They're a legit progressive magazine. I don't think you're going to find anything in the NYT, CNN, etc. Those outlets are ignoring the majority of the leaks.

TYT reported on it as well, and they campaigned hard for Obama back in the day.

https://youtu.be/0QhPaCu0NzY

11/2/2016 10:38:54 AM

There's always caution with these leaks from major publications because they get twisted all to hell (see Podesta email about dumping email).

That in particular is pretty damning but not terribly surprising.

----

New thought but tangentially relates but I found it interesting as I was listening to BB radio on my drive in this morning that bank stocks have been so closely correlated to Trump's news this year. When he does well they soar and when Clinton does well they drop. Despite all the talk about Clinton being so closely connected the street still thinks Republican policy is far more important to bank deregulation.

[Edited on November 2, 2016 at 10:45 AM. Reason : To too two ]

11/2/2016 10:45:32 AM

Quote :

"Is that a reputable source? It seems like if you don't post something from Huffington, CNN, Salon or Washington Post, it isn't a legitimate source. But if so, holy shit that's corrupt. But I bet every president does it. Big oil probably picked Bush's cabinet."

I, for one, am not at all shocked that a multi-national, powerful corporation like Citi would play a part in dictating Obama's cabinet. Given how readily Obama bailed out the banks, it makes perfect sense. However, I think it's naive to assume this is an isolated case and that something this shady hasn't happened before. If you want to look at previous administrations, all you need to do is examine Reagan/ George Bush Sr. and how much the agriculture industry changed during their watch which led to widespread factory farm subsidies and a largely unchecked beef/cattle industry (hello Mad Cow and e Coli). Ever heard of Monsanto? All of this is pretty well documented. As for Bush Jr? Just look at Cheney and his ties to the energy industry.

Wanna take a guess who will be picking Hilldawg or Trump's cabinet?

[Edited on November 2, 2016 at 10:47 AM. Reason : .]

11/2/2016 10:46:35 AM

^^Really? Not saying you're wrong because I haven't closely tracked it, but I did notice last week that stocks fell when the FBI made their announcement about the ongoing Clinton email issue:

http://www.businessinsider.com/stocks-after-fbi-reopens-clinton-emails-investigation-2016-10

[Edited on November 2, 2016 at 10:48 AM. Reason : ^]

11/2/2016 10:48:29 AM

^^^,^^

Oh I know. But it's never been laid out so clearly before.

11/2/2016 11:03:16 AM

^^ the broader market is very nervous about a Trump win. Was only talking about bank stocks specifically

11/2/2016 11:17:08 AM

I'm not bored enough to go back and check every financial stock throughout this election but all the ones I just checked dropped right along with the market on Friday (GS, MS, CIT, HSBC, JPM)

11/2/2016 11:22:14 AM

Getting way off topic but I just ran RCPs Trump and Clinton indices versus the S&P Bank ETF and the correlation is what I heard this morning (obviously with some noise).

11/2/2016 11:27:22 AM

there is not nearly enough evidence to show that the Citi guy and only the Citi guy was solely responsible for constructing the cabinet

11/2/2016 11:29:00 AM

Quote :

"hello Mad Cow and e Coli"

Please, stop. You obviously have no idea what you're talking about in regards to agriculture.

11/2/2016 11:51:59 AM

^^
no one thinks that. he lead the team.

[Edited on November 2, 2016 at 11:52 AM. Reason : .]

11/2/2016 11:52:09 AM

i love this belief that people who are at the top of their industry shouldn't be involved with helping cultivate a list of people who could potentially help run the country. maybe the us just deserves trump as president. it's clear a whole shitload of people are just too stupid to deserve more than the disaster he will deliver upon us

11/2/2016 12:45:39 PM

Quote :

"Please, stop. You obviously have no idea what you're talking about in regards to agriculture."

I don't? Please tell me how small-scale and local agriculture exploded into farm factories, and while you're at it, can you please tell me why so many people got sick eating beef, poultry, and pork, despite USDA inspections. I'd like to know.

11/2/2016 12:51:15 PM

^^
yes, the people at the top who couldn't care less about the people at the bottom.

11/2/2016 12:55:21 PM

Quote :

"i love this belief that people who are at the top of their industry shouldn't be involved with helping cultivate a list of people who could potentially help run the country. maybe the us just deserves trump as president. it's clear a whole shitload of people are just too stupid to deserve more than the disaster he will deliver upon us "

We raise eyebrows when the person at the top of ONE company of the BANKING industry delivers a list that gets implemented almost to a T, and then that ONE company ends up getting the largest bailout in the BANKING industry.

11/2/2016 1:08:43 PM

As if we don't have a mountain of scholars to choose from. No, we need people whose life goal is to accumulate absurd amounts of money and power. But hey, they sure are good at it.

11/2/2016 1:10:36 PM

Um, that was signed on Oct 3, 2008.

11/2/2016 1:11:45 PM

Quick question, what has the Obama administration done to help the banking industry? (pro tip: the bailout was done by the Bush administration).

