What actually happened was that McCain did his best to cover up all the dirt in 2004, because he wanted to run for President in 2008, which meant getting the Republican nomination.
So, now that Hayworth has had his ass kept out of jail by McCain, Hayworth is running a scorched earth primary challenge against him.
Heh.
BTW, Dennis G. at Balloon Juice has the full story, and McCain’s cover-up is a remarkably sordid tale.
Heh.
I wonder when McCain starts leaking stuff from his files tot he press about this.
Forget Erickson’s politics and whether you agree with them. It’s not whether he’s on the left or the right that matters — it’s the way he expresses his beliefs that’s the problem. Among other things, he’s had readers send fake dog poop to Rep. Earl Pomeroy, D-N.D., because of the congressman’s support for his party’s healthcare reform proposals, he’s celebrated Chicago’s losing the 2016 Summer Olympics by writing, “Obama’s pimped us to every two bit thug and dictator in the world,” he’s said that “leftists celebrate each and every death of each and every American solider because they view the loss of life as a vindication of their belief that they are right.”
I’m not asking that they find a smart wingnut, but at the very least, they should find someone who does not need help to cut his own meat, you know, someone who can at least pretend to have two brain cells on the teevee, see Will, George.
As I have said before, the problem was that the governments were too eager for integration, so they used unrealistic exchange rates to bring in the less well off EU members into the Euro, basically payoffs, and so you now have imbalances that need to sort themselves out.
Still if I were a betting man, I’d bet on the Germans being complete dicks about all of this, because it’s how they roll.
As you may recall Mr. Monseratte was expelled from the New York Senate after assaulting his girl friend, and now he has lost the election bid to José Peralta in a special election in which he took gay baiting to very ugly places.
Monseratte was running as an independent, because there was no way that the Democratic party would put him on the ticket after he was one of the two State Senators who switched to the Republicans, flipping the chamber briefly, and I’m wondering if it was over gay marriage now.
Hopefully, this is the end of his political career.
A Repo 105 transaction: if it looks confusing, that’s because it’s intended to confuse
As I noted a few days ago, Lehman used what any normal human being would have called, “accounting fraud.”
Well, we have some more details, and it appears that the New York Bank of the Federal Reserve, and its president, current Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, knew it, and did nothing about it.
Basically, this was all about what is called “Repo” transactions.
Essentially, it’s a way to get short term cash by turning over assets as collateral, which is normal and ordinary. It’s a lot like pawning your wedding ring, only the amounts are much larger, and typically the periods of the loan are typically shorter.
So, what is the problem?
Well, ignoring the fact that the assets were in reality absolute crap, which is really a matter of due diligence for the lender, if you remain responsible for any losses in value of these assets, and you structure the transaction so that it does not show up on your balance sheet, because they booked the transaction as a sale of assets, as opposed to borrowing money.
The thing is, that this is illegal, or at least without precedent, in the United States, so they justified the activities, which took place in the United States, by claiming that they operated under UK law:
When Lehman first designed Repo 105 in 2001, however, there was one catch. The firm couldn’t get any American law firms to sign off on the aggressive accounting, namely that these transactions were true sales instead of what amounted to the parking of assets. From the firm’s own Repo 105 accounting policy document, according to the report:
Repos generally cannot be treated as sales in the United States because lawyers cannot provide a true sale opinion under U.S. law.
Enter Linklaters, [a “magic circle” law firm, the US equivalent is a “white shoe” law firm] which grounded its legal brief in English, rather than American, law. The firm explicitly said: “This opinion is limited to English law as applied by the English courts and is given on the basis that it will be governed by and construed in accordance with English law.”
The full legal opinion is after the break.
In any case, other investment banks are denying that they use this accounting gimmick, to which I reply, “Yes, and you will respect me in the morning, the check is in the mail, and you won’t cum in my mouth.”
It’s no wonder that the bankruptcy examiner described the behavior as, “grossly negligent.”
