More

WaPo's Stephen Stromberg Seems Unclear On The Concept Of Geithner's Ties To Wall Street

First Posted: 05/28/09 06:12 AM ET Updated: 05/25/11 02:15 PM ET

Tim Geithner

Last week, the Washington Post's Stephen Stromberg blogged about how sick and tired he was of poor Tim Geithner being accused of having connections and entanglements to Wall Street, and has decided that people who pen so-called "anti-Geithner diatribes" (like we do, apparently!) should be quiet and rate him on whether the "policy" he devises "is credible," and not on whether he's too closely tied to the people who will be governed by those policies. I thought that you can do both things! I also thought that the two things might be connected! But Stromberg objected, saying, "Indicting Geithner by associating him with vaguely defined, almost certainly fictitious corporate conspiracies is a cheap shot."

He's really going to be cheesed at the New York Times, then, and their Homerian cheap shot testament to all of Geithner's "vaguely defined" and "almost certainly fictitious" associations!

Stromberg, writing in defense, mainly strove to assert that Geithner had been a dedicated public servant all his life with no connections to the financial kingpins. Stromberg cited a "heated exchange" with Damon Silvers over the matter in his post:

Take this heated exchange yesterday between Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and Damon Silvers, the associate general counsel of the AFL-CIO and a member of a panel supervising the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).


At an oversight hearing, the AFL-CIOer prefaced his final question for the Treasury secretary with a dose of guilt-by-association, indicating that he practiced law, while Geithner was "in banking." Geithner wouldn't let Silvers finish. He's never been in banking, the Treasury secretary bristled.

A long time ago, perhaps?

Nope.

Investment banking?

Never done that, either.

In fact, Geithner interjected, he's been in public service his whole career. Silvers conceded and went on with his question.

I'm pretty sure that neither The Ford Foundation or Kissinger And Associates, where Geithner has worked, are public sector firms, but this is beside the point. Geithner has spent the past five or so years as the President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. To the untrained eye, that position can sound sort of "public servanty." But here's what today's NYT exegesis says about it:

When the New York Fed was looking for a new president, both former secretaries were advisers to the bank's search committee and supported Mr. Geithner's candidacy. [Robert] Rubin's seal of approval carried particular weight because he was by then a senior official at Citigroup.

Mr. Weill, Citigroup's architect, was a member of the New York Fed board when Mr. Geithner arrived. "He had a baby face," Mr. Weill recalled. "He didn't have a lot of experience in dealing with the industry."

But, he added, "He quickly earned the respect of just about everyone I know. His knowledge, his willingness to listen to people."

[...]

At the New York Fed, top executives of global financial giants fill many seats on the board. In recent years, board members have included the chief executives of Citigroup and JPMorgan Chase, as well as top officials of Lehman Brothers and industrial companies like General Electric.

In theory, having financiers on the New York Fed's board should help the president be Washington's eyes and ears on Wall Street. But critics, including some current and former Federal Reserve officials, say the New York Fed is often more of a Wall Street mouthpiece than a cop.

In other words, Geithner was hand-selected to oversee the people that did the selecting. And so, a cozy relationship was born! But Stromberg seemed to feel that there was ample evidence of Geithner's purity of soul:

Part of Geithner's appeal to the Obama camp is that it's pretty hard to accuse him of being a tool of corporate America, a shill for big finance, or whatever alarmist moniker you prefer, since he's been taking home relatively tiny paychecks of one type or another his whole career. So it's a little astonishing that this Geithner-as-Wall-Street-servant meme still has life -- and in an oversight panel on the substance of TARP policy, no less.

Yes. Those 'relatively tiny paychecks!" Why according to Bloomberg News, in 2008, Geithner earned a paupers wage!

Geithner, confirmed by the Senate yesterday, earned $411,200 in 2008 and the first two weeks this year as president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. As the country's 75th Treasury secretary, Geithner makes an annual salary of $191,300, the Treasury's Web site says.

Really! It's appalling that we expect people to be able to live on just a few hundreds of thousands of dollars. Was there any silver lining for this miserable life of public service to which Geithner could cling?

One consolation may be a $434,668 severance payment from the New York Fed that Geithner listed as an asset on his disclosure form, released today in Washington. The value of Geithner's holdings ranged between $770,000 and $1.8 million.

Anyway, that Times piece is eight pages of Tim Geithner having lunch with everyone who runs a bank on Wall Street, on and on, forever, driving home a singular point:

An examination of Mr. Geithner's five years as president of the New York Fed, an era of unbridled and ultimately disastrous risk-taking by the financial industry, shows that he forged unusually close relationships with executives of Wall Street's giant financial institutions.

What a cheap shot!

[Would you like to follow me on Twitter? Because why not? Also, please send tips to tv@huffingtonpost.com -- learn more about our media monitoring project here.]

