RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Bernie Sanders begins: "At a Senate Budget Committee hearing in 2009, I asked Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke to tell the American people the names of the financial institutions that received an unprecedented backdoor bailout from the Federal Reserve, how much they received, and the exact terms of this assistance. He refused."

Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), 03/11/09. (photo: WDCpix)
Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), 03/11/09. (photo: WDCpix)


A Real Jaw Dropper at the Federal Reserve

By Sen. Bernie Sanders

03 December 10



t a Senate Budget Committee hearing in 2009, I asked Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke to tell the American people the names of the financial institutions that received an unprecedented backdoor bailout from the Federal Reserve, how much they received, and the exact terms of this assistance. He refused. A year and a half later, as a result of an amendment that I was able to include in the Wall Street reform bill, we have begun to lift the veil of secrecy at the Fed, and the American people now have this information.

It is unfortunate that it took this long, and it is a shame that the biggest banks in America and Mr. Bernanke fought to keep this secret from the American public every step of the way. But, the details on this bailout are now on the Federal Reserve's website, and this is a major victory for the American taxpayer and for transparency in government.

Importantly, my amendment also required the Government Accountability Office to conduct a top-to-bottom audit of all of the emergency lending the Fed provided during the financial crisis to be completed on July 21, 2011, which will take a hard look at all of the potential conflicts of interest that took place with respect to this bailout. So, in many respects, details that the Fed was forced to divulge on Wednesday about the $3.3 trillion in emergency loans that until now were totally kept from public scrutiny, marked the beginning, not the end, of lifting the veil of secrecy at the Fed.

After years of stonewalling by the Fed, the American people are finally learning the incredible and jaw-dropping details of the Fed's multi-trillion-dollar bailout of Wall Street and corporate America. As a result of this disclosure, other members of Congress and I will be taking a very extensive look at all aspects of how the Federal Reserve functions and how we can make our financial institutions more responsive to the needs of ordinary Americans and small businesses.

What have we learned so far from the disclosure of more than 21,000 transactions? We have learned that the $700 billion Wall Street bailout signed into law by President George W. Bush turned out to be pocket change compared to the trillions and trillions of dollars in near-zero interest loans and other financial arrangements the Federal Reserve doled out to every major financial institution in this country. Among those are Goldman Sachs, which received nearly $600 billion; Morgan Stanley, which received nearly $2 trillion; Citigroup, which received $1.8 trillion; Bear Stearns, which received nearly $1 trillion, and Merrill Lynch, which received some $1.5 trillion in short term loans from the Fed.

We also learned that the Fed's multi-trillion bailout was not limited to Wall Street and big banks, but that some of the largest corporations in this country also received a very substantial bailout. Among those are General Electric, McDonald's, Caterpillar, Harley Davidson, Toyota and Verizon.

Perhaps most surprising is the huge sum that went to bail out foreign private banks and corporations including two European megabanks - Deutsche Bank and Credit Suisse - which were the largest beneficiaries of the Fed's purchase of mortgage-backed securities.

Deutsche Bank, a German lender, sold the Fed more than $290 billion worth of mortgage securities. Credit Suisse, a Swiss bank, sold the Fed more than $287 billion in mortgage bonds.

Has the Federal Reserve of the United States become the central bank of the world?

The Fed said that this bailout was necessary to prevent the world economy from going over a cliff. But three years after the start of the recession, millions of Americans remain unemployed and have lost their homes, life savings and ability to send their kids to college. Meanwhile, big banks and corporations have returned to making huge profits and paying their executives record-breaking compensation packages as if the financial crisis they started never happened.

What this disclosure tells us, among many other things, is that despite this huge taxpayer bailout, the Fed did not make the appropriate demands on these institutions necessary to rebuild our economy and protect the needs of ordinary Americans.

For example, at a time when big banks have nearly a trillion dollars in excess reserves parked at the Fed, the Fed did not require these institutions to increase lending to small- and medium-sized businesses as a condition of the bailout.

