November 27, 2008

 

 

 "...He who can destroy a thing has the real control of it...."

 

                                - Quotation of Paul "Muad D'ib" Atreides, from

                                  the science fiction novel "Dune", by Frank Herbert

                                  (1965).

 

 

"...Who really cares about it being unconstitutional? This is what's right to do,

    and if this means that we have to go out and have a court battle, then that's

    fine...We have plenty of dead bodies coming in our streets every single

    day, and that is unacceptable..."

 

                                - Pittsburgh Councilwoman Tonya Payne, a supporter of a

                                  a proposed Pittsburgh gun control ordinance that is pre-empted

                                  by the Pennsylvania state constitution, as quoted by the Pittsburgh

                                  Post Gazette (online edition) on November 26, 2008 in a story

                                  by Richard Lord.

 

 

To All,

    Once again life imitates art....

 

The Weirding Way of Wall Street:

     One of the "givens" of the firearms rights movement is that, for the Second Amendment to flourish, activists must master the art and ways of politics.

 

     Included in that mastery requires broad knowledge about those techniques used by other organized groups as they pursue their own interests, and whether those actions positively or negatively affect the firearms rights community in any way. Especially if those actions may have contributed to the ascension of a political regime that has little regard for the individual right to keep and bear arms.

 

    So it was with extreme interest that one found an investigative report by a 5 journalist team from the Wall Street Journal's "Print Edition" of Monday, November 24, dealing with the apparent "shorting" of credit-default swaps and certain false claims regarding the financial soundness of financial services provider-cum investment banker-to-the-world Morgan Stanley.

 

   The team of Susan Pulliam, Liz Rappaport, Aaron Lucchetti, Jenny Strasburg, and Tom McGinty discovered that certain "anonymous" sources on Wall Street started spreading rumors around September 17, 2008, that Deutsche Bank AG had pulled a credit line of approximately $ 25 billion from Morgan Stanley, over concerns of it's "financial health".

 

    The Wall Street Journal team reports that the Deutsche Bank rumor was untrue at the time. But nevertheless, the rumors resulted in a shorting of Morgan Stanley's position by raising the price of the credit default swaps needed to offset the risk of the various kinds of debt that it had incurred in the course of doing business. Morgan Stanley was negatively impacted by such increasing costs (an almost 300% rise in the price of these credit default swaps) to the point that investors began to believe that Morgan Stanley was holding too much "undeclared" bad debt. The subsequent run damaged Morgan Stanley severely, necessitating government intervention and support that is part of the current adverse economic downturn. This, in turn, is a major aspect to a downturn that has led to the loss of some $ 2 trillion dollars in retirement wealth, a 1% (and climbing) increase in the nation's unemployment rate, and a "buffaloing" of the public to vote for an untried  "Kwisatz Haderach" as President.

 

    What is more is that the Wall Street Journal Team is able to "name names" as to who was shorting Morgan Stanley at a time that was oddly influential with the Presidential Campaign (The date of September 17 has been generically used by the Openly Biased Media as the rough date of the decline of John McCain's political fortunes).

 

    In this case, financial transaction records reviewed by the Wall Street Journal team show that some of Morgan Stanley's erstwhile confrères in the investment community were responsible for both the credit default shorting and the actual shorting of Morgan Stanley's stock value on the Dow Industrials. The Journal team names Merrill Lynch, Citigroup (what goes around comes around, eh?), UBS AG, and surprisingly Deutsche Bank AG as those whose trading desks were shorting Morgan Stanley.

 

   One can only wonder why all these scorpions decided to attack Morgan Stanley The Red Legged Frog at this particular time in history and the Presidential Election cycle. Given what has happened to Citigroup, who seems to be victim of a similar "downturn in confidence", one would have thought that the piranha-like tendencies of the market traders would have been leashed by the purportedly cooler heads of the various boards involved (At least they should not have allowed the "Young Gun" traders to play with nuclear weapons...). (Note- This poster has personal bank accounts with Citigroup).

 

    But given Chuck "U" Schumer's summer involvement with the run on Indymac Bank in California, one can entertain suspicions that a more deliberate tampering with the economy was taking place as part and parcel of the political campaign. If it turns out that the very same executives and traders that countenanced the obliteration of trillions of dollars of personal wealth and retirement accounts, and the taxpayer being put on the hook for trillions more, and they then are not banished permanently from the halls of finance and political power, then perhaps the very first scandal of the Obama Administration is in the making. Especially if any subsequent market run up to the announcement of Timothy Geithner (current President of the New York Federal Reserve) as Treasury Secretary-Designate in the Obama Administration is due to a signaling of a more laissez faire approach when it comes to trying to find out who any of the Crash of 2008's responsible parties were.

 

    What is more, the utilization of these kinds of tactics may be presaging a return of a kind of "no holds barred" style politics, otherwise known as the Chicago Way. Rather than follow the "friendly advice" of the compromised punditocracy, it could just be that firearms activists may have to escalate in their manner of expression and indignation when lobbying their elected representatives (Think Stonewall, only with greater numbers and the "whiff" of Hoppe's # 9 in the air...). After all, we have nothing to lose but our chains.

 

Links:

 

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/laland/2008/07/feds-cite-schum.html

 

http://www.cnbc.com/id/25654303

 

 

Follow The Money Update:

     From information at Opensecrets.org, donations by certain "Heavy Hitters" involved in taxpayer bailouts, or otherwise involved in the current pressure for the government to firewall certain kinds of liabilities, reveal a certain trend when it comes to donations to the political parties in the 2008 Cycle (Through October 18, 2008)-

 

Goldman Sachs-

    Democrats            $ 3,365,583        73%

    Republicans          $ 1,262,086        27%

 

Citgroup-

    Democrats            $ 2,248,481        60%

    Republicans          $ 1,483,884        40%

 

JP Morgan Chase-

    Democrats            $ 2,155,365        59%

    Republicans          $ 1,493,847        41%

 

Morgan Stanley-

    Democrats            $ 1,812,421        58%

    Republicans          $ 1,298,568        42%

 

Merrill Lynch-

    Democrats            $ 1,140,934        49%

    Republicans          $ 1,162,544        50%

 

AIG-

    Democrats            $ 539,871            70%

    Republicans          $ 226,175            30%

 

United Autoworkers-

     Democrats            $ 1,351,414          99.5%

     Republicans          $         6,750            0.5%

 

Hmmmmmm....

 

Link at:

http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php?order=A

 

 

Respectfully,

 

 

Anthony Canales

SFVMC-NRA