Politics

More Whackos and Weird Stuff

Kind of Odd
So, if the head of a major criminal investigation closes the case and then ends up very mysteriously dead, wouldn't that ring alarm bells for you?

A city police chief who led an investigation into charges that Britain cooperated with secret CIA flights to transport terrorism suspects without formal proceedings has been found dead, his deputy said Tuesday.


Manchester Chief Constable Michael Todd, 50, was found dead in Snowdonia, about 240 miles northwest of London, Deputy Chief Constable Dave Whatton said. He had been missing since going out for a walk Monday during his day off.

Whatton said the body, which was found Tuesday afternoon, had not yet been formally identified but he believed it was Todd.

...

The association gave him the task of looking into accusations that Britain allowed the CIA to use the country's airports to fly terrorism suspects to other countries without any extradition hearings, a clandestine procedure known as "extraordinary rendition."

Todd's investigation concluded last June that there was no evidence to back the claim. Last month, however, Britain admitted one of its remote outposts in the Indian Ocean had twice been used by the United States as a refueling stop for the secret transfer of two terrorism suspects.

The guy was either inept, corrupt or incredibly gullible, as everyone and their brother knew we'd used British airspace for these torture flights.

So I wonder what happened here. A guy wanders off, ends up dead in some godforsaken backwater far from home... was he being offed because he didn't do a good enough coverup? By some angry victim of torture upset about the whitewash? To shut him up?

Or did he honestly wander off to die?

Sources: Raw Story

Planes, Trains and.. Err, Just Planes Actually
So McCain has another lobbyist scandal brewing on the back burner.

European Aeronautic Defense and Space Co. and Northop Grumman Corp. were awarded a $35 billion Pentagon contract last month to build new Air Force tankers, instead of Boeing Co., and the Seattle-based company is formally challenging the agreement.

Boeing's complaint asks the Government Accountability Office to make sure the EADS contract is fair. McCain pushed for EADS to get the contract, and his campaign employs three former EADS lobbyists, although there is no specific evidence of impropriety, according to ABC.

"Mr. Clean has a bunch of lobbyists that work for a company that won that contract," House Democratic Caucus chairman Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., told the network. "Some people claim the way the specs were written, it was all but certain that the company that his campaign lobbyists worked for couldn't but get that contract."

From everything I read, Boeing's claims about their plane being better are nonsense, and the better project really did win out here.

Still, that doesn't necessarily have anything to do with why McCain would get involved; from the Iseman thing, we know his relationships with lobbyists are very cozy indeed.

Source: Raw Story

Stifle that Free Speech!
So Congress isn't too keen on letting people discuss how the credit companies have ruined their lives.

What if you held a hearing, but the people who were most directly affected by the proposals were barred from speaking? That's what happened yesterday.

The Financial Services Subcommittee on Financial Institutions of the House Committee on Financial Services held hearings on credit cards. Congresswoman Maloney (D-NY) has sponsored a bill with 82 coauthors that would outlaw some of the worst credit card tricks and traps. The card issuers were there in full force--complete with an army of lobbyists to pack the audience. The professors--Katie Porter, Adam Levitin, Larry Ausubel and I--were there to try to give the other side.

Our panel was supposed to be the second panel. The first panel was four regular people who wanted to give first-hand information about their experiences with their credit cards. While the reps from Cap One, Chase and Bank of America went on for hours about their customer friendly policies and how much value they provided free to consumers, the people who had different stories were never allowed to utter a single word.

The people who had been invited to testify had flown in from around the country with their credit card bills in hand, only to learn that they couldn't talk unless they would sign a waiver that would permit the credit card companies to make public anything they wanted to tell about their financial records, their credit histories, their purchases, and so on. The Republicans and Democrats had worked out a deal "to be fair to the credit card lenders." These people couldn't say anything unless they were willing to let the credit card companies strip them naked in public.

So that's where it stood when Congressman Bachus (R-AL) roared into the hearing about three and a half hours after the hearing started. It seems that someone in the press had made some critical statement about the deal, and he was furious. He kept talking about how it wasn't fair that someone could say something and there wouldn't be any way for the credit card companies to say whether it was true or not. Fair is fair, he kept insisting.

