Suddenly, TARP money looks … bad; Update: Congress gets a clue
posted at 5:00 pm on March 26, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Banks that accepted for taxpayer money to weather the financial crisis now have begun to rethink their position. After watching Congress break out pitchforks and torches over retention bonuses at AIG, suddenly government involvement in their business looks less than welcome, especially mindless fanning of populist rage over what is considered fairly normal compensation options. Banks that can afford to bail out of the bailout are looking for the exit:
For relatively strong banks, doing business with the government may be more trouble than it’s worth.
Banks are publicly declaring their intent to pay back loans from the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, as quickly as they can. They range from Charlotte-based Bank of America Corp., which is the country’s biggest bank, to tiny Iberiabank Corp. in Lafayette, La.
The banks complain about the rules that the U.S. Treasury keeps imposing on them retroactively, sometimes in ways that seem arbitrary or driven by constituents’ anger.
Some say they never needed the money but were cajoled into taking it by the Treasury, which wanted a show of industry support for its program.
We heard a little at the beginning of the bank bailout that some were strongarmed into accepting TARP monies. Wells Fargo reportedly was forced to take $5 billion. Why? The Obama administration and Treasury wanted to keep dissent from their strategy to a minimum, and seeding the industry on the widest possible scale helped demonstrate its necessity — and provided incentive for dissenters to keep their mouths shut.
Local bank TCF, run by William Cooper, had been vocal about its disillusion with the program. Cooper had announced earlier that he wanted to give the money back, but Treasury has yet to create a payback mechanism. Why not? The TARP monies gave Geithner and Congress an opening to dictate compensation policies and lending practices to a much greater depth than prior regulation allowed. They don’t want the money as much as they want the leverage to keep their fingers in the business operations at the banks.
Update: Looks like Congress and the Democrats have finally figured out that chasing bankers and financial specialists out of the markets will not help them get re-elected after the inevitable crash occurs:
From the White House through the halls of Congress, Washington is losing its zeal for an all-out fight over hefty executive bonuses, now that it wants the financial companies it blames for the collapse of the U.S. economy to help clean up the mess. …
The Senate, meanwhile, has put on hold a bill that Democrats unsuccessfully tried to advance last week. It would tax away about 70 percent of the employee bonuses at AIG and other companies getting more than $100 million in bailout money.
Since last fall, AIG has received or been promised more than $182 billion of government money, much of it funneled to investors and foreign banks who held high-odds bets with the company on the U.S. housing market collapsing.
The about-face came as it become clear that financial institutions would not partner with the government on new efforts to restore vital credit flows to businesses and consumers if it meant later being demonized for its use of taxpayer dollars.
The House had actually retreated on its bill of attainder, but inadvertently came up with something even worse — a mechanism to block bonuses deemed by a board at Treasury to be “unreasonable or excessive”. The Senate appears to have decided to ignore the House bill altogether and let the entire issue die a quiet death. Will that convince bankers and financial institutions to partner on Geithner’s tarp program? Only if they’re idiots. (via Power Line)
On the (somewhat) lighter side, that brings us to this cartoon, sent to me by Hot Air reader JK Pendleton:

The AIG outrage certainly looked staged, especially after it became apparent that Geithner knew all about the bonuses — enough to answer questions about them in specifics from Congress on March 3rd. Small wonder banks want to stay out of the clutches of Obama and Geithner.










Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
why wouldn’t they return it, the money is coming with strings to social engineer, that is that.
rob verdi on March 26, 2009 at 5:02 PM
As if socialism is never voluntary.
lorien1973 on March 26, 2009 at 5:03 PM
Scratch the as if in that previous comment :P
lorien1973 on March 26, 2009 at 5:04 PM
Hank Paulson is a sleezebag. Bush only put him there because he was assured of getting him through the confirmation process by that ultimate sleezebag Schumer. Geitner and Paulson are cut from the same cloth, plus Paulson was a big buddy of Obama. This was well orchestrated and planned out before the election. Wonder how all the bankers and wall street guys that gave Obama money and backed him feel now.
suzyk on March 26, 2009 at 5:05 PM
… meanwhile somewhere in the esteemed halls of congress some dimwit Pelosi lacky is feverishly working on a bill to make the payback of TARP funds illegal or something …
gatorboy on March 26, 2009 at 5:06 PM
I hate to be the one to say this to the mental midgets who took the money from the “mob,” oops, I mean the government, but, WE TOLD YOU SO!