At a time when large corporations are more profitable than ever, the Fed did not demand that corporations that received this backdoor bailout create jobs and expand the economy once they returned to profitability.

I intend to investigate whether these secret Fed loans, in some cases, turned out to be direct corporate welfare to big banks that used these loans not to reinvest in the economy but rather to lend back to the federal government at a higher rate of interest by purchasing Treasury Securities. Instead of using this money to reinvest in the productive economy, I suspect a large portion of these near-zero interest loans were used to buy Treasury Securities at a higher interest rate providing free money to some of the largest financial institutions in this country. That is something that we have got to closely examine.

At a time when Wall Street executives are now making more money than before the financial crisis, how many big banks that paid back TARP funds in 2009 to avoid limits on executive compensation received no-strings-attached loans from the Federal Reserve?

At a time when millions of Americans are paying outrageously high credit card interest rates, why didn't the Fed require credit card issuers to lower interest rates as a condition of the bailout?

The four largest banks in this country (Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Wells Fargo, and Citigroup) issue half of all mortgages in this country. We now know that these banks received hundreds of billions from the Fed. How many Americans could have remained in their homes, if the Fed required these bailed-out banks to reduce mortgage payments as a condition of receiving these secret loans?

We have begun to lift the veil of secrecy at one of most important agencies in our government. What we are seeing is the incredible power of a small number of people who have incredible conflicts of interest getting incredible help from the taxpayers of this country while ignoring the needs of the people.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+82 # Elaine Swanson 2010-12-03 23:11
Senator Sanders,I listen to you nearly every Friday morning on Thom Hartman's radio show. I wish the USA had 49 more senators as committed as you to the welfare of this country. Thank you for all you do.
 
 
+39 # rumigirl 2010-12-04 02:28
Quoting Elaine Swanson:
Senator Sanders,I listen to you nearly every Friday morning on Thom Hartman's radio show. I wish the USA had 49 more senators as committed as you to the welfare of this country. Thank you for all you do.

Make that 99 senators and 435 representatives .
 
 
+46 # Suzie Christmas 2010-12-04 07:27
Quoting Elaine Swanson:
Senator Sanders,I listen to you nearly every Friday morning on Thom Hartman's radio show. I wish the USA had 49 more senators as committed as you to the welfare of this country. Thank you for all you do.


They would all be shot or politically assassinated like what they did to Elliot Spitzer. Spitzer had written an Op-Ed for the NYT, just a week before the whole prosititute incident, about the mortgage fraud. Did anybody notice no one else was arrested in the prostitution scam? Bernie, like Paul Wellstone, should stay out of small planes.
 
 
+27 # Paul Ravenstone 2010-12-04 08:00
I knew something wasn't right about all of that when it was going down, but I had no clue what... Now, I am completely blown away. Thank you for fighting for transparency!
 
 
+19 # Darlene F. Price 2010-12-05 08:46
Great job Senator Sanders!!!! Keep speaking truth to power!!!!
 
 
+10 # Elder Berry 2010-12-06 13:03
Yes, he has called it exactly, and I wish the Obama administration and other Democrats would use the words the senator uses: CORPORATE WELFARE. That's what it is. And the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy are HIGH-INCOME WELFARE.
 
 
+1 # Homer 2010-12-12 15:52
Occasionaly Senator Sanders is one the Keith Olbermann show on MSNBC....great man. I wish he would team up with Denis Kucinich in 2012. If Bloomberg gets into the fray and splits the electoral vote, sending it to the House we may wind up with Caribou Barbie in the White House.

BTW, there are many great comments below but the one thing missing is the old golden rule, "Them that's got the gold, rules!"
 
 
+10 # Barbara Larcom 2010-12-06 12:57
Yes, I echo others in thanking you for all you do - and for this article which has made my blood boil. There is at least one other Senator whom I also admire - and unfortunately he is about to leave the Senate - Russ Feingold.
Quoting Elaine Swanson:
Senator Sanders,I listen to you nearly every Friday morning on Thom Hartman's radio show. I wish the USA had 49 more senators as committed as you to the welfare of this country. Thank you for all you do.
 