FOLLOW HUFFPOST MEDIA

Last week, the Washington Post's Stephen Stromberg blogged about how sick and tired he was of poor Tim Geithner being accused of having connections and entanglements to Wall Street, and has decided th...
Last week, the Washington Post's Stephen Stromberg blogged about how sick and tired he was of poor Tim Geithner being accused of having connections and entanglements to Wall Street, and has decided th...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 44
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PhilipTaylor
Legalized Bribery is an Oxymoron - must END
07:07 AM on 04/29/2009
The Executives and Employees have taken so much of the Profits from their banks the Banks are Bankrupt!

These people who in 1980 made 20 times the average worker NOW MAKE 400 Times the Avg Worker!

Remember $10 to $100 Million Christmas Bonuses on top of $10 to $50 Million salaries!

They ruined their OWN Banks and want to continue while WE the taxpayers Bail their Banks OUT!

THEY RUINED THEIR OWN BANKS!
11:52 AM on 04/28/2009
The NYT article on Geithner's links to Wall Street could hardly be any more damning. But then there's the remarkable, stunning, intellectual and ethical abortion of an idea that was his apparent suggestion of having the government, i.e. the tax-payer, back ALL (private) bank debt (!). A pot-head high school student would not come up with an idea this misguided, yet BO appoints Geithner to run Treasury?

Whoa! as Keanu would say.
11:56 AM on 04/28/2009
At this stage, it's increasingly clear that Mr. Obama is largely at the mercy of the banking industry, and that he's little more than a charming, personable mouthpiece who's being paid to smile and read from a teleprompter.

Yet, there is a lesson to be learned from this: the leaders of other nations now have clear evidence that the much vaunted US capitalist system is not truly about "free markets", but instead an increasingly barefaced charade fully controlled by the (increasingly supranational) financial industry. These vampires are currently engaged in a massive-scale suction frenzy, extracting as much as they possibly can from the pockets of the US tax-payers (and their children) before they rebalance their portfolios, move, and set up shop elsewhere in the planet, leaving the US (and its creditors) holding the bag.

If I were a foreign leader, I would "quarantine" the US financial system via legal/regulatory means (not an easy feat now that so many have drunk the toxic "globalization" kool-aid) to the greatest possible extent, to prevent these banking parasites from (further) infecting other financial markets worldwide. Rational parasites will kill their host if they know there is a "next host" they can jump to. By limiting the mobility of the banking vampires, foreign leaders would be doing their countries, and the US taxpayers, a great favor (unless the idea of ending up a spider's meal is appealing to them).
11:12 AM on 04/28/2009
Ok so Geithner IS in bed with all of the bankers.

My real problem with him is that he should be inspiring confidence in the American people, but he comes off like a SLEAZY fast talking used car salesman
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jcwtts1
Elections have consequences
10:20 AM on 04/28/2009
Look, I understand that to a middle school teacher 450,000 or assets totaling 1.8 million seems like a lot, but get a grip on yourself. On wall street it is tip money. How much did the head of the ny stock exchange get when he retired, 150 million, more? Look. The point is that money is relative. Anyone remember when they said Jordan lost a million dollars playing golf and everyone freaked out... and then it came out that he made that much in interest ever two weeks. Money is relative and 450,000 a year is no money on wall street.
10:58 AM on 04/28/2009
poor poor babies!
11:14 AM on 04/28/2009
and these people are obviously worth the money, because look what a good job they all did making their company's profitable
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
iafn
09:41 AM on 04/28/2009
Sorry, Jason, but this is just ridiculous.

First of all, Geithner worked for Kissinger and Associates RIGHT OUT OF SCHOOL, for three years. Are you representing your first employer's interests on this blog? Bringing that up is just silly.

Second, I don't see the Ford Foundation on his bio; your information might be wrong. His FATHER was a program official at the Ford Foundation, where he was part of the "evil conspiracy" that brought the microlending to the world. Bastards!

Third, taking a $400K/year job IS a sacrifice, when you could make 100x that in the private sector for your knowledge, experiences, and relationships.

Finally, while the IMF, the Fed, etc. are technically private, it is just too hard to imagine somebody willfully taking that road to economic gain when it's SO much easier to just work inside the system. Nobody had a big debate about whether Jamie Dimon is greedy or corrupt, right?

I think Bernanke and Geithner are an excellent teaming of an outsider academic and a guy who knows the world he's regulating from close proximity. The fact that we have a guy who does know the lay of the land but HASN'T ever worked inside these institutions is something of a miracle, to be honest. He hasn't been bold, necessarily, and hasn't been as confrontational as a lot of us would want. But he deserves a little humility from his critics that maybe, just maybe, he knows what he's doing better than we do.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
LizM
My micro-bio is too long for this space.
07:03 AM on 05/03/2009
That was a pleasure to read.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Genep34
stop the nightmare, end the GOP
08:48 AM on 04/28/2009
Sorry but I disagree. I think Geitner will be vindicated - his resume is filled with pluses that have nothing to do with Wall Street.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PhilipTaylor
Legalized Bribery is an Oxymoron - must END
07:21 AM on 04/28/2009
Why is Geithner pretending his $1 Trillion give-away will help Wall Street?