http://franklinslocke.blogspot.com/
franklinslocke on March 26, 2009 at 5:07 PM
Suddenly????
sonofdy on March 26, 2009 at 5:07 PM
As it said, lots of smaller well capitalized banks were forced to take money from TARP, to destigmatize the banks that needed the money.
lorien1973 on March 26, 2009 at 5:08 PM
Excellent cartoon.
unclesmrgol on March 26, 2009 at 5:09 PM
A TARP just covers up the problem…
right2bright on March 26, 2009 at 5:11 PM
This is actually good news. Go Team Obama! You’ve convinced them not to take a really bad deal that harms everyone, especially American taxpayers.
Esthier on March 26, 2009 at 5:11 PM
I could see that happening.
myrenovations on March 26, 2009 at 5:15 PM
You don’t understand…it is like Al Capone coming to your house and saying; “I think it is best that you take this money”, hey, you take the money or die.
If they didn’t participate, they would be destroyed…these are gangsters, they (banks) did not have a realistic choice.
Some tried to opt out, but it was made clear, that it would not have been “good for business”.
Did they have a “choice”, yeah, participate or be ruined…if the government wasn’t the government, the RICO act would have been applied.
They made them an offer they couldn’t refuse…
right2bright on March 26, 2009 at 5:16 PM
The Bush administration did the initial strong arming I believe.
WashJeff on March 26, 2009 at 5:18 PM
The Obama administration is Frankenstein… Anybody that dares do business with this administration is making a deal with the devil. That’s obvious at this point. Sending a bus load of ACORN thugs to civilians homes for what purpose, to terrorize them? WTF is up with Americans watching this mafia act and looking the other way. This behavior will eventually makes it’s way into everybody’s lives either directly or indirectly.
The class war between civilians over ideology, religion, race, or any other reason or cause, had better be put on hold while we all fight this government for our freedom and liberty.
If we don’t stop this administration, we will be responsible for destroying the American dream for our children and grand children. As is the case with international terrorism, they will harm people of all colors, faiths, and ideologies. Same thing applies here folks, this administration will harm each and every one of us if we don’t stop them.
Recall, Impeach, Remove… Whatever word you choose to call it, let it be done!
Keemo on March 26, 2009 at 5:19 PM
True, but franklinslocke’s comment does apply to some companies who came to Washington looking for a handout. Many were forced, but many went willingly, little understanding what they were doing or why.
Esthier on March 26, 2009 at 5:19 PM
I heard the head of BBT on Bill Bennett’s show, the regulators told them that everyone need to take TARP funds so that the great unwashed couldn’t tell the sound banks for the shaky ones. Now they are making it a major headache to give the money back. Can you imagine, you have to make an application to return the funds? Please let’s put these folks in charge of more.
Cindy Munford on March 26, 2009 at 5:30 PM
“The Obama administration and Treasury wanted to keep dissent from their strategy to a minimum, and seeding the industry on the widest possible scale helped demonstrate its necessity — and provided incentive for dissenters to keep their mouths shut.”
Well, only partially true. The other thing is that TARP money was only going to go to banks that the government thought were in good shape aside from the “toxic” loans on the books. So getting TARP money was like saying “the government things we are in good shape”. NOT getting TARP money was like saying “the government is going to allow us to fail”. So they accepted TARP money in order to show their depositors that the government had faith in the bank.
What they didn’t count on were the rules changing AFTER they accepted the TARP money and now they are falling over themselves in attempting to get the cash back.
crosspatch on March 26, 2009 at 5:31 PM
What banking monopoly are we looking to avoid? The Libtard congress bank of socialism or the private sector process of the strong rolling up the weak?
ericdijon on March 26, 2009 at 5:32 PM
Small wonder banks want to stay out of the clutches of Obama and Geithner.
petefrt on March 26, 2009 at 5:33 PM
And therein lies the problem. From what I’ve gathered from various financial “talking heads” is that the recent rally on WS and the level of “confidence” that is coming back, has to do with Geithner’s new plan for toxic assets, which he unveiled a few days ago. But this “plan” is predicated on the idea that the private sector is going to be willing to partner with the Fed. Govt. If private investors choose not to tie that large millstone around their necks, then we could be back at square one again and very soon.
