Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 40 of 40
  1. 03-22-2009 #26
    Clandestino
    JEBO TE! Clandestino's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Post Count
    5,649
    Quote Originally Posted by smeagol
    I see a lot of bankers leaving American banks and either going to European/Asian banks or simply starting their own shops.

    I also see JPM, Wells Fargo and other American banks that are financially sound, returning the TARP funds ASAP.
    wells fargo lost money last quarter
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote Clandestino is offline
  2. 03-22-2009 #27
    boutons_
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Post Count
    15,842
    Losing money one quarter is not the same a being bankrupt like Citi and BoA.

    WF was forced to take TARP money they didn't want.

    Everybody had to take it, ill and well, to obscure from investors and depositors which banks needed it.

    Banks overseas aren't doing any better than US banks.

    Like lawyers and doctors, there are too many damn bull bankers.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote boutons_ is offline
  3. 03-22-2009 #28
    boutons_
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Post Count
    15,842
    It looks like the WH will veto the Congressional the bull ex-post-facto-tax-the-bankers-after-they've-deposited law.

    Congress is full of children. What kind of country elects such assholes?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote boutons_ is offline
  4. 03-23-2009 #29
    smeagol
    I love J.T. smeagol's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Post Count
    11,756
    Quote Originally Posted by boutons_
    It looks like the WH will veto the Congressional the bull ex-post-facto-tax-the-bankers-after-they've-deposited law.

    Congress is full of children. What kind of country elects such assholes?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote smeagol is offline
  5. 03-23-2009 #30
    Wild Cobra
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Quote Originally Posted by ElNono
    Ofcourse it was was ex-post-facto law. I dare you proving it was not.
    It was a law passed by Congress granting retroactive immunity to telecoms. And it was made AFTER court cases were in place in order to have said court cases dismissed. If it was not ex-post-facto then those court cases would have been allowed to continue, since they were filed before the immunity law was issued.
    No.

    They were acting under the authority of the highest executive branch of this nation. They did nothing illegal. The immunity keeps the costly process of litigation from occurring.

    Like it or not, the cons ution grants broad executive powers. You don't have to like it, but that is fact.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote Wild Cobra is offline
  6. 03-23-2009 #31
    Wild Cobra
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Quote Originally Posted by boutons_
    It looks like the WH will veto the Congressional the bull ex-post-facto-tax-the-bankers-after-they've-deposited law.

    Congress is full of children. What kind of country elects such assholes?
    Maybe our president is smart enough not to look like a fool when such a law gets overturned.

    I wonder if those in congress voting for it have read the cons ution?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote Wild Cobra is offline
  7. 03-23-2009 #32
    Winehole23
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    114,144
    Quote Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
    They were acting under the authority of the highest executive branch of this nation.
    When Congress passed these amendments to FISA?

    They did nothing illegal. The immunity keeps the costly process of litigation from occurring.
    I assume you mean the TSP. Regarding which the Congressionally mandated immunity prevents discovery, er, costly lawsuits.


    Here is the EFF/ACLU brief on the FISA amendments.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote Winehole23 is offline
  8. 03-23-2009 #33
    Winehole23
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    114,144
    In a nuts , the AIG clawbacks and the amendments to FISA are very precisely analogous, WC. Both actions by Congress, both prima facie ex post facto. You lose this point to El Nono.

    The question of whether anyone has any standing to make this complaint much less to prevail, remains to be seen.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote Winehole23 is offline
  9. 03-23-2009 #34
    Wild Cobra
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Quote Originally Posted by Winehole23
    When Congress passed these amendments to FISA?

    I assume you mean the TSP. Regarding which the Congressionally mandated immunity prevents discovery, er, costly lawsuits.


    Here is the EFF/ACLU brief on the FISA amendments.
    Say what you will. Congress can override previous laws. The president is the executor of law. They cannot override the cons ution. The cons ution protects us from UNREASONABLE search and seizure. It does not protect us completely.

    Have to define what is and is not reasonable.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote Wild Cobra is offline
  10. 03-23-2009 #35
    boutons_deux
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    "president is the executor of law."

    as your good buddy dubya and his puppetmaster head demonstrated repeatedly in breaking all precedents for signing statements, the Exec is under no obligation to enforce laws passed by the Legislature.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote boutons_deux is offline
  11. 03-23-2009 #36
    johnsmith
    Veteran
    My Team
    Denver Nuggets
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Post Count
    12,134
    Really? Another Boutons? Really?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote johnsmith is offline
  12. 03-23-2009 #37
    DarrinS
    Veteran DarrinS's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    42,561
    Quote Originally Posted by johnsmith
    Really? Another Boutons? Really?

    Isn't Boutons_ a little redundant?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote DarrinS is offline
  13. 03-23-2009 #38
    smeagol
    I love J.T. smeagol's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Post Count
    11,756
    Quote Originally Posted by johnsmith
    Really? Another Boutons? Really?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote smeagol is offline
  14. 03-23-2009 #39
    Winehole23
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    114,144
    Quote Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
    The cons ution protects us from UNREASONABLE search and seizure. It does not protect us completely.

    Have to define what is and is not reasonable.
    So unreasonable that John Ashcroft and several of his straight-arrow lieutenants were ready to resign over it unless certain conditions were met.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote Winehole23 is offline
  15. 03-23-2009 #40
    Wild Cobra
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Quote Originally Posted by johnsmith
    Really? Another Boutons? Really?
    OMG... Help us...
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote Wild Cobra is offline
« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Forum Rules