HOW THE BRIBES WERE PAID TO THE PUBLIC OFFICIALS INVOLVED

Share SHARE ON SOCIAL MEDIA

HOW THE BRIBES WERE PAID TO THE PUBLIC OFFICIALS INVOLVED

Public officials and Silicon Valley oligarchs exchanged felony bribes and manipulated government actions in order to benefit themselves and harm us. These are the facts including the lists of bribes, attacks and covert financing routes!

Famous members of Congress lie, cheat, steal and manipulate public records in order to protect their trillions of dollars of Google, Facebook, Netflix, Tesla and Amazon stock market payola.

Now the public is working together, around the globe, to end this corruption forever by exposing every single one of the corrupt and all of their dirty secrets!

Elon Musk, for example has over 1000 people who work at Goldman Sachs and other "operative firms", including:

These players spend all of their time manipulating markets and stocks which are concurrently owned by politicians making policy which supports Musk.

In recent history, one of the best examples of dirty insider trading political bribe routes comes from UK-based day trader Navinder Singh Sarao, who is credited with the flash market crash of 2010. He managed to pocket $40 million through illegal trading of futures spanning several years.

Market manipulation can take many forms, and unfortunately new ones keep popping up. The most common, however, broadly fall under 3 categories:

• Spreading false information about a company

• Rigging quotes or prices in order to create a deceptive picture of the level of demand for specific stocks

• Using fraudulent methods to limit the number of shares available to the public

Here's a rundown of common manipulation techniques used by the tech Cartel  bribery network:

Churning

Some day traders make profits by buying stocks, holding for just a few seconds and then offloading them many times a day. This is a legal trading method because the trader is exposed to some risk for the duration they hold the shares no matter how infinitesimal.

Wash Trading

Wash trading is closely related to churning. It involves selling and repurchasing the same stock so as to give the impression of high trade volumes and inflate prices. Related: Bullish Developments Fail To Prop Up Gold Prices

But in contrast to churning, wash trading is an illegal practice because it constitutes buying shares, usually in large quantities, from one broker and selling them immediately through another broker without ever actually owning the shares. This is done in a bid to give a deceptive picture of volumes and inflate prices.

Pump and Dump

This is a Solyndra-type market manipulation method that involves disseminating bogus information to millions of retail investors in a bid to increase interest in a particular stock and drive up prices. The promoters then dump their holdings once the stock climbs. It’s about as easy as it comes, but involves spending on marketing and boiler rooms.

Bear Raiding

A bear raid is an illegal practice whereby a group of investors gang up and conspire to push down the price of a stock through concerted short-selling and spreading of false rumors about the target company. The practice is common with traders who have opened large short-positions in a bullish stock.

Market Cornering

Cornering the market involves purchasing enough stock in a company in order to be able to manipulate and control prices. Lightly traded stocks are more vulnerable to this dangerous scheme.

Right now, ranking high on the SEC’s list of market manipulations to worry about is crypto because no one’s really patrolling this segment to pinpoint. This is where pump and dump schemes will flourish because it’s that much more difficult to identity the perpetrators and bring them down—especially when the targeted scheme involves off-the-radar crypto as opposed to something as big as bitcoin. 

But that doesn’t mean that bitcoin is being manipulated, too. When the Japanese-based Mt Gox crypto exchange was robbed of some $460 million in cryptocurrency, it was only after reports of massive manipulation behind the scenes that allegedly involved the use of fake accounts and transactions to bolster trading volume and make it appear that it was worth more than it was.