Let me make this clear, I have not read the report, it’s 1053 pages long not counting appendices, but Yves Smith did, and she finds that the NY Fed did not exercise due diligence, and cites the footnotes:
Liquidity was an important factor in the stress testing that Lehman was required to run under the CSE Program. After March 2008 when the SEC and FRBNY began onsite daily monitoring of Lehman, the SEC deferred to the FRBNY to devise more rigorous stress‐testing scenarios to test Lehman’s ability to withstand a run or potential run on the bank.5753 The FRBNY developed two new stress scenarios: “Bear Stearns” and “Bear Stearns Light.”5754Lehman failed both tests.5755 The FRBNY then developed a new set of assumptions for an additional round of stress tests, which Lehman also failed.5756 However, Lehman ran stress tests of its own, modeled on similar assumptions, and passed.5757It does not appear that any agency required any action of Lehman in response to the results of the stress testing.
A final note on all this, for some reason, the blogs are doing a good job of covering all of this, but the papers are burying the story on inside pages, with the WSJ placing it on page C7, and the NYT placing it on B2.
I think that the bill really sucks, though not as much as the status quo, and I doubt the “Camel’s nose under the tent” argument, but still from a purely political calculus, this is good news.
I just hope that she’s twisted Blue Dog arms hard, they always seem to the carrot, and never the stick.
The Fed speak is that economic conditions, “warrant exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate for an extended period,” this means that they will not raise rates at their next meeting or probably the one after that.
Most likely you will see at least, and possibly 2 statement changes from the Fed before they raise rates, but they are closing the taps a bit by, “closing the special liquidity facilities that it created to support markets during the crisis,” and it reaffirmed that it will be closing the TALF will on June 30.
Release Date: March 16, 2010 For immediate release
Information received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in January suggests that economic activity has continued to strengthen and that the labor market is stabilizing. Household spending is expanding at a moderate rate but remains constrained by high unemployment, modest income growth, lower housing wealth, and tight credit. Business spending on equipment and software has risen significantly. However, investment in nonresidential structures is declining, housing starts have been flat at a depressed level, and employers remain reluctant to add to payrolls. While bank lending continues to contract, financial market conditions remain supportive of economic growth. Although the pace of economic recovery is likely to be moderate for a time, the Committee anticipates a gradual return to higher levels of resource utilization in a context of price stability.
With substantial resource slack continuing to restrain cost pressures and longer-term inflation expectations stable, inflation is likely to be subdued for some time.
The Committee will maintain the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent and continues to anticipate that economic conditions, including low rates of resource utilization, subdued inflation trends, and stable inflation expectations, are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate for an extended period. To provide support to mortgage lending and housing markets and to improve overall conditions in private credit markets, the Federal Reserve has been purchasing $1.25 trillion of agency mortgage-backed securities and about $175 billion of agency debt; those purchases are nearing completion, and the remaining transactions will be executed by the end of this month. The Committee will continue to monitor the economic outlook and financial developments and will employ its policy tools as necessary to promote economic recovery and price stability.
In light of improved functioning of financial markets, the Federal Reserve has been closing the special liquidity facilities that it created to support markets during the crisis. The only remaining such program, the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility, is scheduled to close on June 30 for loans backed by new-issue commercial mortgage-backed securities and on March 31 for loans backed by all other types of collateral.
Voting for the FOMC monetary policy action were: Ben S. Bernanke, Chairman; William C. Dudley, Vice Chairman; James Bullard; Elizabeth A. Duke; Donald L. Kohn; Sandra Pianalto; Eric S. Rosengren; Daniel K. Tarullo; and Kevin M. Warsh. Voting against the policy action was Thomas M. Hoenig, who believed that continuing to express the expectation of exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate for an extended period was no longer warranted because it could lead to the buildup of financial imbalances and increase risks to longer-run macroeconomic and financial stability. 2010 Monetary Policy Releases
I guess that he had to run, because serial killer Theodore Bundy is dead.
What is his pitch? That, “We need jobs and growth,” and that taxes are too high.
Seriously dude, you used to work for Bear Stearns. The idea that you are going to somehow create jobs, when you were at the epicenter of an epic collapse that you were in part responsible for is simply ludicrous, but he finishes up with this:
We need financial reform legislation but one that gets us toward more jobs and growth, not one that gets us toward more Washington
Does he really think that the voters are stupid enough to hand him the keys to financial reform?
You know, a campaign slogan of, “I know how to stop crime, because I was a criminal,” might sell in Louisiana, but not in New York.
When you compare the $50 million F/A-18, with the let’s-be-serious-here $100 million + F-35, and the fact that with global warming and the potential opening of the Northwest Passage, the Danes will need to patrol around Greenland, it gives a 2nd engine has some real value.