Of course, as the article later notes, the credit card companies didn't have to provide any of THEIR data/dirty laundry to testify about their supposed 'facts'.

Funny how that double standard works.

Source: TPM Cafe

Oh, Dana...
Dana Peroxide on why she's not qualified to do her job. Direct quote:

Some of the terms I just don’t know, I haven’t grown up knowing. The type of missiles that are out there: patriots and scuds and cruise missiles and tomahawk missiles. And I think that men just by osmosis understand all of these things, and they’re things that I really have to work at — to know the difference between a carrier and a destroyer, and what it means when one of those is being launched to a certain area.

It isn't osmosis, Dana, it's having functional grey matter and being able to read.

Lots of us have to do it for our work. You should give it a try.

Source: Think Progress

Polling Data
So there've been some polls conducted of Iraqis on the eve of the fifth anniversary of our catastrophic invasion.

Geez. It's been that long? I remember being in class during the invasion. Now I feel old.

LONDON (AFP) - More than two-thirds of Iraqis believe US-led coalition forces should leave, according to a poll conducted for British television ahead of the fifth anniversary of the Iraq invasion.

The ORB/Channel 4 News survey suggested that 70 percent thought multinational forces should withdraw.

Yet some 40 percent of the 4,000 people surveyed said they wanted the United States to play a bigger role in rebuilding Iraq and 36 percent wanted more British involvement.

So they hate us, but like our money.

Good to know. But why so glum about the occupation?

A quarter of those surveyed said they had lost a family member to murder. In Baghdad, that figure rose to nearly half (45 percent).

Some 81 percent had suffered power cuts and 43 percent had experienced drinking water shortages. In the last month, more than a quarter (28 percent) had been short of food.

Oh, that's why.

Still, oddly, they're largely optimistic about the future, with 45% claiming to be satisfied with the pace of change.

I just can't fathom that kind of optimism.

Source: Raw Story

Bill Kristol, Are You Ever Right?
Jon Stewart as always has this guy pegged.

In his New York Times column today, Bill Kristol asserted that Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) “was in fact in the pews” when pastor Jeremiah Wright blamed the “arrogance” of the “United States of White America” for much of the world’s suffering. As Marc Ambinder pointed out, this claim was false; Obama was on his way to campaign in Miami. Kristol has now printed a (misspelled) correction in the online version of his column:

"In this column, I cite a report that Sen. Obama had attended services at Trinity Church on July 22, 2007. The Obama camapaign [sic] has provided information showing that Sen. Obama did not attend Trinity that day. I regret the error."

This is the second time that Kristol has had to issue a correction to his NYT column since it began in early January.

The first correction was a misattributed quote; this is far worse, a complete fabrication based on no evidence whatsoever, which Keith Olbermann thinks he got from Newsmax, some right wing loony 'news' site.

The Times really needs to can him for this.

Source: Think Progress

Advertising Hook
So there's a Senatorial candidate, Steve Novick, who is playing up some slightly unusual things about himself in his advertising.

For one thing, he's very short (4'9"). For another, he's missing his left hand, and has a hook prosthesis.

So the man is selling a custom beer as a fundraising tool... "Left Hook Lager".

Seriously.

Source: Steve Novick for Senate (Left Hook Lager)

Trickery On Our Side
For a change, Harry Reid is using parliamentary tricks in our favor.

Long story short, he's arranged it such that the Republicans can't stop a vote on the no-telecom-immunity version of the already egregious warrant-free wiretap bill.

They'll have to filibuster the actual thing.

Or Reid can cave to them again, I guess. He's rather unreliable.

Source: Daily Kos

Wall Street
So Wall Street is more or less in full panic mode now, brought low by their own stupidity and greed.

Big surprise.

Pushed to the brink of collapse by the mortgage crisis, Bear Stearns Cos. agreed -- after prodding by the federal government -- to be sold to J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. for the fire-sale price of $2 a share in stock, or about $236 million.

Bear Stearns had a stock-market value of about $3.5 billion as of Friday -- and was worth $20 billion in January 2007. But the crisis of confidence that swept the firm and fueled a customer exodus in recent days left Bear Stearns with a horrible choice: sell the firm -- at any price -- to a big bank willing to assume its trading obligations or file for bankruptcy.