Certain California State officials, Obama White House Staff and Federal Agency staff accepted bribes from Silicon Valley Oligarchs and Investment Bank Cartels. They were bribed with: Billions of dollars of Google, Twitter, Facebook, Tesla, Netflix and Sony Pictures stock and stock warrants which is never reported to the FEC; Billions of dollars of Google, Twitter, Facebook, Tesla, Netflix and Sony Pictures search engine rigging and shadow-banning which is never reported to the FEC; Free rent; Male and female prostitutes; Cars; Dinners; Party Financing; Sports Event Tickets; Political campaign printing and mailing services "Donations"; Secret PAC Financing; Jobs in Corporations in Silicon Valley For The Family Members of Those Who Take Bribes And Those Who Take Bribes; "Consulting" contracts from McKinsey as fronted pay-off gigs; Overpriced "Speaking Engagements" which are really just pay-offs conduited for donors; Gallery art; Private jet rides and the use of Government fuel depots (ie: Google handed out NASA jet fuel to staff); Recreational drugs; Real Estate; Fake mortgages; The use of Cayman, Boca Des Tores, Swiss and related money-laundering accounts; The use of HSBC, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs and Deustche Bank money laundering accounts and covert stock accounts; Free spam and bulk mailing services owned by Silicon Valley corporations; Use of high tech law firms such as Perkins Coie, Wilson Sonsini, MoFo, Covington & Burling, etc. to conduit bribes to officials; and other means now documented by us, The FBI, the FTC, The SEC, The FEC and journalists..."

The pool list of political payola scams includes these dirty favorites used by Google, Facebook, Netflix, Tesla, Sony Pictures and optimized by the Jeff Epstein class of insiders:

Pools

Agreements, often written, among a group of traders to delegate authority to a single manager to trade in a specific stock for a specific period of time and then to share in the resulting profits or losses."[5] In Australia section 1041B prohibits pooling.

Churning

When a trader places both buy and sell orders at about the same price. The increase in activity is intended to attract additional investors, and increase the price.

Stock bashing

This scheme is usually orchestrated by savvy online message board posters (a.k.a. "Bashers") who make up false and/or misleading information about the target company in an attempt to get shares for a cheaper price. This activity, in most cases, is conducted by posting libelous posts on multiple public forums. The perpetrators sometimes work directly for unscrupulous Investor Relations firms who have convertible notes that convert for more shares the lower the bid or ask price is; thus the lower these Bashers can drive a stock price down by trying to convince shareholders they have bought a worthless security, the more shares the Investor Relations firm receives as compensation. Immediately after the stock conversion is complete and shares are issued to the Investor Relations firm, consultant, attorney or similar party, the basher/s then become friends of the company and move quickly to ensure they profit on a classic Pump & Dump scheme to liquidate their ill-gotten shares. (see P&D)

Pump and dump

A pump and dump scheme is generally part of a more complex grand plan of market manipulation on the targeted security. The Perpetrators (Usually stock promoters) convince company affiliates and large position non-affiliates to release shares into a free trading status as "Payment" for services for promoting the security. Instead of putting out legitimate information about a company the promoter sends out bogus e-mails (the "Pump") to millions of unsophisticated investors (Sometimes called "Retail Investors") in an attempt to drive the price of the stock and volume to higher points. After they accomplish both, the promoter sells their shares (the "Dump") and the stock price falls like a stone, taking all the duped investors' money with it.

Runs

When a group of traders create activity or rumors in order to drive the price of a security up. An example is the Guinness share-trading fraud of the 1980s. In the US, this activity is usually referred to as painting the tape.[6] Runs may also occur when trader(s) are attempting to drive the price of a certain share down, although this is rare. (see Stock Bashing)

Ramping (the market)

Actions designed to artificially raise the market price of listed securities and to give the impression of voluminous trading, in order to make a quick profit.[7]

Wash trade

In a wash trade the manipulator sells and repurchases the same or substantially the same security for the purpose of generating activity and increasing the price.

Bear raid

In a bear raid there is an attempting to push the price of a stock down by heavy selling or short selling.[8]

Lure and Squeeze

This works with a company that is very distressed on paper, with impossibly high debt and consistently high annual losses, but very few assets, making it look as if bankruptcy must be imminent. The stock price gradually falls as people new to the stock short it on the basis of the poor outlook for the company, until the number of shorted shares greatly exceeds the total number of shares that are not held by those aware of the lure and squeeze scheme (call them "people in the know"). In the meantime, people in the know increasingly purchase the stock as it drops to lower and lower prices. When the short interest has reached a maximum, the company announces it has made a deal with its creditors to settle its loans in exchange for shares of stock (or some similar kind of arrangement that leverages the stock price to benefit the company), knowing that those who have short positions will be squeezed as the price of the stock sky-rockets. Near its peak price, people in the know start to sell, and the price gradually falls back down again for the cycle to repeat.