Remember: Consumer protection was the Fed’s bailiwick in the run up to the, so this clearly appears to be a sell out, only, as an equally confused Paul Krugman notes:
…But here’s my puzzle: the bill, as I understand it, calls for an independent Consumer Protection Agency, with a director directly appointed by the president, but one that is “housed” at the Fed.
………
Does it mean that the staff will all be long-term Fed employees? Then that would, to at least some degree, compromise the agency’s independence. Or is it purely a cosmetic issue? If so, who exactly is being diverted?
I’m not prejudging this — there’s a lot to look at. But I’m puzzled.
He is insisting that the bureau (downgraded from agency) would be, “Autonomous from the Fed,” and just co-located.
Resolution authority for large institutions.
I think that the real question here is two fold, transparency and independence.
As to transparency, the question is whether Freedom of Information Act laws apply to this organization as they do to other regulatory institutions, or is it a paranoid secret black hole like the Federal Reserve.
As to independence, the question is whether it gets to, under the limitations of civil service regulations, hire its own staff, and draw up its own budget.
If it does not have this authority, it is a paper tiger.
It’s a PR, so I can quote it in full, and it’s brilliant so I will quote it in full:
On Friday night, Sarah Palin came to Orlando, and attacked Rep. Alan Grayson. This is what she said:
“I got to meet quite a few candidates who are lining up in a contested primary who want to take out Alan Grayson. And I think Alan Grayson — what can you say about Alan Grayson? Piper is with me tonight, so I won’t say anything about Alan Grayson that can’t be said around children. [Good one, Sarah!] But thank you, Florida, for allowing candidates in a contested primary to duke it out over ideas and principles and values, all with the same goal, and that is unseating those who have such a disconnect from the people of America. That’s what the goal is here in this race against Alan Grayson. Please fight hard, and do this for the rest of the country. Fight hard, and send a conservative to Washington, DC.”
Palin, the former half-term Governor, current-nothing and future-even-less, charmed the all-Republican audience with her folksy folksiness and her homespun homespunnery. Atypically, Palin was wearing clothes that she had paid for herself. At the end of the event, she shared her recipe for mooseface pie.
In response to Palin’s attack on Rep Grayson, Grayson actually complimented Palin. Grayson praised Palin for having a hand large enough to fit Grayson’s entire name on it. He thanked Palin for alleviating the growing shortage of platitudes in Central Florida. Grayson added that Palin deserved credit for getting through the entire hour-long program without quitting. Grayson also said that Palin really had mastered Palin’s imitation of Tina Fey imitating Palin. Grayson observed that Palin is the most-intelligent leader that the Republican Party has produced since George W. Bush.
When asked to comment about what effect Palin’s criticism might have, Grayson pointed out, “As the Knave’s horse says in Alice in Wonderland, ‘dogs will believe anything.'” Earlier, as the Orlando Sentinel reported, Grayson said, “I’m sure Palin knows all about politics in Central Florida, since from her porch she can see Winter Park,” which is part of Grayson’s district.
Grayson said that the Alaskan chillbilly was welcome to return to Central Florida anytime, as long as she brings lots of money with her, and spends it. “I look forward to an honest debate with Governor Palin on the issues, in the unlikely event that she ever learns anything about them,” Grayson added, alluding to Politifact’s “liar, liar, pants on fire” evaluation of much of what Palin has said . Scientists are studying Sarah Palin’s travel between Alaska and Florida carefully. They hope to learn more about the flight patterns of that elusive migratory species, the wild Alaskan dingbat.
Let’s be clear here: I don’t think that every Democratic office holder or candidate talk this way, but I think that it is essential for some Democratic office holders or candidates to talk this way.
We also have an attempt to rehabilitate red-baiter Joe McCarthy, and poster child for sex without partners Newt Gingrich, and it gets really, really, stupid.
Seriously let’s give them back to Mexico, and let the federales pry their guns from their cold, dead fingers.
OK, so I was rear ended today, and it’s the first Monday of Daylight Savings Time, and now, I’ve spent the last 1½ hours dealing with my wife having a flat tire.
Well, at least with that, we have our three bad things.
*Not my line, I am quoting insane comic book artist Dave Sim.
This morning, at about 7:10, while stopped behind a school bus, I was rear-ended, and pushed into the car in front of me.