It will simply line the pockets of the Executives who are already "F@T" from $12.8 Trillion that the FED and Treasury pumped in that did not even scratch the surface for the Empty Shell (Zombie) Banks pi1fered of Profits by the Employees!

Goldman runs Around Waving Big Fake Profits Saying they are Paying Back TARP!

BUT! BUT! BUT! BUT! With $1 Billion in Toxic Debt per employee is it REAL?

Goldman has over $1 Billion in Toxic Debts/Assets per employee!
____________________________________________________
Goldman has $30 Trillion in Toxic Debts/Assets
Goldman has 27,898 Employees
Goldman has $1,075,345,903 per employee in Toxic Debts/Assets]

JPM has over $390 Million in Toxic Debts/Assets per employee!
___________________________________________________
JPM has Astonishing $88 Trillion in Toxic Assets/Debts!
JPM has 225,000 employees
JPM has $391,000,000 per employee in Toxic Debts/Assets
photo
flossophy
Liberalism is not liberal.
02:46 PM on 04/28/2009
Perhaps this is crony S0cialism...

Democrats run all of the major Wall Street institutions...
Democrats give significantly more to Democrat candidates... including Obi-wan.

Perhaps you're on the wrong side of the ideol0gical divide?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PhilipTaylor
Legalized Bribery is an Oxymoron - must END
07:18 AM on 04/28/2009
Why is Geithner pretending his $1 Trillion give-away will help Wall Street?

It will simply line the pockets of the Executives who are already "FAT" from $12.8 Trillion that the FED and Treasury pumped in that did not even scratch the surface for the Empty Shell (Zombie) Banks pilfered of Profits by the Employees!

Goldman runs Around Waving Big Fake Profits Saying they are Paying Back TARP!

BUT! BUT! BUT! BUT! With $1 Billion in Toxic Debt per employee is it REAL?

Goldman has over $1 Billion in Toxic Debts/Assets per employee!
____________________________________________________
Goldman has $30 Trillion in Toxic Debts/Assets
Goldman has 27,898 Employees
Goldman has $1,075,345,903 per employee in Toxic Debts/Assets]

JPM has over $390 Million in Toxic Debts/Assets per employee!
___________________________________________________
JPM has Astonishing $88 Trillion in Toxic Assets/Debts!
JPM has 225,000 employees
JPM has $391,000,000 per employee in Toxic Debts/Assets
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
davidpkronmiller
06:47 AM on 04/28/2009
I have no problem with folks debating different approaches to solving our economic crisis but this anti-Geithner mess, considering he doesn't have a full team yet, and has only been in the position a short while, while inheriting a multi-facetted crisis (those thinking this is only the banking sector I fear only see trees) - it's all a distraction and notice none of these folks have a solution of their own. At least not a coherent one outside of nationalizing everything - which a good chunk of people in this country aren't too ready for yet.

Who would you like to see in this post other then Geithner? How would they differ from Geithner? What actions would you like the federal government to make? Don't we need someone familiar with the old system in order to change and improve it? I mean the above article kinda makes it a blunt point that he's relatively new....

Can these questions be answered? By anyone?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Carolab
Walking an 87-year-old in the sand isn't easy
01:19 AM on 04/28/2009
KUCINICH: BRING FED UNDER TREASURY

Washington D.C. - Congressman Kucinich made the following statement addressing news reports that President Obama and advisors are considering nationalizing parts of the U.S. banking system. In the statement, Kucinich urges Congress not to nationalize banks, but to place the Federal Reserve under the Treasury Department.

"At a time when millions of Americans are losing jobs, homes, and pensions, our government is prepared to give another trillion to the banks. We are ready to compound the moral hazard by nationalizing banks, which are allegedly profit-making entities.

"THIS IS ANTIDEMOCRATIC. INSTEAD OF NATIONALIZING BANKS, WE SHOULD NATIONALIZE THE MONEY SYSTEM BY PLACING THE FEDERAL RESERVE UNDER THE U.S. TREASURY, END THE FRACTIONAL RESERVE SYSTEM AND STOP BANKS FROM LENDING CREDIT INTO CIRCULATION. THEN INSTEAD OF BORROWING MONEY AND CREATING DEBT, GOVERNMENT CAN SPENT THE MONEY INTO CIRCULATION to rebuild and restore America with money for jobs housing, healthcare and education I will soon be introducing legislation to accomplish this.