Quote stuffing

Quote stuffing is made possible by high-frequency trading programs that can execute market actions with incredible speed. However, high-frequency trading in and of itself is not illegal. The tactic involves using specialized, high-bandwidth hardware to quickly enter and withdraw large quantities of orders in an attempt to flood the market, thereby gaining an advantage over slower market participants.[9]

Cross-Product Manipulation

A type of manipulation possible when financial instruments are settled based on benchmarks set by the trading of physical commodities, for example in United States Natural Gas Markets. The manipulator takes a large long (short) financial position that will benefit from the benchmark settling at a higher (lower) price, then trades in the physical commodity markets at such a large volume as to influence the benchmark price in the direction that will benefit their financial position.

Spoofing (finance)

Spoofing is a disruptive algorithmic trading entity employed by traders to outpace other market participants and to manipulate commodity markets. Spoofers feign interest in trading futures, stocks and other products in financial markets creating an illusion of exchange pessimism in the futures market when many offers are being cancelled or withdrawn, or false optimism or demand when many offers are being placed in bad faith. Spoofers bid or offer with intent to cancel before the orders are filled. The flurry of activity around the buy or sell orders is intended to attract other high-frequency traders (HFT) to induce a particular market reaction such as manipulating the market price of a security. Spoofing can be a factor in the rise and fall of the price of shares and can be very profitable to the spoofer who can time buying and selling based on this manipulation.

Price-Fixing

A very simple type of fraud where the principles who publish a price or indicator conspire to set it falsely and benefit their own interests. The Libor scandal for example, involved bankers setting the Libor rate to benefit their trader's portfolios or to make certain entities appear more creditworthy than they were.

High Closing (finance)

High closing is an attempt to manipulate the price of a security at the end of trading day to ensure that it closes higher than it should. Usually by putting in manipulative trades close to closing.

Cornering the market

In cornering the market the manipulators buy sufficiently large amount of a commodity so they can control the price creating in effect a monopoly. For example, the brothers Nelson Bunker Hunt and William Herbert Hunt attempted to corner the world silver markets in the late 1970s and early 1980s, at one stage holding the rights to more than half of the world's deliverable silver.[10] During the Hunts' accumulation of the precious metal, silver prices rose from $11 an ounce in September 1979 to nearly $50 an ounce in January 1980.[11] Silver prices ultimately collapsed to below $11 an ounce two months later,[11] much of the fall occurring on a single day now known as Silver Thursday, due to changes made to exchange rules regarding the purchase of commodities on margin.[12]

Of course all of these things are dne in covert syncronization with Google insiders who control what media the market sees and the Pelosi and Feinstein type of Senators who control the policy that will affect these outcomes.

- "DARK MONEY" IS THE WAY THAT CORRUPT POLITICAL CRIMINALS EXCHANGE COMPENSATION, BRIBES AND INFLUENCE WITHOUT THE FBI CATCHING THEM

- This is about a group of tech oligarchs, and their corrupt Senators, who commit crimes in order to manipulate over a trillion tax dollars (YOUR MONEY) into their, and their friends pockets.

- They are felons yet they control some of the offices of the agencies who are supposed to arrest them. Silicon Valley bought K Street and U.S. Senators, gave them more Dark Money than history has ever seen and then had giant tech-law firms bribe, hit-job and blockade any attempts to solve the problem.

- Some of the largest bribes in American history were paid via billions of dollars of pre-IPO cleantech stock, insider trading, real estate, Google search engine rigging and shadow-banning, sex workers, revolving door jobs, nepotism, state-supported black-listing of competitors and under-the-table cash. Why are these Silicon Valley Oligarchs and their K-Street law firms and lobbyists immune from the law?