If anyone saw a black 2 door small hatchback driving rapidly along Gwynnbrook east of Owings Mills Blvd with some damage to the grill (or so I assume, I never saw the front), please contact me.
I don’t hurt, at least not yet, and the car drives fine, though I am not sure if I can open the hood which is bent.
Still, on the assumption that these things happen in 3s, I’m expecting demonic possession of our lawn mower.
This is an interesting rumor. While the Mirage F-1 has almost reached the end of the line as an operational asset with the AdA, it remains a capable fighter and should stay in service for about another decade with a few other air forces (Ecuador, Morocco, and Iran). The Iraqis have recently requested that France delivers the 24 pre-embargo F-1s ordered at the time by the regime of Saddam Hussein in 1985. The Iraqi air force has a long, and relatively successful, history with the F-1 and is particularly looking forward to rebuilding its air defense capability with an aircraft it knows well. However, things are somewhat more complicated; there has been a long standing rumor of F-16s going to the Iraqi Air Force instead and lately, it would also appear that the UAE Mirage 2000-9s have entered the fray.
Sorry, but if this is true, and note that it only a rumor, some heads should roll.
While I understand how US Air Force officers might favor the F-16, it is something that they are familiar with, the idea that they would purchase the aircraft in order to clear the way for a defense contractor is over the top.
This appears to be a decision driven by a desire by some Air Force officers to secure a cushy gig at Lockheed-Martin in retirement, not a decision driven by the real needs and capabilities of the Iraqi military.
And going with a Bullpup, which would allow for a longer barrel in a shorter weapon would not hurt either.
A monograph by Major Thomas P. Ehrhart (PDF) is raising a bit of a stir in the blogosphere, and mostly this is used as a stopping off point for the suggestion that the 5.56mm round be replaced with something bigger and heavier.
I think that looking at the abstract gives a good picture of the problem:
Operations in Afghanistan frequently require United States ground forces to engage and destroy the enemy at ranges beyond 300 meters. While the infantryman is ideally suited for combat in Afghanistan, his current weapons, doctrine, and marksmanship training do not provide a precise, lethal fire capability to 500 meters and are therefore inappropriate. Comments from returning soldiers reveal that about fifty percent of engagements occur past 300 meters. Current equipment, training, and doctrine are optimized for engagements under 300 meters and on level terrain. This monograph reviews the small arms capability of the infantry squad from World War I to present. It then discusses current shortfalls with cartridge lethality, weapons and optics configurations, the squad designated marksman concept and finally the rifle qualification course. Potential solutions in each of these areas are discussed.
(emphasis mine)
So, the current standard weapon, the M4 is inadequate beyond 300m, and somewhat marginal at lesser distances, but the M-16 serves ably in this role:
In the table of organization for a light infantry company only the six –M240B 7.62-mm machineguns, two– 60-mm mortars and nine designated marksman armed with either 7.62-mm M14 rifles or accurized 5.56-mm M16A4’s rifles are able to effectively engage the enemy. These weapons systems represent 19 percent of the company’s firepower. This means that 81 percent of the company has little effect on the fight. This is unacceptable.
There are two reasons for this, the M4 has a 14½ inch barrel, and as velocity of the round drops, so does stopping power. The M16, with its 20 inch barrel can effectively engage at the longer distances.
The second problem is that the US Army is does not place sufficient emphasis on marksmanship:
The U.S entered World War I with a small professional Army trained in marksmanship. It filled its ranks with volunteers and conscripts and traditional marksmanship training took too much time. Between World War I and the end of the Vietnam War, the U.S. Army was a conscript Army that relied on suppressive fire, not marksmanship, and trained accordingly. The problem is suppressive fire does not do well with a light, barely lethal bullet at the distances of engagements in Afghanistan.
Note again that the bullet is “barely lethal” when fired from a 14½ inch barrel.
Most of the other western armies have moved to Bullpup, and additionally use a gas driven piston to operate the bolt, as opposed to the gas tube system used on the AR-15 family of weapons, which is sensitive to the accumulation of grime and combustion residues.
While changing the weapon and training is a non-trivial course, it is far more straightforward than a adopting a new round, particularly when there would still be issues with accuracy under the current doctrine, particularly when it is likely that our NATO allies would be disinclined to make the change in a timely manner: It took nearly a decade for the 5.56 to be adopted as NATO standard, and a decade after that for it to become the standard round for infantry weapons.