Bonus question, why did they lobby so hard to get Mitt Romney elected in 2012 if they already had their manchurian candidate in Obama?

[Edited on November 2, 2016 at 1:15 PM. Reason : .]

11/2/2016 1:12:31 PM

Nobody is suggesting that effective leaders and intelligent minds shouldn't make up a presidential cabinet. That would exclude military leaders, judges, doctors, etc. But yeah, there's a pretty big difference between appointing an expert, and then bailing out an entire industry based on an expert in your cabinet.

11/2/2016 1:15:01 PM

^^They've totally refused to prosecute individuals that were likely responsible for illegal banking moves

[Edited on November 2, 2016 at 1:18 PM. Reason : Slap on tha wrist]

11/2/2016 1:15:47 PM

Hey I didn't excuse Bush - I specifically mentioned that big oil probably made up his cabinet.

It's just more of the same, when Obama was supposed to be different.

Someone asked who was making Hillary's cabinet? I'm sure Saudi Arabia has some input there

And Trump's cabinet? Big real estate. That's it.

11/2/2016 1:17:13 PM

This happened in Feb 2009

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/28/business/28deal.html

11/2/2016 1:19:05 PM

Quote :

"Quick question, what has the Obama administration done to help the banking industry? (pro tip: the bailout was done by the Bush administration)."

Perhaps you'd have a case if inequality hadn't soared during the eight years Obama was in office. As others pointed out, he basically punted when given the opportunity to hold Wall Street accountable.

11/2/2016 1:21:04 PM

The big banks have a paid over $200 billion in fines related to the mortgage crisis to date. Yes, the federal government did not spend millions of taxpayer dollars seeking felony convictions against bankers. While I understand why people wish they had, I fail to see the good it would have done, especially since nothing is guaranteed once you go to trial.

11/2/2016 1:24:01 PM

It would have given people a sense that our justice system is consistent, rather than it being multi-tiered based on the defendants net-worth or skin color.


It's a pretty common complaint from the right and the left.

[Edited on November 2, 2016 at 1:31 PM. Reason : $200 Billion hasn't proven enough to make them change their behaviors]

11/2/2016 1:28:28 PM

Elizabeth Warren makes the case pretty well.

Obama administration owned by Citi:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/12/12/enough-is-enough-elizabeth-warrens-fiery-attack-comes-after-congress-weakens-wall-street-regulations/

Asking why there was no prosecution:

http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/senator-elizabeth-warren-requests-formal-investigation-about-why-obama

[Edited on November 2, 2016 at 1:31 PM. Reason : .]

11/2/2016 1:29:24 PM

Quote :

"While I understand why people wish they had, I fail to see the good it would have done, especially since nothing is guaranteed once you go to trial."

Um, maybe it would send a message that if you're in massive collusion to defraud the American public, you can face prosecution and consequences for your actions?

11/2/2016 1:31:28 PM

Quote :

"It's just more of the same, when Obama was supposed to be different."

yep.

the direction of the country under bush

exactly the same as

the direction of the country under obama

ex. act. ly. the. same.

[Edited on November 2, 2016 at 1:41 PM. Reason : .]

11/2/2016 1:41:22 PM

Quote :

"It would have given people a sense that our justice system is consistent, rather than it being multi-tiered based on the defendants net-worth or skin color."

Quote :

"Um, maybe it would send a message that if you're in massive collusion to defraud the American public, you can face prosecution and consequences for your actions?"

I get this, I really do, just like I understand why people wanted Obama to go after the Bush administration for the Iraq War. But the federal government doesn't have unlimited prosecutorial resources, and like I said, criminal convictions are hardly a sure thing even with a mountain of evidence in your favor (see: Simpson, O.J.). Obama was facing an economic crisis the likes of which we hadn't seen in generations, people were losing their homes left and right, and he had some hard choices to make in regards to what the justice department would pursue. I'm not totally defending the decision to forgo criminal charges entirely, but I do understand the thought process that went into it, and I don't think it was because Citigroup bought him off.

11/2/2016 1:49:12 PM

That's great and all, but the government had plenty of money to pony up, especially if it was duped into bailing out the corrupt banks in the first place. I'm sure tax payers wouldn't have minded one bit to see wealthy Wall Street types on trial.

11/2/2016 1:53:47 PM

Quote :

"Obama was facing an economic crisis the likes of which we hadn't seen in generations, people were losing their homes left and right"

Because of people intertwined with his administration who he chose not to prosecute. Seriously dude...

11/2/2016 1:59:05 PM

I will say this, I do think he listened to people like Lawrence Summers and Timothy Geithner a bit too much early on, which is why the bailout wasn't as large as it should have been nor did Dodd-Frank have the teeth it really needed. It's not like hasn't learned from that though, those people are long gone and replaced with much more progressive economic minds.

11/2/2016 2:08:19 PM

So what you're saying is that $200 billion dollar fines were appropriate enough of a punishment, and that something like this will never happen to Americans again. K.