U.S. Senators, Agency Heads and Congress are bribed with: Billions of dollars of Google, Twitter, Facebook, Tesla, Netflix and Sony Pictures stock and stock warrants which is never reported to the FEC; Billions of dollars of Google, Twitter, Facebook, Tesla, Netflix and Sony Pictures search engine rigging and shadow-banning which is never reported to the FEC; Free rent; Male and female prostitutes; Cars; Dinners; Party Financing; Sports Event Tickets; Political campaign printing and mailing services "Donations"; Secret PAC Financing; Jobs in Corporations in Silicon Valley For The Family Members of Those Who Take Bribes And Those Who Take Bribes; "Consulting" contracts from McKinsey as fronted pay-off gigs; Overpriced "Speaking Engagements" which are really just pay-offs conduited for donors; Private jet rides and use of Government fuel depots (ie: Google handed out NASA jet fuel to staff); Real Estate; Fake mortgages; The use of Cayman, Boca Des Tores, Swiss and related money-laundering accounts; The use of HSBC, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs and Deustche Bank money laundering accounts and covert stock accounts; Free spam and bulk mailing services owned by Silicon Valley corporations; Use of high tech law firms such as Perkins Coie, Wilson Sonsini, MoFo, Covington & Burling, etc. to conduit bribes to officials; and other means now documented by us, The FBI, the FTC, The SEC, The FEC and journalists.


FOR EXAMPLE:

David Brock’s Media Matters gave a $930,000 cash grant to David Brock’s Franklin Education Forum

David Brock’s Franklin Education Forum credited the Bonner Group for raising those funds, triggering the 12.5% commission

David Brock paid the Bonner Group a $124,250 commission to solicit a cash grant … from himself!

IT DOESN’T STOP THERE

After the Franklin Education Forum retained $869,750, they sent a $816,224 cash grant to David Brock’s The Franklin Forum:

franklin-education-forum-grant-to-franklin-forum

Note: The ‘Franklin Education Forum’ is a 501(c)3, and ‘The Franklin Forum’ is a 501(c)4. They are not the same company.

Since The Franklin Forum 501(c)4 paid Bonner a commission in 2013, it’s safe to assume fundraiser received a $102,028 commission in 2014. Unfortunately, it’s hard to tell for sure. They still haven’t filed their taxes for 2014!
LET’S RECAP

Say, for example, you donate $1,062,857 to Media Matters for America.   This is how David Brock would have used your charitable donation in 2014:

In the end, Brock’s solicitor would have pocketed $350,825, almost a third of your initial donation! That’s a far cry from the advertised 12.5% commission.

As bizarre as that scenario may sound, this is exactly what David Brock did in 2014.

HOW CAN WE BE SURE THIS IS INTENTIONAL?

David Brock is the Chairman for each of these organizations!  How could he not know what’s going on?

He’s a hands-on Chairman.  According to their tax returns, Brock allocates time, weekly, to his organizations:

Furthermore, the New York Times reports that David Brock shares a summer rental in the Hamptons with Mary Pat Bonner, the President of the Bonner Group!

David Brock will have a hard time claiming ignorance on this.  These transfers are intentional.  He vacations with his solicitor.  Case closed.

STILL NOT CONVINCED?

David Brock didn’t even bother to give his organizations different phone numbers.  They all share the same phone number!

WHAT IF…?

We even located the Bonner Group’s solicitation agreement with Media Matters on Florida’s Gift Givers’ Guide.  Clarification on their commission can be found on page 2:

In English:  Contractually, David Brock has the option to exclude certain contributions from triggering the commission.  In spite of this option, he intentionally chooses to trigger the 12.5% commission for money grants between his organizations.

Note: Yes, we are making the assumption that all of Brock’s organizations have the same solicitation agreement with the Bonner Group.  Given that his organizations share the same address, board members, and telephone number, we feel it’s safe to assume they also share the same solicitation agreement.
THIS BARELY SCRATCHES THE SURFACE

Utilizing public facing tax returns, along with records submitted to the FEC, we mapped out all the significant money transfers from 2014 that took place in Brock’s office:

This is all from just one year! 