"At the end of the day, what Bear Stearns was looking at was either taking $2 a share or going bust," said one person involved in the negotiations. "Those were the only options."

Of course, with a Republican in the White House, the taxpayers have to foot the bill.

To help facilitate the deal, the Federal Reserve is taking the extraordinary step of providing as much as $30 billion in financing for Bear Stearns's less-liquid assets, such as mortgage securities that the firm has been unable to sell, in what is believed to be the largest Fed advance on record to a single company. Fed officials wouldn't describe the exact financing terms or assets involved. But if those assets decline in value, the Fed would bear any loss, not J.P. Morgan.

Oh goodie! We're screwed! J.P. Morgan just got a 30 billion dollar check for imaginary mortgage properties!

Simultaneously with the announcement of Bear Stearns's sale, the Fed took the extraordinary measure of allowing securities firms to borrow from the central bank under terms normally reserved for regulated banks. People close to Bear Stearns were bitter about the move, saying that had the Fed acted earlier, the firm could potentially have survived by borrowing directly from the Fed and using its troubled securities as collateral.

The deal already is prompting howls of protest from Bear Stearns shareholders, since the New York company last week indicated that its book value was still close to its reported level of about $84 share at the end of the fiscal year. "Why is this better for shareholders of Bear Stearns than a Chapter 11 filing?" one Bear shareholder asked J.P. Morgan executives in a conference call last night.

A third of Bear-Stearns stock is held by its employees, who got royally shafted here. If they weren't in turn royally shafting the American, hell, Global public, I'd feel sorry for them.

Late yesterday, some Bear Stearns employees and shareholders were grumbling about the deal. If the feeling is widespread it could emerge as a potential obstacle to the completion of the deal because Bear Stearns employees own about a third of the company's shares.

"I've got to think we can get more in a liquidation, I'm not selling my shares, this price is dramatically less than the book value Alan Schwartz told us the company is worth," said a midlevel Bear Stearns executive. "The building is worth $8 a share."

Waaaah, we got caught in our own trap!

There is this little bit of hilarity; Bear Stearns has apparently long had a lazy overseer at the helm, who spends more time on card games than keeping his company afloat.

James Cayne, Bear Stearns's chairman, who had been participating in a bridge tournament when the crisis unfolded, returned to New York on Saturday and participated in the negotiations, said one person familiar with the discussions.

HAHAHAHAHA

Priceless.

Source: The Wall Street Journal

Where Else Have I Heard of J.P. Morgan Lately?
Oh yeah, a whistleblower leaked documents detailing a scheme of theirs to help the ultra-rich evade insider trading laws!

A confidential memo obtained by Wikileaks shows that not only has the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission created an insider trading loophole big enough to drive a truck through, but that Wall Street is taking full advantage of it, establishing 'how-to' programs and even client service divisions to help well-heeled clients circumvent insider trading regulations.

Most of us think of insider trading as illegal. It allows those with inside knowledge to tilt the playing field, with the small investors invariably losing to the privileged few. Unfortunately for the small investor, the big boys get to play by different rules, and it has all been made legal, thanks to the SEC.

In 2000 the SEC promulgated Rule 10b5-1. The new Rule was designed to address the confusion caused by a series of court decisions that had left investors uncertain about what constitutes insider trading. Rule 10b5-1 was designed to "clarify" what constitutes illegal insider trading.

But top Wall Street houses were not to be deterred from advantaging their big clients at the expense of their small ones. Wall Street firms like JP Morgan found loopholes in Rule 10b5-1 that allowed them to continue trading on inside information "legally." Indeed, JP Morgan has gone so far as to set up an entire 'selling program' within its Securities division to help their clients profit from the loophole.

This is a scheme that only seems clever to douchebags who hate playing fair.

Here's how it works:

1. An insider client transfers all or a portion of their company stock into a JP Morgan Securities Inc. brokerage account.

2. The insider then develops, in conjunction with the 10b5-1 team, a 'phased, pre-planned sales program to be executed at either market or

specified prices'.

3. Depending on the information available to the insider (but not the public), the insider can decide whether to execute the sale or not.

See, they didn't say 'SELL', they said 'EXECUTE'.

That makes all the difference.

Riiight.

Source: Wikileaks