Remember how Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson promised full transparency in spending the $700 billion bailout money? And remember how bailout opponents predicted that the failure to mandate such transparency would allow all sorts of Halliburton-style shenanigans? From the looks of the first private contracts issued by the Treasury Department, it looks like the bailout opponents were correct.
As flagged by BailoutSleuth.com, Paulson is blacking out the sections of government contracts that spell out how much private firms will be paid for their services in administering taxpayer money. Here's a page from the compensation part of a contract with Bank of New York, which has been hired to do some of the bookkeeping (because, of course, the Bush administration is happy to privatize that function):
And here's a page from the compensation part of a Treasury contract with law firm Simpson Thatcher Bartlett - a firm being hired to provide "legal advice" to the government:
Think these are doctored images? Check them out yourself on Treasury's website - the first contract is here (blacked out section on page 25 of the PDF) and the second contract is here (blacked out section on page 5 of the PDF).
So, just to review - within just a few weeks of the bailout passing, our government is blacking out the parts of public contracts that explain how much taxpayer cash private contractors are going to be paid. Perhaps this is what Paulson meant when he promised transparency - by posting these blacked out contracts on the Treasury website, the government is being transparent about exactly where it is being secretive. But I don't think that definition of transparency really flies, do you?
Of course, I wish I was surprised about this - but one of the major reasons I was opposed to this bailout from the beginning was because (as I and others repeatedly wrote) there is no real transparency at all. Now we know what "no transparency at all" really means.
King George the Lesser, and His Appointed Successor, King John the Elder, will both Rule by the Divine Right of Kings ...
The Congress has no responsibility, and the Judiciary has no right, to intercede or even to know what is happening. (Why? Because they said so.)
There is a lot of truth in that parable of "the Prodigal Son," and the most-important truth is this: the Son went ALL THE WAY TO THE BOTTOM, just as far DOWN as he could possibly go, abandoned by every "friend" he had ever known (all of them much wiser than he...), before it finally dawned on him that he was a PRINCE.
The American people do not yet see themselves as "a nation of 300+ million PLAINTIFFS." They don't want to acknowledge that their "elected" leaders are systematically knocking their teeth out, smashing their faces collectively into the dirt, and calmly stealing their wallet. They're still willing to blame it on (or to pin their hopes for salvation upon) "this party" or "that one." "The next President will fix everything."
Simple fact: they're sociopaths. Red shirt, blue shirt ... sociopaths.
Who will ultimately turn against them? Not their own nation, sadly enough, but other nations. The USA is only a moderate part of the world-wide economy, and by now they know they've been SWINDLED.
Michale.....
}}}}
um....Did he SAY that Congressional Democrats were not to blame for the bill? In a word......
no.
{{{{
He certainly implied it..
But, I would be more than willing to concede that point if Rolo is willing to concede that the Democrats ARE as much to blame as the Republicans...
Is he willing to concede that??
Are you??
Michale.....
Paulson as with all Goldman Sachs Alumni cannot be trusted..!
Goldman Sachs is the KBR Haliburton of the of the investment financial world..
And don't you get three quotes before you ok any work being done?
Yet finally, with the kind of gig this is, why isn't the gov't setting the price?
And telling those who would apply for the privilege to take it or leave it?
This should not be a gig in which some company makes a huge amount of income.
They should be doing this at cost plus 5%.
They should not be asking the american people to foot the bill so that their shareholders earn income for their work.
}}}}}}
The same old neocon misdirection crap..
{{{{{
Hardly...
}}}}}
I dare say that quite a few GOPers had to sign on for that horrid thing to pass--but I guess to the small-minded those GOPers weren't "real" republicans.
}}}}}
Sounds like old Democrat misdirection carp...
}}}}
And I do believe--judging from recent history--that the pork is equally if not more appealing to GOPers than to Dems....
{{{{
You are apparently quite ignorant of recent history. Allow me to educate you.
The initial bail out bill had the support of an overwhelming majority of Democrats, President Bush and very few Republicans.
The subsequent bail out bill had a LOT of new pork in it to make it more appealing to Democrats and a LOT of new Patriot Act carp to make it more appealing to Republicans.
Hence, it passed.
These are the facts.. And they are indisputable...
Now, if you want to make the claim that Republicans share a measure of responsibility in this atrocious Bail Out measure, you will get no argument from me.
But I will simply NOT allow you to re-write recent history to make it appear that Democrats are as pure as the driven snow in this atrocity...
This atrocious bail out measure is the love child of Democrats and President Bush with Republicans cheering it on...
Michale.....
{{{{{{
um....Did he SAY that Congressional Democrats were not to blame for the bill? In a word......
}}}}}}}
{{{{{{{
no.
So, while the second document does give the total amount, a portion of the document has been redacted.
Somewhat transparently but not totally.
I am submitting my resume for one of those oversight banking jobs..(I've been a "retail stock broker for 25 years...and have more COMMON sense than these schmoes...I saw this coming years ago..when "wholesaler" from companies like AIG and even Deutche Bank came in with "enhanced" yield products..I could NOT understand..and when I asked questions..it was "umm...err...I'l find out"...
I digress..here is my resume
name: XXXXXXXXXXX
Experience: XXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxxx
References:
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
so so...do I have a shot?
I think you nailed it on you 3 June 08 DN! interview. Our participation in our governance scares them to death. Those redactions are fingers poked right in our eyes.
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/6/3/uprising_an_unauthorized_tour_of_the
....but what I think really scares them is the direct action. When I was at that Exxon Mobil shareholder meeting—
AMY GOODMAN: Give us the scene.
DAVID SIROTA: Yeah, I was at the Exxon Mobil shareholder meeting, and it was with a group of religious shareholders, people representing religious institutions, and they were filing a resolution to ask the company simply to acknowledge and plan for global warming and potential regulation of global warming....So you get this one company to even acknowledge it and change a little bit, you can make a planet-wide impact. And when they stood up and offered this resolution and it looked like it was going to get a significant amount of votes, you saw CEO Rex Tillerson very, very nervous, sort of moving back and forth. He finally was forced to acknowledge that he thought that global warming is actually really an issue, which is a big revelation,
DAVID SIROTA: Well, I think what’s scaring Wall Street is the upsurge in participation. You know, Wall Street and money power has its best influence, its most impactful influence, when people are not paying attention. And I think the crises that we are experiencing now—housing crisis, the financial crisis, the Middle East crisis—is focusing people’s attention. I think what’s particularly scaring Washington, even beyond the political involvement in political campaigns, because when people get involved in political campaigns, it means lobbyists and big money has less power, but what I think really scares them is the direct action. When I was at that Exxon Mobil shareholder meeting—
AMY GOODMAN: Give us the scene.
DAVID SIROTA: Yeah, I was at the Exxon Mobil shareholder meeting, and it was with a group of religious shareholders, people representing religious institutions, and they were filing a resolution to ask the company simply to acknowledge and plan for global warming and potential regulation of global warming.
Why did Democrats join with President Bush to make sure this bail out plan succeeded?? Was it for all the pork it got them???
Michale.....
I dare say that quite a few GOPers had to sign on for that horrid thing to pass--but I guess to the small-minded those GOPers weren't "real" republicans.
Pathetic.
And I do believe--judging from recent history--that the pork is equally if not more appealing to GOPers than to Dems....
Was he bought too?
You're Da Man ! Thanks for all your efforts.
Needless to say, but I'll say it anyway, this bail out was akin to putting the fox in charge of the hen-house. Imagine that!?! Agape.