 
+4 # Robert E Flynn 2010-12-06 18:19
Quote:
listen to you Friday mornings on Thom Hartman's radio show. I wish the USA had 49 more senators as committed as you to the welfare of this country. Thank you for all you do.
Yes. Thank you! Keep working for us please; perhaps find some other honorable statespeople. I pray for your safety.
 
 
+28 # Ken Hall 2010-12-04 00:19
Yes, Senator Sanders is one of the few in the federal gov't who advocate for the interests of those citizens who are less than mega-rich.
 
 
+25 # Sandy Steubing 2010-12-04 00:27
Thank heavens for Senator Sanders, He is one of the few government representatives I listen to and believe.
 
 
+28 # Kristen 2010-12-04 01:07
Senator Sanders, I thank you for your work to get to the truth about the Federal Reserve, but I still don't get why you and everyone else in government and the media refer to that institution as a part of our government. The Federal Reserve is a privately held bank which has never been a part of the American government.
It is fascinating to me that many citizens are discussing this truth, but Congress seems to not know this. Well, of course they do, but the real question is why aren't they admitting this fact?
For a good education in this masquerade just read "The Creature from Jekyll Island" by G. Edward Griffin- (1994). The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve (1st ed., 2d ed. 1995, 3d ed. 1998 American Media, 4th ed. 2002, now in 6th ed.). Appleton, WI: American Opinion Publishing. ISBN 0912986166. OCLC 31354943.
Of course you know about it already, but have you read it?
Again, thanks for your courage- it must be lonely in those halls of judgment.
 
 
-12 # political economist 2010-12-04 20:58
Sorry but please take a good economics course before you write abut this. The fed really is part of the government. It is established by law and it makes a healthy profit almost all of which is turned over to the federal government.
 
 
+14 # Monkeerench 2010-12-04 22:03
That's b.S., you go take a course. The Fed is not at all a "part" of the government, any more than Congressionally -created Fanny & Freddie were before they were put on the stock market tickers by the bribing of politicos. The Fed is a "regulated" Federally-sanct ioned entity in the similar way that corporations are "established by law" (state law), supposedly to be regulated by administrative rules and regulations.
 
 
+3 # Gary1 2010-12-06 08:21
Monkeerench - Give us the name of ANY other not-for-profit corporation that has a CEO appointed by and serves at the whim of the POTUS. And it's not a part of the federal government?? Please...
 
 
+9 # Reyn 2010-12-06 13:13
According to the Board of Governors, the Federal Reserve is independent WITHIN government in the sense that "its decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government." However, its authority is derived from the U.S. Congress and is subject to congressional oversight. Additionally, the members of the Board of Governors, including its chairman and vice-chairman, are chosen by the President and confirmed by Congress. The government also exercises control over the Federal Reserve by appointing and setting the salaries of the system's highest-level employees. Thus the Federal Reserve has both private and public aspects.

The U.S. Government receives all of the system's annual profits, after a statutory dividend of 6% on member banks' capital investment is paid, and an account surplus is maintained. The Federal Reserve transferred a record amount of $45 billion to the U.S. Treasury in 2009.

Kind thoughts,

Reyn

see section two below
 
 
+8 # Reyn 2010-12-06 13:14
section two

The Federal Reserve is, quite simply, the central bank of the United States, and while it is structured differently from most central banks, and has some elements of a private corporation, it is not -- and since it was established in 1913 it has never been; nor will it ever be. While the idea that it is private is a nice fantasy for some people, (usually market purists who want to pretend that the markets are both independent and genuinely capable of surviving with neither regulation nor intervention) it is in fact a part of the Federal Government, and always has been.