Weight of Glory on March 26, 2009 at 5:33 PM
I have seen an ad twice today on TV. It ask you to call this number: 202-225-3127 it is the switch board at the Capitol. You are suposed to call telling them that you support Barack Obama’s budget plan. I urge you all to call and tell them that you don’t support the bankrupting of this country.
I called the guy asked me if Rush Limbaugh told me to call. I don’t even listen to him. I mean sometimes if I’m in the car when he’s on… The guy accused me of thinking Obama is the devil. It was extermely paternalist and demeaning. This is my country how dare he talk to me like that!!! WE HAVE GOT TO GET TERM LIMITS OR SOMETHING TO STOP THE CORRUPTION IN THIS GOVERNMENT!!!!!
If you call the number they will insist on connecting you to some congressman. They connected me to Nancy. Not her but some idiot who answers the phone.
Make this ad backfire. Call and tell them you don’t support this budget.
petunia on March 26, 2009 at 5:35 PM
When it looked like a freebie, many banks probably said “why not take TARP funds”? But when they saw all the strings attached retroactively, banks that could be solvent without TARP probably figured they would do better in the long run without TARP money, and without Obama’s greedy mitts in their pockets. Payback time, one way or another.
Like the inhabitants of ancient Troy, some banks don’t want to look a gift horse in the mouth.
Steve Z on March 26, 2009 at 5:35 PM
I’m expecting the secret service any minute.
petunia on March 26, 2009 at 5:35 PM
This is the 2 edges of Obama’s inept handling of AIG
Good: Companies double thinking taking bailout money
Bad: Companies double thinking partnering up with Feds to kill the toxic assets.
Chuck Schick on March 26, 2009 at 5:36 PM
Retroactive fiddling while the Market burns.
NerObama, found America steel and left her tin.
profitsbeard on March 26, 2009 at 5:36 PM
Why? It was all a part of the bigger plan.
Didn’t the banks say that the initial TARP money was never for troubled assets, but to buy up smaller banks?
PrincipledPilgrim on March 26, 2009 at 5:37 PM
Led by an Abby Normal brain.
Steve Z on March 26, 2009 at 5:37 PM
Why in the name of Beezlebub’s Left Nostril Hair is anyone surprised at the sudden shift in accepting TARP money? In some cases, the money was needed to patch the economic holes created by Lady Frank and the Silver Haired Weasel from Connecticut. Others, who found Don Vito Coreleone’s one deal they couldn’t refuse puts Caliph Hussein al-Chicago and his Merry Megalomaniacs firmly in charge of the economy.
If banks cannot re-pay the money, as they would like, the Caliph and Tiny Tim hold all the cards but one – something about ‘High Crimes and Misdemeanors’.
SeniorD on March 26, 2009 at 5:37 PM
Loan sharks to the rescue!
PrincipledPilgrim on March 26, 2009 at 5:37 PM
Where’s getalife?
You don’t have to report in now junior. I had my dog type that for me.
fogw on March 26, 2009 at 5:39 PM
WTF forcing companies to take tarp? What a waste of our money. “Here take this $. Dont need it? Dont worry spend it on whatever. Oh by the way i want control of your company”
Greed on March 26, 2009 at 5:40 PM
The United States wouldn’t even be eligible to enter the European Union if it wanted to because of its debt levels, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) claimed Thursday.
The European Union’s Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) adopted in 1997 requires a budget deficit to be less than three percent, and requires a national debt beneath 60 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
“We’ve been lectured by France on the fact that we’re not fiscally responsible right now,” Gregg, the would-be commerce secretary, noted with incredulity.
MB4 on March 26, 2009 at 5:42 PM
right2bright on March 26, 2009 at 5:16 PM
Encore! Encore! (holds up lighter at full flame)
calguyintexas on March 26, 2009 at 5:46 PM
You frightened me with that update. I feared that getaclue won that NY special election.
myrenovations on March 26, 2009 at 5:47 PM
Very interesting. This explains a lot.
The adults are in charge now, though. I have to try and remember that.