I have been asking myself lately; how were there so many corrupt people in the Obama Administration?  The only answer I can come up with is that Barack Obama himself was a very corrupt person.  Who else would have had so many corrupt people that he chose or tolerated in his Administration.

Do you remember Lois Lerner from the IRS and Barack Obama asking her to go after his political rivals using the most feared government agencies, the IRS. The last place you want to be is between the government and your money.

Obama Attorney General Eric Holder who was found in Contempt of Congress for lying to Congress and looking the other way on every illegal act Obama or someone in his administration perpetrated.

Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, earned his spot among Obama’s corrupt appointees thanks to his admitted role in the “green energy” scams, specifically the Solyndra scandal in which the Obama gave more than $500 million to a failed company and one of its key investors, Obama backer George Kaiser.

Do not forget Obama’s corrupt cabinet appointee Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius. According to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel, she was guilty of violating the Hatch Act by campaigning for the president in her official capacity. Violators of this act are normally fired, but Obama would not allow his AG Eric Holder to do any such thing. So Sibelius got off without punishment after claiming she said she "...  got a little caught up in the notion that the gains which had been made would clearly not continue without the president’s reelection..."

I am not even going into the details of the corrupt John Brennan former CIA Director and James Clapper Director of National Intelligence.

And let us not forget about the most corrupt person Obama appointed and that was Hillary Clinton.

After thinking about all of the people above how could we not think Obama himself was the Godfather of this mob?

Now let us add another and that is James Comey, former disgraced FBI Director.  Politico is reporting that on Friday night the FBI released a two-page summary former disgraced FBI Director James Comey used to brief then President-elect Donald Trump on the “dossier” about Trump’s ties to Russia. ( https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-uncovers-doj-records-showing-numerous-bruce-ohr-communications-with-fusion-gps-and-christopher-steele/ )

The document, asserts that Christopher Steele, the person who compiled the dossier, was working “on behalf of private clients” in his investigation of Trump’s possible ties to Russia.  Comey was not honest to the court because Steele was actually working for the DNC and Clinton campaign. Comey also did not inform the court or President-Elect Trump Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party paid the Russian government via Steele and Fusion GPS for the opposition research document.  Why didn’t Comey inform the court or President-Elect Trump that the information came from the Russian government: because then he would be admitting that the true collusion was between Hillary, the Democratic Party and Russia.

No matter which political party corruption is found in we must drain the swamp of all these corrupt people and prosecute them if we actually want to improve the political climate in the United States.

The key suspects under investigation for the crimes, attacks on the public and manipulation of Democracy include:

Amy Pascal; Bill Daley; Bill Lockyer; Brian Goncher; Daniel Cohen; David Axelrod; David Drummond; David Plouffe; David E. Shaw; Dianne Feinstein; Elon Musk; Eric Holder; Eric Schmidt; John Zaccarro, Jr.; Frank Giustra; Nick Denton; Harry Reid; Haim Saban; Hillary and Bill Clinton; Ira Ehrenpreis; Jay Carney; James Comey; Jared Cohen; Jeffrey Katzenberg; John Doerr; Harvey Weinstein; Yasmin Green; Jonathan Silver; Ken Brody; Lachlan Seward; Judge Stewart M. Bernstein; Larry Page; Google; Alphabet; YouTube; Facebook; In-Q-Tel; Amazon; Twitter; WordPress.Org; The Law Firm of Perkins Coi; Mark Zuckerberg; Martin LaGod; Matt Rogers; Marc Benioff; Michael Birch; S. Donald Sussman; Pierre Omidyar; Rahm Emanual; Raj Gupta; Ray Lane; Tom Perkins; Robert Rubin; Rob Friedman; Reid Hoffman; Richard Blum; Robert Gibbs; Robert Shwarts; Roger Altman; The Law Firm of Covington and Burling; Sanford Robertson; Steve Jurvetson; Steve Rattner; Steve Westly; Steven Chu; Steve Spinner; Susie Tompkins Buell; George Soros; Warren Buffet; Tom Steyer; The Clinton Foundation, Tim Draper; Valarie Jarrett; Jeffrey Epstein; Vinod Khosla; Michelle Lee; The law firm of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich and Rosatti; Lawrence Summers; Marc Andreessen Sheryl Sandberg; Yuri Milner; Fenwick & West LLP; James W. Breyer; McBee Strategic; Mike Sheehy; Nancy Pelosi; Gilman Louie; Thomas J. Kim; Ping Li; Greylock Capital, Accel Partners; Jim Swartz; Bank Menatep; Alisher Asmanov; Marc L. Andreessen; Peter Thiel; Clarion Capital; Richard Wolpert; Robert Ketterson; David Kilpatrick; Tesla Motors; Solyndra; BrightSource; IDG Capital Partners; Goldman Sachs; Morgan Stanley; State Street Corporation; JP Morgan Chase; Lloyd Blankfein; Jamie Dimon; Steve Cutler; Rodgin Cohen; Sullivan Cromwell, LLP; Jeff Markey; Steve McBee; Michael F. McGowan; Toni Townes-Whitley; CGI Federal; Todd Y. Park;  Frank M. Sands, Sr.; Robin Yangong Li; Parker Zhang; Jonathan Goodman; Gawker Media; Jalopnik; Adrian Covert, John Herrman; Gizmodo Media; K2 Intelligence; WikiStrat; Podesta Group; Fusion GPS; Think Progress; Media Matters; Black Cube; Debbie Wasserman, The DNC Executive Committee; Correct The Record; Stratfor; ShareBlue; Sid Blumenthal; David Brock; Barack Obama; Sen. Robert Menendez; Jerry Brown; Ken Alex; Susan Rice; Kamala Harris; Bruce Ohr; Nellie Ohr; and other names to be identified in court...

These parties appear to have exploited taxpayer government resources to line their pockets at tax payer expense as proven by finance reports, FEC filings, Congressional studies, Panama Papers, espionage journalism, state election reporting forms, Goldman Sachs and ICIJ Swiss Leaks documents and journalists, on-staff whistle-blowers, covert accounts revelations, forensic audits, Congressional action comparison charts and other evidence. Connected on XKEYSCORE, FBI, Palantir, Linkedin and other investigative databases. Confirmed in cross-over financial dealings and transfers. Sourced as beneficiaries and financiers of the activities.

Jeffrey Epstein Chaired a $6.7 Billion Company that Documents Suggest May Have Received a Secret Federal Reserve Bailout As Political Payola!

According to a database created by The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists containing files leaked from the law firm Appleby, Jeffrey Epstein, who is under indictment as a sex trafficker and assaulter of underage girls, was the Chairman of Liquid Funding Ltd. from November 9, 2001 to at least March 19, 2007. The offshore business had been incorporated in Bermuda on October 19, 2000 and according to the Fitch ratings firm, it had $6.7 billion in outstanding liabilities in 2006.

 

In a regulatory filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission in February 2003, Bear Stearns, the Wall Street investment bank that Epstein had resigned from under murky circumstances in 1981, confirmed that it was a 40 percent owner of Liquid Funding Ltd., writing as follows:

“At November 30, 2002, the Company had an approximate 40% equity interest in Liquid Funding, Ltd. (‘LFL’), a AAA-rated special purpose vehicle established to participate in the repurchase agreement and total return swap markets. A subsidiary of the Company acts as investment manager…”

 

The subsidiary that acted as investment manager for Liquid Funding Ltd. was Bear Stearns Bank Plc in Dublin, Ireland, which functioned outside of U.S. regulatory authority and was a wholly owned subsidiary of Bear Stearns Ireland Limited, which was wholly owned by the U.S.-regulated Bear Stearns Companies Inc.. The U.S.-based Bear Stearns was one of the myriad Wall Street banks that imploded during the financial crisis of 2008 and received both publicly-announced and secret bailouts from the Federal Reserve, the central bank of the United States, via its Wall Street compromised regional bank, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

Just who it was that owned the remaining 60 percent of Liquid Funding Ltd. is unknown at this time, but if the off-balance sheet structure follows the typical pattern, a number of those listed in the leaked documents as serving as a director or officer, including Epstein, are likely to have invested funds.