Kind thoughts,

Reyn
 
 
-4 # James Jardine 2010-12-07 00:11
Reyn. Your so called "Federal Reserve" is a private corporation as is the Bank of England with whom it cooperates.
See www.themoneymasters.com
 
 
-4 # Alan W 2010-12-07 13:11
Reyn,
If you check the white pages of your telephone directory you will find the Federal Reserve listed in the business white pages, not under any listing under United States Government. The fact POTUS appoints the chairman is simply part of the shell game to hide the fact it is the owners of the central banks of the world that are calling the shots, including who we "elect" as POTUS. The Federal reserve is neither federal nor is there any "reserve." Do you work for the federal Reserve or for one of the many organizations that are part of the paper money banking scam? Sorry to "reyn" on your nonsense parade.
 
 
+3 # Christopher Warren 2010-12-06 13:35
I'm sorry, but most economists have no valid real world experiance in actually producing anything of pratical reality based value. You, like most politicians,CEO 's, Executives, and high ranking Military Officers do not know what the hell you're doing! Except being a socially functioning narcissistic sociopath.
 
 
+2 # Anti-State 2010-12-10 11:50
The Fed Reserve Board is an independent agency of the USgov. The Twelve Fed Reserve Banks are private, owned by the large banks in their district.

The NY Fed is the controlling Fed bank, owned by the owners of Goldman Sachs, Citi, Hong Kong Shanghai, and others.(notice each frb has a .org website, not .gov)

The Fed does return a portion to the treasury but only after expenses. They have many private jets, quite the art collection, and through private operations makes trillions in loans and purchases.

While it's great that this has been revealed, I certainly don't want anymore apparatchiks like Sanders.
 
 
+31 # B. Julien 2010-12-04 01:27
Thank you so much Senator Sanders for all you do. I cannot understand how so many of the rich in this country can sleep at night knowing how they have destroyed life for so many of their fellow Americans. Their greed is unbelievable. We must get these criminals out of our Government.
 
 
+28 # AngryMan 2010-12-04 01:36
Mr. Sanders, I thank you for your exceptional contributions. You are about the last caring person in politics. When the others sold out, you stayed the course of honesty and integrity. That is rare these days. You are truly a gem. I thank you.
 
 
+20 # Merschrod 2010-12-04 02:06
A great service to all - Thank you "Bernie."

There should be a law against giving an institution government money and allowing that same institution from then lending it back to the government for a higher rate of return, or using it as reserves.

It is definitely an indicator of corporativism and should be stopped.
 
 
+23 # futhark 2010-12-04 02:09
What else do you expect from an institution and a government of, for, and by the plutocrats and other robber barons?
 
 
+32 # GeraldT 2010-12-04 02:14
Thank God and thank you people of Vermont for electing an Independent to Congress, rather than another DemoRepubliCrat corporate shill. I am SO tired of watching these two self-serving, sides the same coin groups pretend to fight and disagree to keep the American public off balance while they BOTH pander to the ones paying for their elections and under the table: the corporations.
 
 
+3 # Katbarb 2010-12-07 21:49
You took the words right out of my keyboard GeraldT. Well said.
 
 
+22 # hope asrelsky 2010-12-04 03:35
Another mind-blowing revelation about the appalling power of the banks, enhanced and abetted by "our" government. Sen. Sanders should be promoted, rewarded, considered the leader in ethical principles in our cowardly, bought-off, dithering Senate.
 
 
+17 # Hors-D-whores 2010-12-04 03:40
Mr. Sanders, you're the best. I'm no financial wizard but you explain it so well I even understand, and I'm angry as heck.

Sometimes I think we have been drugged or something since we the people should really be breaking some doors down. (Figuratively speaking.)

Thank you Mr. Sanders.
 
 
+29 # Dan Fletcher 2010-12-04 04:09
I won't be satisfied in the least until I see some bus loads of bankers being hauled off to prison and see that this class of white colar criminals are forced to pay restitution and penalties, severe penalties, to the American people.
 
 
+7 # Amanda Casha 2010-12-06 11:20
Wouldnt that be grand! To actually see some justice done in our country??? I want to see it from the top down...every single one of them!
 
 
+22 # Nels Wight 2010-12-04 05:53
Bravo, Bernie, the Julian Assange of the Senate!
 
 
+28 # Terry 2010-12-04 06:34
And how many Senators were indirectly compensated with bailout funds by lobbyists?