Del Dolemonte on March 26, 2009 at 5:49 PM
This was primarily a mark-to-market issue from day-1 for the banks… For decades reserves for bank regulatory capital were determined w/ oversight from the OCC bases on informed probability of payback… With mark-to-market, the regulated banks were put into the same situation as leveraged hedge funds…
A simple reversion from mark-to-market would have saved the banks, but not investment banks such as Lehman, Goldman, Merrill and Bear Stearns (Paulson is ex. Goldman), hence TARP which was needed to prop up the Investment Banks, insurance companies and hedge funds which comprise over 70% of the lending market…
Pushing TARP onto the remain banks was at a minimum “window dressing” to create an appearance of stability…
Unfortunately there could be nefarious intentions, and the chaos created by Barry and Turbo-Tax Timmy has kept over 3 trillion dollars of investment capital tied up in cash instruments…
As there are no former “traders” amongst the egg-heads at Treasury and the Fed, they fail to realize that illiquid markets don’t react well to “forced” selling because everyone takes a valuation hit, when one holder panic sells, resetting the valuation on the entire market…
One large multi-billion hedge fund could create a panic (re Soros’ good crisis) or conversely, a fresh hedge fund with $10 billion of capital could rapidly pump up the market with daily bidding (many credits trade on a weekly/monthly basis, and mark-to-market is on an “available bid” basis, not actual transactions)…
Unfortunately big government means serial, one-size-fits-all processes, which is why government never does anything well, except waste money.
Now with the Marxist-Leninists in control of the governement, class-warfare is in full-bloom, and any interaction with the federal government is a disaster for the banks
phreshone on March 26, 2009 at 5:53 PM
Are you sure that’s the right number? I’m getting the voice mail for someone named Ted Prell (I think) with the Republican something or the other.
Knucklehead on March 26, 2009 at 5:54 PM
That makes it a feature, not a bug.
rbj on March 26, 2009 at 5:57 PM
I’m sorry I was really mad… 202-225-3121
petunia on March 26, 2009 at 5:57 PM
Wasn’t TARP absolutely necessary to prevent the end of the world, with women and minorities hit the hardest? :|
Patrick S on March 26, 2009 at 5:58 PM
But this “plan” is predicated on the idea that the private sector is going to be willing to partner with the Fed. Govt. If private investors choose not to tie that large millstone around their necks, then we could be back at square one again and very soon.
Weight of Glory on March 26, 2009 at 5:33 PM
—–
Last numbers I saw, Weight, require “private” investment of 7% of assets’ estimated value, meaning 93% gov’t investment.
So, I buy a condo “estimated” at $100k for $7k, sell it for $50k, and pocket the “profit”. If I do this fast enough, they won’t be able to change the rules on me… How can I lose? (grin)
My guess is this kind of program will only be open to “Friends Of Barry”…
Mew
p.s. did you see the latest on commercial real estate? Soros is expecting a 30% drop in value…
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ahCDwyRZkAUI&refer=worldwide
acat on March 26, 2009 at 6:03 PM
It is 1858 and holding.At some point the voters in some more states are going to tell the feds to shove it.10th amendment.
Army,Navy,Marines,small and for defense only National Guard.the states can handle the Borders and the rest.Dismantle the Fed and have a National Bank with the directors voted on by states in the four regions of the country,with set terms of service.Un Federalize DC make it a tourist atraction and have the residents returned to Maryland.
Finally each state pay it’s own reps and senators an allowance to go to DC to vote on the few things we do allow the feds to do.
Frankly I would bet the Texas Rangers could clean up DC in six months and bring gharges that would stick.
Form a Citizens grand jury to handle political ethics issues?
Col.John Wm. Reed on March 26, 2009 at 6:08 PM
I’m from the Government……….
…………… and I’m here to help.
Seven Percent Solution on March 26, 2009 at 6:09 PM
When you all hear the ad you will see why I was so livid!
It’s as though Barack Obama had an immaculate conception. And all Democrats for that matter. None of them had any part in setting this thing in motion. And now they want us to support the strangling of freedom and prosperity for generations! So Here’s that number: 202-225-3121
I pressed redial and it just rang. I guess Congress doesn’t work after 6:00.
And hey if Rush wants to join me I’d be more than happy to have him. But this is MY anger and I don’t want it diminished by giving Rush credit!!!!
They publish the number they must want to hear directly from us.
petunia on March 26, 2009 at 6:10 PM
Figures, no answer but I’ll try again tomorrow. Or maybe they got tired of people calling to opose it and decided not to take anymore calls from irate people. That would be you Petunia lol
Knucklehead on March 26, 2009 at 6:11 PM
Wait, isn’t this the way it should be?
