You are currently browsing the daily archive for April 20, 2010.

The original headline on this was so good, I hardly wanted to change it

Goldman Sachs taps ex-White House counsel

.Obama may try to pose as populist by pushing a very tepid financial regulation and set some distance between himself and his financial backers, but it’ll take a lot of propaganda to get that sticky, sticky entanglement off.

For one, the “R” are for once armed with the truth

Republicans sought to tie President Barack Obama to Wall Street firm Goldman Sachs after it was hit with civil fraud charges.

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) released a statement after the Securities and Exchange Commission filed charges against the Wall Street titan, calling the firm a “key supporter” of the president’s bid to reform the nation’s financial regulatory system.

Furthermore, the sinking Goldman Sachs is determined to pull his protegee with him. Hence hiring Obama’s reject counsel, Greg Craig. You might remember him as the one fired because he made Obama look bad by putting a deadline to the promise to close Guantanamo

His departure frustrated many liberal Obama supporters who saw Craig as a strong advocate for undoing some of what they saw as the worst excesses of the Bush era.

But for now, he is the guy with the rolodex who, as Politico puts it, can be useful to

help in navigate the halls of power in Washington, a source familiar with the firm told

My favorite of this is the denials
But the source familiar with Goldman’s operations said Craig wasn’t hired just because he’s well-connected.
This is the actual denial.

Craig wasn’t hired just because he’s well-connected.

Of course not. His good hair and the fact that he is a impeccable  dresser must have been a more important reason, I am sure.
It can’t be much else because it appears that
“A former White House employee cannot appear before any unit of the Executive Office of the President on behalf of any client for 2 years—one year under federal law and another year under the pledge pursuant to the January 2009 ethics E0,” said a White House official.
So, do your hair, dress well and just in case bring your rolodex too, I guess.
And since we are on the subject of denials, here’s another relevant one
The official also said that the White House had no contact with the SEC on the Goldman Sachs case. “The SEC by law is an independent agency that does not coordinate with the White House any part of their enforcement actions.”
That might further mess up the B0bot world.

Would this ever have happened under the administration of a corporate tool? No. No it wouldn’t.

And think for a moment about the TIMING of this. As we go into the debate over financial regulation.

(Heloooo? Bush? Enron?).

Gt it? Air tight alibi, just like with the selling of his senate seat or Rezko.
Yup. That’s the ticket.
For the few of you who watched “Damages” this has a delicious echo. remember what happened when the crooked Tobins fired their faithful lawyer?
Karma did.
Update

Goldman’s White House connections raise eyebrows

WASHINGTON — While Goldman Sachs’ lawyers negotiated with the Securities and Exchange Commission over potentially explosive civil fraud charges, Goldman’s chief executive visited the White House at least four times.

White House logs show that Chief Executive Lloyd Blankfein traveled to Washington for at least two events with President Barack Obama, whose 2008 presidential campaign received $994,795 in donations from Goldman’s political action committee, its employees and their relatives. He also met twice with Obama’s top economic adviser, Larry Summers.

Update

This list was compiled by Mother Jones before the SEC suit.

some picks (only the Goldman Sachs bankers)

CURRENT ROLE IN WASHINGTON
PREVIOUS ROLE ON WALL STREET

Mark Patterson
Treasury secretary’s chief of staff
Goldman Sachs lobbyist

Gene Sperling
Counselor to the treasury secretary
Made nearly $900,000 advising Goldman Sachs

Karthik Ramanathan
Acting assistant treasury secretary for financial markets
Foreign exchange dealer at Goldman Sachs

Adam Storch
Managing executive of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement
VP of Goldman Sachs’ Business Intelligence Group

Gary Gensler
Chairman of Commodity Futures Trading Commission
18 years at Goldman Sachs, where he made partner

Advertisements

Remember the good old times when Democratic candidates for POTUS were telling voters that women’s right to chose is at stake because of the SCOTUS nominations? I sound very old here – as I doubt Obama made this argument – although his strategists trumpeted on Obama TV that Roe was the “ace in the hole” to bring   back the women he demeaned in the primaries. We know how well this worked for them.

When Obama picked Sotomayor, he made a point in saying he didn’t even asked her about her views on women right to chose. I am old enough to remember when Democrats were accused of posing a “litmus test” on this – Obama ended this “R” worry.

In fact we are now sliding further down with this scary headline from WaPo

Abortion rulings could bring scrutiny of possible Supreme Court pick Wood

Suddenly, being for women’s right to chose (or as the RW an their media put it “abortion rights”) is no longer a Democratic principle, but a SCOTUS candidate “Achille’s heel”.

CHICAGO — If President Obama nominates U.S. Circuit Judge Diane P. Wood to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, social conservatives say they intend to make her rulings on abortion rights the primary point of contention.

“That’s her Achilles’ heel,” said Curt Levey, executive director of the Committee for Justice, which opposes Wood’s rulings on abortion. “It tells you that she’s probably not going to be selected, because Obama doesn’t have the stomach for this to be about an abortion debate.

Let me repeat this again

Obama doesn’t have the stomach for this to be about an abortion debate.

This is pretty much telegraphing that Obama is ready to sell women in the SCOTUS pick.

While it made a modicum of sense for Obama to declare that HCR was not about the abortion debate, to say that a SCOTUS pick can be about anything else is to practically send all women back to the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant.

And while I don’t know much about Diane Wood, I get an idea from Glenn Greenwald’s simile

f one were to analogize the search for Justice Stevens’ replacement to the recently concluded health care debate, Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Diane Wood would be the public option.

Just as the truly left-wing health care approach (a single-payer system) was eliminated from consideration before the process even began, so, too, have the truly left-wing candidates to replace Justice Stevens (Pam Karlan, Harold Koh) been ruled out as “not viable.”  As a result, the moderate-progressive compromises (i.e., the public option for health care and Diane Wood for Stevens’ replacement) are falsely depicted as some sort of liberal extremism, merely because they’re the least conservative options allowed to be considered.

So, the standards – for everything – are moved to the right with the speed of light.

Women’s rights of choice have been dubbed “abortion rights” and they are now considered “the Achille’s heel” of a SCOTUS nominee. It’s a matter of time – very short – until they’ll be both outlawed and be reason for burning at the stake by our new overlords.

Women who voted for “the Feminist” – it’s on you more than it is on the men. Because you should have known better.

,

.The cover of the day belongs to NY Post today for representing all major news stories in one sentence

.The second most significant page one is USA Today, featuring an interesting poll

The nation’s fastest-growing political party is “none of the above,” which could be bad news for Democrats and Republicans.

DC Express reminds us there’s another volcano waiting to wreck havoc

and gun rights pop on page one of the Examiner

.Stars and Stripes reminds us of the long term effects on war

.Back to Goldman Sachs, Wall Street Journal tries to take comfort in the SEC split decision on party lines

.while WaPo makes the Financial Bill look like a rerun of the HCR disastert

and the New York Times confirms it

.In NYC the major story is Bloomberg being dissed by Obama (in his new populist stance – see NY Post cover)

.and a bit of fluff about the men’s playground – I wonder where does this leave women

AM-NY

and Metro

Click here to add text
Click here to add text

.

Not Your Sweetie