Okay, Toni, I've been trying to do your job, and this is the
by Ziks511 - 7/23/12 11:48 AM
In Reply to: I've posted it twice by TONI H
best answer I've been able to find regarding Geithner's complicity.
"The New York Federal Reserve in July 2012, released documents dating back to 2007 which showed that they were aware that banks were lying about their borrowing costs when setting Libor and chose to take no action against them at that time. Released minutes from the Bank of England indicated similarly that the bank and its deputy governor Paul Tucker were also aware as early as November 2007 of industry concerns that the Libor rate was being underreported. In one 2008 document a Barclays employee told a New York Fed analyst, "We know that we're not posting um, an honest LIBOR, and yet we are doing it, because, um, if we didn't do it, it draws, um, unwanted attention on ourselves." [Note that he is a Barclays employee, not the NYFedReserve.]
"The documents show that in early 2008 a memo written by then New York Fed President Tim Geithner to Bank of England chief Mervyn King looked into ways to "fix" Libor. [RTB fix = repair] While the released memos suggest that the New York Fed helped to identify problems related to Libor and press the relevant authorities in the UK to reform, there is no documentation that shows any evidence that Geithner's recommendations were acted upon or that the Fed tried to make sure that they were. In October 2008, several months after Geithner's memo to King, a Barclays employee told a New York Fed representative that Libor rates were still "absolute rubbish." "
RTB text and opinions start here:
So Geithner is likely to have known in 2007, he was concerned, he was attempting to help the Bank of England repair this situation, there is no indication that The Bank of England or The British Bankers Association took any effective action.
Geithner is as aware as any banker is that bad news creates havoc, market crashes and bank crashes, and chose to keep the lid on the issue, but he still attempted to help LIBOR repair itself. Unfortunately either LIBOR, or its constituent banks or the British Bankers Association or the Bank of England, or some combination of those elements could not agree, and continued to screw around with the rate.
Geithner is in no way linked in a fiduciary or legal sense to LIBOR. It is not his responsibility to detonate the bomb, nor is it in his, or anybody's best interest for there to be yet another financial scandal or explosion. All of this rate fixing helped lower the cost of the bailout.
So may we please have an end to this farrago of lies, half-truths and innuendoes in an area that few of us understand and fewer of us care about. So long as it didn't reach into your pocket (and low rates don't) which it couldn't because it was purely about hypothetical bank to bank lending the only people harmed are stock holders for the various banks. That doesn't keep me up at night.
Your only concern here is to destabilize Obama's Cabinet and to try to lose him votes. Fine, we got that sometime back in 2008, early. It's 4 years later. There's nothing to see here, there is no malfeasance, or misfeasance, or duty to report, or anything. This whole thing is not just tissue paper, it is tissue paper still in its gooey liquid form, nothing connects with anything, nothing holds together.
This is an ex-issue, bereft of life, it is no more. If you didn't keep nailing it to a placard 4 times a day it would have rung down the curtain and joined the choir invisible. It should have been pushing up the daisies 4 years ago. Now, if that's all, do you have anything else? Like a Slug? or a Snail or some other slime creature?
Was this reply helpful? (0) (0)