And why is the government "obligated" to borrow money from private banking institutions?

And why do the American people sit back and accept all of this BS from their government?
 
 
+9 # eldoryder 2010-12-04 07:43
Amen to that, sister.
 
 
+23 # anne holder 2010-12-04 07:51
This article is worth its weight in gold. I am so grateful for a Senator Sanders.
 
 
+25 # JCM 2010-12-04 09:49
Bernie Sanders for President?
 
 
+13 # Dick Huopana 2010-12-04 21:48
We should all urge Senator Sanders to seek the presidency in 2012 and support his election campaign. He definitely is presidential and will use the power of the office to get essential government business done. Our current president, who I voted for, unfortunately has well-demonstrat ed he is too weak for the job. I've finally and sadly come to that conclusion watching Obama's unwillingness to firmly oppose extending the obviously never affordable Bush tax cuts. He should have insisted on letting all the Bush tax cuts expire and a moratorium on any future tax cuts until budget deficits have been eliminated and the government's crushing debt significantly paid down. Senator Sanders, are you listening?
 
 
+5 # jerry6665 2010-12-07 13:03
it pains me to say so but, i have to agree. in order to be a great leader, one must have a stiff backbone and the ability to know WHEN to act in a negotiation. unfortunately, there have been NO negotiations since president obama has taken office. there have only been total capitulations. he should have stood firm and let everything lapse in this latest 'negotiation'. then, you start from scratch.

i was a republican who changed parties when i realized we were being usurped by the limbaugh/beck machine backed by mega-billions and captive media outlets. i now fear for the future of the Republic as the president does not seem to thoroughly understand or appreciate the downwards spiral we are finding ourselves in. Nor does he seem to have a plan to combat the direction we are headed.

thank you, bernie. thank you for standing up for the truth. i wish others in congress would stand with you instead of worrying about their next election cycle.
 
 
+16 # Elisabeth Hair 2010-12-04 11:35
Seriously---tha nk God for Bernie Sanders. He is a voice of truth and reason. Long may he serve.
 
 
+11 # lnmon A. Pitts 2010-12-04 11:45
How could this type of behavior exist for so long. Greed is destroying America.
 
 
+25 # proud_lemming 2010-12-04 12:14
Though not an American, I try to keep up on American politics, but am not as attentive as I should be.

So, I am grateful to Sen. Sanders for illuminating the the "bail-out."

I've also heard that Sen. Sanders is among the few US legislators not to become apoplectic at the sound of the word "socialism," and may occasionally associate himself with it.

Since he is a rare "truth-teller" with a good grasp of economics, maybe it's time for American citizens to connect the dots.

Socialism is a credible economic theory with beneficial practical consequences for citizens. Nordic nations, continental European countries and parliamentary democracies like the UK, Canada and Australia are all "socialist" by US standards (universal health care, etc.). They are also more equitable, healthy. democratic and safer than the US, which is at or near the bottom of most OECD measures of quality of life(most recently in child poverty, health and education).

Maybe Americans could dare to experiment with something other than 18th-century homilies to individual greed. Adam Smith worked well in preindustrial times. Postindustrial? Not so much.
 
 
+2 # Reyn 2010-12-06 13:16
Yep, Bernie is a member of the Progressive People's Party, if I remember his party affiliation correctly - which is the socialist party of Vermont. We send him little bits of money from next door NY when he is up for reelection. He is wonderful.
 
 
+1 # Homer 2010-12-12 15:49
I've also heard that Sen. Sanders is among the few US legislators not to become apoplectic at the sound of the word "socialism," and may occasionally associate himself with it.

The majority of those in the Senate and House couldn't define socialism if given wikipedia, a search engine and a new Webster's dictionary.
 
 
+16 # Barbara Krimgold 2010-12-04 13:05
Senator Sanders,
I wish there were more like you in the Senate and in the country. Thanks for protecting what is left of the country and of our democracy from the encroaching corporatocracy of the past few decades.
Barbara Krimgold
PS Please give Obama some backbone.
 