"Banking is not a proper function of the government, but OVERSIGHT is. The Treasury Department should not be outsourcing to the Fed its oversight responsibilities. The Fed, which failed miserably to oversee the banks, should be put under Treasury instead.

"Its time for the government to operate in the public interest, not in the interest of private banks. Its time to stop bailing out banks and begin building up America."

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=9407
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Carolab
Walking an 87-year-old in the sand isn't easy
03:47 AM on 04/28/2009
Dennis Kucinich Explains Our Current Economic Situation (C-Span)

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2864340017700873183
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Carolab
Walking an 87-year-old in the sand isn't easy
01:18 AM on 04/28/2009
Nice, Jason, but you left out the part where the New York Times ADMITTED the Fed is private.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Carolab
Walking an 87-year-old in the sand isn't easy
01:21 AM on 04/28/2009
QUOTE:

"Sitting like a fortress in the heart of Manhattan’s financial district, the New York Fed is, by dint of the city’s position as a world financial center, the most powerful of the 12 regional banks that make up the Federal Reserve system.

The Federal Reserve was created after a banking crisis nearly a century ago to manage the money supply through interest-rate policy, oversee the safety and soundness of the banking system and act as lender of last resort in times of trouble.

The Fed relies on its regional banks, like the New York Fed, to carry out its policies and monitor certain banks in their areas. The regional reserve banks are unusual entities.

They are PRIVATE and their shares are owned by financial institutions the bank oversees. Their net income is paid to the Treasury.

At the New York Fed, top executives of global financial giants fill many seats on the board. In recent years, board members have included the chief executives of Citigroup and JPMorgan Chase, as well as top officials of Lehman Brothers and industrial companies like General Electric."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Carolab
Walking an 87-year-old in the sand isn't easy
01:27 AM on 04/28/2009
In fact, the ENTIRE INTERNATIONAL MONETARY SYSTEM IS PRIVATE.

And the key issue here is the CURRENCY. Our Currency was NEVER EVER to have been created and issued by a PRIVATE BANKING SYSTEM. In fact, the Constitution did not allow for a CENTRAL BANK AT ALL. WHY? Because the founding fathers knew that the English and European central banks were private and controlled their respective governments by controlling the currency. They tried through our history to keep control over ours -- in fact the Revolution was fought over the CURRENCY, NOT "tea taxes".

And the Federal Reserve Banking Act of 1913 changed everything, putting not only a central bank in place, but one run by private bankers--both foreign as well as domestic. And it created their debt-based inflationary usurious fiat money and fractional reserve banking system that has gotten us into this mess. In 1930, a plan was hatched to create an international bankers' bank and eventually bring every nation's central banks under its control with ONE global currency.

NOW THEY ARE DOING IT:

The Tower of Basel: Secretive Plans for the Issuing of a Global Currency Do we really want the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) issuing our global currency by Ellen Brown

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13239
11:48 PM on 04/27/2009
i have some foxes guarding my hen house --
i cannot understand why my hens keep disappearing ??
i had this problem before --
my neighbor said that maybe the foxes i was using awhile back could be used again -
since they were the ones who were there when the hens starting disappearing, so
they were the best qualified to find out where they went.
hmmmm ?
what do you think ?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Samalabear
09:40 AM on 04/28/2009
ROTFL.
11:01 AM on 04/28/2009
Geithner/Summers are excellent foxes!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:44 PM on 04/27/2009
Uh, he's a banker. How shocking is the news that bankers have often worked for banks in the company of other bankers?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:54 AM on 04/28/2009
uh, what exactly is your definition of a banker? he is not a banker.
11:02 AM on 04/28/2009
Really, being President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York is not a banker?
11:20 PM on 04/27/2009
i am curious of what it will take to convince obama supporters that they have been fooled/duped/swindled ??? ---
obama is a public relations created savior whose greatest talent is in appearing to support the very people whom his policies rob !!! ---
the Business Party, for whom he speaks, chose well in placing him into the presidency. ---
check out this link =>
http://adage.com/moy2008/article?article_id=131810
for insight into the workings of the Amorican election process --
--
Obama won Advertising Age's Marketer of the Year:

How they voted
Marketer % of votes
Obama 36.1%
Apple 27.3%
Zappos 14.1%
Nike 9.4%
Coors 8.7%
McCain 4.5%
Source: Meridia ARS
01:31 AM on 04/28/2009
Remember...........Obama is an Illinois politician.

You cant get elected to the board of the Humane Society in Illinois without being corrupt.

This is a guy who came from and only knows one way...........corrupt politics.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Genep34
stop the nightmare, end the GOP
08:49 AM on 04/28/2009
That is nonsense.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mountainweb
Conservative Commonsense
10:55 PM on 04/27/2009
WaPo is CLUELESS! Next topic!