 
 

According to an October 24, 2006 announcement from the ratings agency, Fitch, Liquid Funding Ltd. was a Structured Investment Vehicle (SIV) — the same structure that played a major role in blowing up another major Wall Street bank, Citigroup, during the financial tsunami that cratered Wall Street in 2008. (See Law Firm that Silenced Harvey Weinstein Accusers also Involved in SIVs that Tanked Citigroup.)

According to Fitch, Liquid Funding Ltd. could issue liabilities up to $20 billion, made up of commercial paper, guaranteed investment contracts, medium term notes, and repurchase agreements. Both Fitch and Moody’s gave the medium-term notes to be issued by Liquid Funding a AAA-rating as well as gave it a AAA-rating as a counterparty. And, notably, both ratings agencies gave its commercial paper a Tier 1 rating, meaning that it could now end up in money market funds purchased by average Americans seeking a low-risk, liquid investment. (Until 2008, it was rare for money market funds to “break a buck,” meaning give back less than the original principal invested.)

 

While the ratings agencies acknowledged that they understood the entity could issue up to $20 billion in various instruments, Fitch reported in 2006 that “Liquid Funding is capitalized with $37 million in drawn equity commitments and $63 million in undrawn equity commitments….” We have found nothing, thus far, to explain how $100 millionin equity could support $20 billion in liabilities (other than possibly the fact that Deutsche Bank is still alive). It can’t be that Bear Stearns was guaranteeing the liabilities because Bear stated in a regulatory filing that “The Company’s maximum exposure to loss as a result of its investment in this entity is approximately $5.0 million.”

As a result of those Tier 1 ratings on Liquid Funding’s commercial paper, it ended up in some very big name money market funds. Two of JPMorgan’s money market funds held a total of $100 million; two Dreyfus money markets held at least $139 million; and a Frank Russell money market fund held $125 million. Those amounts are very likely the tip of the iceberg that ended up in money market funds.

 

The amount of toxic debris that had parked itself in supposedly safe money market funds in 2008 led to unprecedented action by the U.S. Treasury, which had to step in with a guarantee plan after a run commenced when it was learned that the bankrupt Lehman Brothers had sold its instruments to money market funds.

And that was just the beginning of bailing out the unprecedented greed and corruption that turned the Wall Street gambling casino into a ward of the U.S. taxpayer. If you were a hedge fund for billionaires or a foreign bank and the insolvent U.S. insurance company, AIG, owed you money because you failed to do your due-diligence in the selection of a derivatives counterparty, you got secretly bailed out at 100 cents on the dollar.

 
 

If you were Goldman Sachs and sold a billion dollar investment to clients after knowingly allowing John Paulson’s hedge fund to secretly stuff it with instruments designed to fail and then make $1 billion for the hedge fund by shorting the deal, you got off without any key executive going to jail. As for John Paulson, instead of being prosecuted, NYU’s Stern School of Business lauded him in their Alumni Magazine and named an auditorium after him after he sealed the deal with a $20 million donation.

If you were a completely insolvent bank like Citigroup, whose negligent board had allowed its former Chairman and CEO, Sandy Weill, to turn himself into a billionaire through Dracula stock options, you got an unprecedented taxpayer bailout plus a secret $2.5 trillion bailout from the Federal Reserve consisting of revolving loans made at close to a zero interest rate while the bank charged its struggling credit card customers over 19 percent interest. The Fed fought a multiple-year court battle to hide this outrage from the American people. And the guy who helped Citigroup at the New York Fed, Tim Geithner, moved up to become U.S. Treasury Secretary.

 

A partial accounting of the Fed’s secret actions only came to light as a result of an amendment tacked on to the Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation in 2010 by Senator Bernie Sanders, which forced the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to conduct a Fed Audit, which was released to the public on July 21, 2011.