 
+13 # proud_lemming 2010-12-04 13:53
Here's the multi-trillion dollar question: Does Mr. Obama lack "backbone," or is the basically on the side of those he seems afraid to try to control?

We all heard a lot about "change you can believe in," but seldom was any specific proposal discussed (and those that were, such as Guantanamo closing or DADT being rescinded, have since been set aside).

On the other hand, the president did promise to escalate the war in Afghanistan, which he has - apparently to no good effect; and, in a casual moment, he summed up his economic thinking in the phrase, "I'm a free-market kind of guy."

That seems about right. He has sought (and failed) to modify corporate behavior, but he has never tried to reform it in any but cosmetic ways (e.g., taking the "single-payer option" off the table before negotiations about health insurance began).

So what do we have? Corporate capitalism with a human face!
 
 
0 # StPete 2010-12-07 00:10
The corporatists have out-spent, out-planned and out-fought the Dems on nearly every front, and have been doing so for years, most of the time.

We were all so excited about Obama-- ready to take the streets in support if needed. Really. But we've been badly let down.
 
 
+14 # FED UP 2010-12-04 13:07
Thanks, Senator, for reminding us why we elected people to Congress. And why we are right in suspecting that real power lies in the hands of corporate america, especially the huge financial institutions. These are not just a few "bad apples." This is endemic to a system void of a moral sense and ruled by values of growth, profitability, and greed.
 
 
+8 # joe w. heyer 2010-12-04 14:15
I second all that has been said in the previous comments. Thank you and please keep up your work. You are one of the few hopes that we have.
 
 
+7 # Judy Moore 2010-12-04 14:52
I consider politicians to be the lowest form of life; that is all except Senator Sanders.
Thank you for your courage and honesty. That is probably not an easy thing to be in modern day Washington, D.C..
 
 
+20 # Marcus 2010-12-04 15:18
Sanders/Kucinic h in 2012! God, I wish.
 
 
+6 # Gary Epstein 2010-12-04 15:41
Goldman Sachs $600 billion
Morgan Stanley $2,000 billion
Citigroup $1,800 billion
Bear Stearns $1,000 billion
Merrill Lynch $1,500 billion
This adds up to $6,900 billion or $6.9 trillion
I cannot understand where Bernie got $3.3 trillion.
 
 
+4 # Dan Fletcher 2010-12-04 19:40
I am curious to know about this as well. Anyone have any ideas?
 
 
0 # Gary1 2010-12-06 07:55
This discrepancy comes from Senator Sanders habit of throwing numbers around that support his political agenda while anticipating that pounding his fist on the lectern will distract your attention away from the obvious.

The numbers from the five banks listed above - in addition to many, many other banks that do the same thing - are the "short term" overnight loans that the Fed normally provides. They have zero to do with TARP or other loans that were provided, but "bernie" knows that he can get away with throwing some "big numbers" around to impress anyone whohe can get to listen to him and they won't question him. Is this the same transparency that he seeks so feverishly? Set an example and "walk the talk". He is only representing the State of Vermont because his home state of Rhode Island kicked him out on his hiney long ago. He has learned the art of "yell loud enough and you drown out any voice of dissension so people have to listen to you".
 
 
+3 # Reyn 2010-12-06 13:18
*sigh*

Regardless of anyone else you and I both know you are lying. If you are being genuine at all here - go read the actual figures that have been released, you haven't of course, and you never will - because all you are doing is attempting to distract people from yet another Rightest atrocity in America.

Regards,

Reyn
 
 
+3 # Gary1 2010-12-06 14:17
Hi Reyn,

The figures are listed in the article - and comment - above. Name calling and belittling others will not change the numbers or where they came from.

Have a lovely day! :)
 
 
+3 # Lariokie 2010-12-07 01:33
Gary1 you are right in saying those have nothing to do with TARP, but you are wrong about them being short-term overnighters. Nomi Prins, a former Goldman managing director who got out of there when she realized what was going on, has been keeping a tally of the money loaned, guaranteed, and used to purchase worthless toxic assets from these banks and financial hucksters. It has actually totaled more than $13 trillion when funds from the Fed, FDIC, and Treasury are all totaled.