11/2/2016 2:12:10 PM

^^
No fucking way, sorry.

This is who replaced Geithner as Secretary of Treasury (currently serving):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Lew#Between_Clinton_and_Obama_tenures

Quote :

"In June 2006, Lew was named chief operating officer of Citigroup's Alternative Investments unit, a proprietary trading group. The unit he oversaw invested in a hedge fund "that bet on the housing market to collapse."

[Edited on November 2, 2016 at 2:18 PM. Reason : .]

11/2/2016 2:17:24 PM

Quote :

"So what you're saying is that $200 billion dollar fines were appropriate enough of a punishment, and that something like this will never happen to Americans again. K."

No, I'm saying winning $200 billion in fines was a more constructive use of the DOJs resources than seeking criminal convictions that they may or may not have been able to get. And the problem with the banking industry isn't that the penalties for misbehaving are too lenient, it's that the incentives for takings risks are too high. A good parallel is the illegal drug market, harsh criminal penalties hardly slowed the cartels down.

^You'd be hard pressed to find anyone in the financial industry who wasn't connected to the housing crisis in some way or another. Lew has been a staunch defender of entitlement programs like Medicaid and Republicans hate him.

[Edited on November 2, 2016 at 2:30 PM. Reason : .]

11/2/2016 2:26:02 PM

Quote :

"^You'd be hard pressed to find anyone in the financial industry who wasn't connected to the housing crisis in some way or another. Lew has been a staunch defender of entitlement programs like Medicaid and Republicans hate him."

This is horseshit.

My whole gripe with Occupy at the time was this line of thinking. The vast majority of the industry are just doing their jobs. Not screwing people out of their life's earnings on purpose.

[Edited on November 2, 2016 at 2:35 PM. Reason : And the decision makers who intentionally did do that should have been prosecuted]

11/2/2016 2:34:46 PM

^^
On top of ^, what's with you and goalielax pushing the notion that economic advisors must come from the financial industry? Why not draft from universities?

11/2/2016 2:39:00 PM

Quote :

"My whole gripe with Occupy at the time was this line of thinking. The vast majority of the industry are just doing their jobs. Not screwing people out of their life's earnings on purpose."

Um, yeah, that's exactly my point. Just because you happened to be working for a company that invested in mortgage related funds doesn't make you a criminal.

^I'm not saying I don't, but again, the argument is that having intimate knowledge of the industry you're trying to regulate isn't a bad thing. There should definitely be more of a balance though.

[Edited on November 2, 2016 at 2:54 PM. Reason : .]

11/2/2016 2:49:22 PM

But that guy is...he was involved in the subprime mortgage crisis.

[Edited on November 2, 2016 at 2:52 PM. Reason : .]

11/2/2016 2:51:51 PM

Quote :

"Why not draft from universities?"

those who can, do. those who can't, teach.

but seriously - i want practical experience over theory

11/2/2016 2:55:01 PM

Even if that practical experience was questionably legal and its end result was the near collapse of the institution you work for?

11/2/2016 3:03:49 PM

It's funny watching these people defend and spin how an entire administration is bought and paid for by big banking.

Again, that guy from Citi - his list was implemented almost to a T. The list was finalized even before the election occurred.

I don't care of other presidents have done the same thing - I feel certain they have. It's just that this one promised us he wouldn't eat cookies, and here he is, caught with his hand in the cookie jar.

11/2/2016 3:08:24 PM

why are you assuming that there was only one list made by only one person?

I mean I know why, but still. critical thinking is a good thing.

[Edited on November 2, 2016 at 3:14 PM. Reason : you are an example of why Glenn Beck has been able to fleece so many people]

11/2/2016 3:12:41 PM

You either nationalize the banks or allow them to fail. Pick one.

11/2/2016 3:13:31 PM

^^Provide me evidence that this "list" was put together by some think tank that had US's best interests in mind and I'll take your post a little more seriously. Right now the only evidence we have is a list sent by an executive at Citi. That's all the evidence we have.

11/2/2016 3:16:12 PM

Michael Froman didn't work in Citi's consumer lending group. to put the subprime mortgage crisis on him would be like blaming the head of GE Aviation for the GE Appliance sell-off this summer.

11/2/2016 3:17:30 PM

^^ you're making my point for me

it's absurd to assume that one hacked email is the answer to something that is more complex than, "this guy is the puppet master, because of an emailed list of names"

[Edited on November 2, 2016 at 3:20 PM. Reason : as with everything else in life, more than one piece of evidence is needed to convict ]

11/2/2016 3:18:59 PM

Why are you assuming it is so complex?

And for the record, I think Glenn Beck is a nutjob.

11/2/2016 3:20:21 PM

yeah man - you don't think the entire cabinet of the US government can be figured out with a single email?

[Edited on November 2, 2016 at 3:20 PM. Reason : ]

11/2/2016 3:20:29 PM

you are doing exactly what Glenn Beck has made a living doing

11/2/2016 3:21:05 PM