One of the chief concerns about the bailouts was that everybody was just taking free money with no consequences. Whether or not you agree with the AIG bonus tax, making recipients think twice about whether to accept funds will the effect of companies that don’t *really* need the money not accepting it. Which is exactly what we want, right?
tneloms on March 26, 2009 at 6:18 PM
Thomas Woods makes this point in Meltdown. He was making the point for shorting stocks, and that regulators have prevented people from telling sound companies from the crappy ones, because they’re always telling us how sound they are, the end result that people keep putting money into the unsound ones. The market works when minimally futzed with, because people have their own interests involved.
bikermailman on March 26, 2009 at 6:18 PM
First, more Republicans 85 wanted to kill Frankenstein, than the 83 who wanted to let the monster live and die in peace.
These Weimar (Frankenstein hating) Republicans (Paul Ryan has admitted his problem and is absolved) are part of the problem.
Then today Republicans release an alternative budget to the press WITHOUT ANY NUMBERS OR SPECIFIC BUDGET CUTTING PROPOSALS. Even Gibbsey got to club that baby seal. : (
Heads must roll, this is incompetence taken to a new level.
This level of incompetence does not happen in a vacuum, could Steele be on Soros’ payroll, too?
Angry Dumbo on March 26, 2009 at 6:20 PM
Thank you, but:
Made some good points…too many banks came in like the scavengers some are, and tried to get a free ride.
The free ride though was dependent on some major banks that were coerced by the feds…the feds knew if the majors didn’t buy into it, it would not have worked.
right2bright on March 26, 2009 at 6:27 PM
So the bankers, and wall street think that if they just give the money back the government intrusion will end?
Hah. It has only just begun.
Skandia Recluse on March 26, 2009 at 6:28 PM
Hmm, maybe the government doesn’t want the money returned yet because those loans haven’t accumulated much interest yet. That was the whole idea behind the TARP loans to be paid back with interest at least that’s how it was sold.
goat on March 26, 2009 at 6:29 PM
Term limits. I’ve never really back them before but we have to get corruption out of our government! A career Congress has to be a thing of the past! Amend the constitution so that it is all states at once! Put the D.C. vote in it so it will pass in all states.
Term Limits.
It took FDR to get it for the President. I hope this is what it takes to get it for Congress. Then we don’t have incompetence like Nancy Pelosi as Speaker. Everyone is a citzen and know they have to go home and live with the laws they pass. But it has to be national!
petunia on March 26, 2009 at 6:46 PM
Although it is now clear that TARP has not worked as advertised, for many TARP was a bad idea from day one. Problem is that many Republicans voted for it, including McCain. This TARP vote (74-25-1) is like the Democrats voting for the War. It is that big and will be a main focus of debate in 2010 and 2012.
Republicans are now placed in the unenviable position of saying I didn’t know what I was voting for, I was misled. There are precious few, only 15 Republicans, who voted against TARP (see below) and even fewer who articulated a free market conservative position in doing so. Heck I would have settled for a politician simply saying they were not going to vote for TARP because they didn’t think it would work. Alas we are stuck with the same group of lousy hacks who got us into this mess.
NAYs —25
Allard (R-CO)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cochran (R-MS)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Dole (R-NC)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feingold (D-WI)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Johnson (D-SD)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sanders (I-VT)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)
Wyden (D-OR)
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=2&vote=00213
Angry Dumbo on March 26, 2009 at 6:54 PM
Exactly. With all the hysteria here about “giving away” money only a few have realized that these were loans and not grants. The banks should be highly motivated to get off the public teet. Sort of how living on welfare shouldn’t be fun–there should be an incentive to get back on your feet.
TARP was a fugly mess, both parties didn’t know what there were doing, but then again the whole crisis was a fugly mess that definitely did need some dealing with. If these banks really do pay back the money and get back to business, I’d consider that a huge success.
jonknee on March 26, 2009 at 7:07 PM
If the investor makes money, the Fed makes money too (and conversely, before the Fed loses any the investor is out all of their cash). It would be great if true market prices could get re-instated across the board by private investors while the Fed gets to bring in some cash home. What’s the problem? The banks are going to take a hair cut, but they have already had to make so many steep write downs thanks to mark to market, that might already be all accounted for.
jonknee on March 26, 2009 at 7:11 PM
It will probably be done by the same mysterious, invisible, staffer-without-a-name entity that changed Dodd’s amendment re AIG bonus rules without his knowledge.