What the public knew about the bailout of Bear Stearns, which potentially included Liquid Funding Ltd., prior to the Fed audit was the public announcement that JPMorgan Chase was buying the firm in 2008 in a fire sale and further details provided in the final report of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (FCIC). The FCIC report explained that the Federal Reserve Bank of New York had created a Special Purpose Vehicle called Maiden Lane LLC that used proceeds from a $28.82 billion senior loan from the New York Fed and a $1.15 billion loan from JPMorgan Chase to purchase approximately $30 billion of Bear Stearns’ toxic assets on which JPMorgan Chase wanted the Fed to bear the brunt of any losses.

 

The FCIC report also revealed this about Bear Stearns’ accounting practices:

“At the end of each quarter, Bear would lower its leverage ratio by selling assets, only to buy them back at the beginning of the next quarter. Bear and other firms booked these transactions as sales—even though the assets didn’t stay off the balance sheet for long—in order to reduce the amount of the company’s assets and lower its leverage ratio. Bear’s former treasurer Upton called the move ‘window dressing’ and said it ensured that creditors and rating agencies were happy. Bear’s public filings reflected this, to some degree: for example, its 2007 annual report said the balance sheet was approximately 12% lower than the average month-end balance over the previous twelve months.”

 
 

When the GAO report came out, the secret $16 trillion feeding tube from the Federal Reserve was revealed, structured as revolving, low-cost loans to any bank, foreign or domestic, teetering or otherwise. Stunningly, the audit showed the Fed started the loans in December 2007 – long before the public knew there was a dangerous financial crisis – and it lasted until at least July 2010.

In addition to the publicly known support to Bear Stearns from the New York Fed, the GAO audit revealed that the Federal Reserve had provided another $853 billion in secret loans to Bear Stearns; $851 billion from its Primary Dealer Credit Facility and $2 billion from its Term Securities Lending Facility.

 

JPMorgan Chase closed its deal with Bear Stearns on May 31, 2008 but the GAO reported that Bear Stearns “was consistently the largest PDCF borrower until June 2008.” A download of the PDCF spreadsheet from the Fed shows that Bear Stearns continued to drink at its trough right up to June 23, 2008.

Was Liquid Funding Ltd., the entity chaired by Jeffrey Epstein long after he was already recognized as a sexual molester of minors, part of the Bear Stearns’ bailout by the Federal Reserve? It was reported to be 40 percent owned by Bear Stearns in multiple regulatory filings.

 

An announcement by Moody’s rating agency on April 18, 2008 further raises that suspicion. It states that “all outstanding rated liabilities” of Liquid Funding Ltd. have been “paid in full.” Moody’s explained as follows:

“…the withdrawal of the three ratings was in response to Liquid Funding’s request for withdrawal, in connection with the voluntary wind-down of Liquid Funding and following the payment and satisfaction in full of all outstanding rated liabilities of Liquid Funding. According to the Outstanding Detail Report issued by JPMorgan as of April 7, 2008 in its capacity as trustee, none of the rated debt issued under the global medium-term note program or the commercial paper note program was outstanding as of that date. Additionally, the Program Outstanding Report issued as of April 8, 2008 by the Bank of New York Mellon in its capacity as trustee showed that all transactions for which Liquid Funding was serving as counterparty have matured or been terminated.”

 
 

If JPMorgan Chase didn’t close on the deal to buy Bear Stearns until May 31, 2008, who paid off its debts in April? The reason Bear collapsed was because it couldn’t obtain adequate funding out of concerns over its finances.

Since JPMorgan Chase was so careful to put the Federal Reserve Bank of New York on the hook for the first $28.82 billion in losses from Bear Stearns, it doesn’t seem reasonable to think that it charitably picked up the tab for toxic assets hiding out in an offshore vehicle.

 

We’ll be making further inquiries into the matter.

Share SHARE ON SOCIAL MEDIA

They posted on the same topic

Trackback URL : http://nationalnewsnetwork.net/index.php?trackback/7817

This post's comments feed