Say what you will about Bernie, but he is the guy responsible for daylighting the Fed's outrageous bailouts.

You are also wrong about Bernie.
 
 
+2 # Gary1 2010-12-07 12:35
Lariokie - Thanks for the clarification. They are indeed listed as "short term" loans, not overnight loans, which in many cases may be one in the same.

"Among those are Goldman Sachs, which received nearly $600 billion; Morgan Stanley, which received nearly $2 trillion; Citigroup, which received $1.8 trillion; Bear Stearns, which received nearly $1 trillion, and Merrill Lynch, which received some $1.5 trillion in short term loans from the Fed."

As for Bernie, I do appreciate the fact that he brought this information to light - it should public. However, he always seems to be selective in what and how he presents information in his speeches and essays. Then again,he IS a politician! Enjoy!
 
 
+11 # Monkeerench 2010-12-04 21:52
Great article and great work Senator.

However, the "Federal" Reserve Bank is not at all an agency of the Federal government. It is a private entity held by private owners, under Federal regulation when the largely corporately-own ed politicos have the guts to regulate it. It replaced J. P. Morgan as a supposedly "last resort" to bail out the US economy when unregulated, excessive speculators' greed tanked it.

I wish you would propose the only Constitutional recourse, seize the Fed as a truly Federal entity, pay off it's owners (cheap, really) and put the responsibility for the national currency back in the hands of the US Treasury where it belongs. Any other course spells ultimate disaster for the US and world economies.
 
 
+12 # Mark 2010-12-05 19:19
I'd like to see President Sanders, but I'm always reminded of the story about Adlai Stevenson. After one of his campaign speeches, a woman said to him, "Governor, you'll get the vote of every thinking person." He replied, "Madam, that's not good enough; we need a majority."
 
 
+5 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-12-06 02:13
Quoting Mark:
I'd like to see President Sanders, but I'm always reminded of the story about Adlai Stevenson. After one of his campaign speeches, a woman said to him, "Governor, you'll get the vote of every thinking person." He replied, "Madam, that's not good enough; we need a majority."

Oh God...I'm torn between laughing and crying. This could be the truth. How sad.
 
 
0 # remoran111 2010-12-05 20:20
The Fed is a cartel protected by government, a non profit registered in Delaware. Go to www.beyondrealtime.com and type in Happy Birthday. The info will amaze you as to how the Fed was created and who the players were who did the deed.
 
 
+5 # ian robertson 2010-12-06 13:38
Well done Sen. Sanders

If the fed had just bought mortgages from ordinary jabonies like me - people would still be in their homes. The big banks took the money and foreclosed out the little guy.

Isn't America a wonderful place
 
 
+3 # Susanna Masters Mill 2010-12-06 16:22
I AM EVEN MORE CONFUSED AFTER READING AN ARTICLE ABOUT PROF. LARRY SUMMERS WHO, WHILE IN THE SERVICE OF THE GOVERNMENT, EARNED SOMETHING LIKE $10 M FOR CONSULTING AND SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS.

I KNOW THAT BRILLIANT BUSINESS SCHOOL PROFESSORS EARN A LOT OF MONEY CONSULTING-- BUT WHY WOULD HE BE ABLE TO DO SO WHILE EMPLOYED AS A CHIEF ECONOMIC OFFICER FOR THE FED. GOV.

IT WORRIES ME THAT OBAMA APPOINTED A PERSON LIKE THAT WHO HAD BEEN SO CONTROVERSIAL AS THE PRESIDENT OF HARVARD (WHERE HE ALSO MADE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS A YEAR- FROM OUTSIDE CONSULTING APPOINTMENTS)

I KNOW HE IS NO LONGER W/ THE GOV. AND IS BACK AT HARVARD-- BUT WASN'T THERE AN EQUALLY BRILLIANT ECONOMIST WHO OBAMA COULD HAVE HIRED WHO IS NOT A MULTI-MILLIONAI RE? HOW OBJECTIVE COULD HE HAVE BEEN ABOUT THE PRACTICES OF THE BIGGIES (BANKS AND CORPS.)?
 