I’m pretty sure it’s actually a rogue teleprompter that got passed over for a promotion to HDTVompter.
Yoop on March 26, 2009 at 7:13 PM
USBank CEO, Richard Davis said, “The problems with the U.S. Treasury Department’s program are that its goals and rules have changed since its inception last fall, it’s poorly defined and it’s caused collateral damage to healthy banks.
Davis said he would be “darned” if Minneapolis-based U.S. Bank would suffer collateral damage from the government’s “sloppy attempt at nationalizing the [banking] industry.”
This TARP thing is going to unravel sooner rather than later…and then we will see which banks gleefully accepted funds, and which banks were strongarmed into taking funding.
Hint: OneUnited Bank asked for $50 million in bailout money. Asked for it. Now, which leading member of Congress has close ties to OneUnited?
Second hint: She’s the one who tried to get Geithner over the coals, but actually made Geithner look good.
coldwarrior on March 26, 2009 at 7:50 PM
It’s all about Citigroup. Citi is insolvent and probably was before last September. It’s the only bank that really needed a bailout. But if it were the only one receiving one, Paulson feared a run on Citibank and a permanent stigma attached to its debt and stock. So he strongarmed the other banks into taking the money. NONE of them wanted it.
You had better believe Wells Fargo and Goldman Sachs are paying the government back as soon as they can.
rockmom on March 26, 2009 at 8:16 PM
Amen!
Christian Conservative on March 26, 2009 at 8:56 PM
I can’t wait until local and regional banks discover a market that wants to do business with an institution that can hang a banner in the window that says:
NO TARP MONEY USED HERE! NO STRINGS ATTACHED TO YOUR LOAN!
(Sort of like the “Dolphin Free” label on tuna, and the “No BGH” label on milk)
BobMbx on March 26, 2009 at 9:34 PM
WF could just hand over what they got in the Wachovia snatch to the Treasury and call it even.
BobMbx on March 26, 2009 at 9:45 PM
Just wait until they get done with the big three auto companies.
I predict getaloaf won’t be here next week – big G20 meeting in Britain, right?
darwin-t on March 26, 2009 at 10:12 PM
Come on folks, you’re not looking past the smell, or through the smoke screen. You’re selling our congressional dim-wits to short. Credit them to being smarter than they really sound, or look.
Originally, TARP funds was a silver lining to the thieves on Wall Street, and of course to cover democrats butts that created the mess.
TARP funding so far has been around 350Bil. The toxic asset or government owned bad bank will take about two trillion or more of Wall Streets defunct mortgage assets. So if our benevolent government plays tooth fairy, then why would any troubled Wall Street financial firm want TARP funds? In the end, it will be us taxpayers who will bear the full brunt of irresponsible congressional social engineering, and greedy investors!
byteshredder on March 26, 2009 at 10:27 PM
Best statement on this topic as TARP has indeed become a cover-up for democrats seizing control of the banks, a cover-up for what led to this disaster of TOXIC assetts, and finally a cover-up for the socialization of America.
A statement like that
needsdemands a link to back it up. Got one?DannoJyd on March 26, 2009 at 11:24 PM
Like a poster in a previous thread alluded to:
The banks laid down with Ogabe’s whore, Geithner, and arose with little livestock in their shorts. Imagine that!
SKYFOX on March 27, 2009 at 5:13 AM
Battered wife syndrome:
[beat] [beat] [beat]
“Ah c’mon baby. You know I didn’t mean it…”
Disgusting with individuals. Disgusting with Congress.
dominigan on March 27, 2009 at 8:16 AM
I’ve said this all along. The original plan sought to push money via TARP through strong banks as well as help bolster others.
They are now being tarred and feathered if they run an ad campaign as abusing the funds, nevermind the idea that the government will start putting them under the bonus microscope.
They will bail out on the government.
AnninCA on March 27, 2009 at 10:36 AM
I’ve already seen that here…
ladyingray on March 27, 2009 at 11:21 AM
Loved that grilling Geithner was getting…”Constitution??? Huh? Wha?”
Dr. ZhivBlago on March 27, 2009 at 6:51 PM