout?
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics...
Unfortunately, it is a fact that Congress can not be trusted with this either.
What about those Hedge Funds, Goldman Sachs, and Soros?
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/06/21/b...
Another statement for a future blog unless someone here beats me to it. There is a chain of evidence to strongly suggest that Bush/Paulson are fully behind Obama. Tree, what do you think?
Thoughts
well
Submitted on October 1st, 2008 by John 2000it seems to be improved a lot since the initial Paulson shock-n-awe and there have been a lot of adjustments after 3 back and forths. Like ONLY 250 bn ot of the gate ... etc.
Some guy named Xu in China wrote an article mid-August describing the coming credit crisis and its international repercussions.
But you know Congress had to be on vacation for the month having taken so much care of business ... and besides we had some stupid conventions and hurricanes scheduled. In mid-August our favorite Barney Frankfurter also said Fannie and Freddie were perfectly fine, thank you.
If anything else you could say Paulson and Bush sure grabbed some attention with admins' 3 pages. It sure will be interesting to see what House does on Friday.
There
Submitted on October 1st, 2008 by Hamiltonis no way we should give this man 700 billion dollars,especially with zero over-sight and heck yes, China is pulling his strings right along with the strings of G. W. Bush. I don't trust him heck I wouldn't trust me with $700 Billion, even better if it's somebody elses money. The problem is; we all know this is going to happen...so what's next?
B. Hamilton Langrehr:
The Hamilton Post: www.thehamiltonpost.blogspot.com
blangrehr@gmail.com
ok, you win
Submitted on October 1st, 2008 by John 2000howz about a more cheerful note:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpIGROMNx...
Let me put on my aluminum foil hat...
Submitted on September 30th, 2008 by TreeTopFlyerI have always been a big fan of conspiracy theories (not necessarily in the "I believe all of them" way but in the "I like to explore all the options" way) so here goes.
All you had to do is mention the IMF and I was right there with you. If he belongs to that organization he does not have our best interest at heart.
Whoever it was that said "we have the best government money can buy" was absolutely correct. There is too much money in public office. In the founding fathers' day it was a mostly short term, part time job. We didn't have to limit the term of the president until Roosevelt because before that everyone went back to their real lives. Now, "politician" is the only real life they know.
So, they have no real life; and then there is the money. It does not make any logical sense that we could spend close to $1 Billion this year to give someone, one person, a job that pays around $250k a year for only four years. It does not make financial sense unless there are moneys changing hands that we don't know about. Enter the IMF.
I have done some research on spies and traitors and guess what, most were not ideologically motivated. Most had nothing to fall back on when they were backed into a corner by some vice and offered an out by some supplier. Often, a gambling problem leads to an offer of money. An affair leads to an offer of secrecy. An addiction leads to a supply.
So, tell me, how would a politician that knows nothing about how to operate in the real world, knows nothing more than brokering power in Washington, is incapable of being self sufficient on their own, get themselves backed into a corner and what would the vice be?
Power. "Power corrupts."
And we all know from economics 101 that money is power.
Who has the unlimited supply of money? The IMF, the Chinese, the Sudanese.
Who has been ever so willing to offer money to fix our problems in recent times? The IMF, the Chinese, the Sudanese.
So, much like the otherwise normal guy that is addicted to drugs, first the supplier just supplies the vice. The IMF just supplies the money, the power. And after the supply of the vice is firmly established, along comes the first favor. First, the supplier asks the addict just for a little information from work. "You don't want to mess up what we have going here do you? Remember you have nothing to fall back on." The addict gives in. The next request is a little more and the one after that is a little more until the addict is a slave to the master that controls his vice.
Politicians have a vice. Power. The IMF has the supply. Are our current problems the result of that supplier beginning to exert authority or the final struggle of the addict trying to get away and forcing the supplier to withhold product.
You be the judge. Either way, we are in trouble.
Thanks for the offer Ham, that was fun.
Foil hat off.
Paulson the utimate bad Politician
Submitted on September 30th, 2008 by PabloPaulson and Berenacke are a Wall Street insiders who is still connected to Wall Street.
Their ideas and plans are not good for Main Street but are designed only for Wall Street to make use of.
Thus its bad and to be honest, Paulson should be fired. He should have raised an alarm 2 years ago. I knew then that this crisis was going to happen as far back as November of 2005 and was certain of it by July of 2006. It was just a matter of time. I closed out in September of 2006 I pulled completely out of my portfoilo anything related to the real estate market. I knew that it was going to go down in flames then. It was just a matter of time and when it happen it would go down fast. Well it took about 2 years with stocks falling since March of 2007 with the massive failures beginning in June of 2008.
I think that the person who monitors Wall Street should be a person who is knowledgeable like a University professor but is not connected to Wall Street or worked in Wall Street. Thus they will not be tied to a good ole boy type of plans where in the end, friends and his own interest is served and main Street average Joe is left holding the bag while the corrupt and those who caused the problem get rich.
An Example is that past SEC Chairmen have gone on to make millions in the market after they left the government because they were to connected before and simply increased their connections after serving with the SEC.
I think that we should pay the SEC top 4 $500,000 a year with the purpose that they can not manage their own portfoilos after they have left the SEC. That they have to appoint a conservator to run their portfoilo.
I also think that the president should earn $500,000 a year. With the stated purpose that they host more parties to connect more with main Street USA. Right now, the office of the president has not done parties which honor common US citizens. The presidents of times past used to have local offices go out and give an invitation to people on main Street USA who were inspirational in that they helped their community of the US. Now that does not happen anymore. Now these parties are only for those who pay for the right to be at the White House and belong to the party in control. Not good at all.
Simply, domestic parties are paid for by the president out of his income or private money. Foreign affairs parties are paid for by the government as long as they are legit.
Clinton for example hosted lots of parties where he invited a single diplomat to the party. No foreign affairs happened but he had the government pay for these parties which were really DNC money raisers. Clintons also pocketed money for running the White house as a bed and breakfast for special DNC connected people to raise personal income.
Thus raise salary of the president and VP then regulate the president so that what the Clinton's did can never happen again as it cheapens the office of President.