 
+6 # Lariokie 2010-12-07 01:22
Quoting Susanna Masters Mill:

IT WORRIES ME THAT OBAMA APPOINTED A PERSON LIKE THAT WHO HAD BEEN SO CONTROVERSIAL AS THE PRESIDENT OF HARVARD (WHERE HE ALSO MADE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS A YEAR- FROM OUTSIDE CONSULTING APPOINTMENTS)

WASN'T THERE AN EQUALLY BRILLIANT ECONOMIST WHO OBAMA COULD HAVE HIRED WHO IS NOT A MULTI-MILLIONAIRE? ?


To answer your questions Susanna, you are right to be worried. Not only did Obama hire Summers, who was one of the most instrumental forces in killing the Glass-Steagal Act, which has for 70 years protected us against the very collapse we are experiencing, but he also hired Tim Giethner who managed the bailout of AIG and Goldman Sachs while he was head of the NY Fed. Indeed, why would our savior invite the wolves into the pen with the sheep?

Your second question is yes, of course Obama could have hired an even more brilliant economist than Summers. He could have brought in Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman, or Nobel Prize winner Joseph Stigletz. But he consciously chose a wolf, to go along with his wolf Secretary of Treasury and his wolf Fed Chairman, Ben Bernanke. What should we make of this?
 
 
+5 # Lariokie 2010-12-07 00:58
Obomber has stated that his administration is the "most transparent in history". As if we needed this to fully understand that he is a liar and a fraud. Obama fought the audit amendment tooth and nail. Now we see why. He has not told us the truth. Add this to the latest cave-in extending the Billionaire Tax Cuts and what we have here is an administration we cannot trust with the future of our country. I have said it before, and I will say it again. Obomber is a Trojan Horse.
 
 
+3 # deadhead 2010-12-07 15:52
and we worry about wiki-leaks?
 
 
+3 # Susan Walden 2010-12-07 21:05
So, who is going to jail? Or better yet--where is the guarantee that it wont happen again? What is the point of letting the American people know just how much they are being screwed by our governments lack of governing? We know Bush can torture, Cheney can out a federal agent, and the banks and Wall Street along with Obama's advisors can steal from the American people. And nothing changes.

There are no jobs, Wall Street and the Federal Reserve are not regulated. People are still losing homes, jobs, and retirement.
So now you know--what is going to be done about it??????
 
 
+1 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-12-08 02:50
...uh, revolution anyone?
 
 
+2 # mrgaribaldi2263 2010-12-08 07:25
Senator, when are you going to run for President? I'll vote for you and tell all my friends about how you are willing to talk about others refuse to talk about.
 
 
+1 # Dale Johnson 2010-12-08 07:57
Bernie, I hope that you will take the lead in a DUMP OBAMA CAMPAIGN FOR 2012.
The man has no principles. Here is what I wrote in response to Organizing for America´s sending around a video of justification--
This outrageous give in to the Right Wing intransigents was the last straw for me. My vote is DUMP OBAMA IN 2012. You have since early in the administration proven to be far from a man of principles that was projected during the campaign. Bush era criminals have not been prosecuted for war crimes and crimes against humanity and you escalate that stupid War in Afghanistan. You pursue the Imperial Ambition with almost as much vigor as your predecesor. You caved in on Health Care...you betrayed us millions who thought you might work for real change.

THERE IS NO FIGHT IN YOU, BE GONE.

Dale Johnson
 
 
+1 # john67787 2010-12-09 01:20
have any of you guys even heard of ron paul? he's BEEN trying to abolish/bring down the FED for decades and you guys act like Sanders is the savior? LOL
 
 
+1 # Anti-State 2010-12-10 11:53
Oh no he's an evil right wing tea partying fascist.....lol .....Boobus Americanas watches too much TV.....
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN