Barack Obama's Banks:
Congress, Give Me the Power,
and I Will Control All of Them
by
Victor Edward Swanson,
publisher
The Hologlobe Press
Postal Box 5263
Cheboygan, Michigan 49721
The United States of America
copyright c. 2010
July 22, 2010
(Version 5)
(Final draft version)
This document is a little document that focuses on the financial industry of the country. I have made it to teach naive individuals and stupid individuals why it is bad for a government to control the banks and financial institutions of a country. I believe Barack Obama is working to take control of all the banks and financial institutions of the country. Actually, at this point, I believe Barack Obama wants the power to be able to take over any bank and financial institution that he wants, using the excuse that taking over a bank or financial institution would be done to stop another crash of the economy, as--he could argue--happened in 2008 because banks and financial institutions and Wall Street people were greedy and their greed led to the crash of 2008, even though that is not true (Democrats in the U.S. Congress and some U.S. Presidents since the 1970s were instrumental in creating the situation that led to the crash, and you should see my document entitled THOUGHTS AND PIECES OF LOGIC for the individual woman and the individual man, which can be reached by using the link at the end of this document).
The way in which Barack Obama could get the ability to take control of any bank or financial institution could come through legislation passed through the U.S. Congress and then signed by Barack Obama. On December 11, 2009, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill--entitled the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act--and one feature of the bill would give a U.S. President the ability to take over a bank or financial institution when it was deemed by the U.S. President that the bank or financial institution, if it should fail, would hurt the country (that reason would be the official reason, which is a vague reason). Once the bill was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives, the bill was sent to the U.S. Senate, and that is where the bill is now.
Now look at the problems that would come to the country if the bill were to become a federal act by being passed by the U.S. Congress and then signed by Barack Obama into law:
If Barack Obama gets the ability to take control of any bank or financial institution, Barack Obama could use any reason--known only to him--for taking over any bank or financial institution, and Barack Obama could take any bank or financial institution over, even though the bank or financial institution could be financial sound (by rules used by good business people). Barack Obama could take over a bank or financial institution so that he could block the management of the bank or financial institution from making donations to political causes or entities that are against Barack Obama's beliefs. Barack Obama could take over a bank or financial institution so that he could take jobs away from people he dislikes and give the jobs to people he likes or to people who support him or his causes; for instance, when Barack Obama takes over a bank or financial, Barack Obama can fire the management and put his associates--people loyal to him--in control (in essence, Barack Obama took over control of General Motors and Chrysler in 2009, and Barack Obama put some of his associates in management positions). Barack Obama could hurt investors of a bank or financial institution by deciding to close the bank or financial institution, and the way in which Barack Obama would hurt the investors is by getting to the point where he only has to give investors pennies on the dollar for their investments, if that; for example, Barack Obama could liquidate an entity and make investors lose investment money, and the investors could be people who might be called rich or be people who are considered regular people whose 401(k) retirement money could be invested in the institution (in 2009, Barack Obama was instrumental in forcing bondholders in Chrysler to take, in essence, pennies on the dollar in relation to the bankruptcy proceedings of Chrysler, and you should see my documents entitled Madness in a President and Other Matters of a Defective Mind and Frank Beckmann Interviews Tom Lauria, an Attorney in Chrysler Mess, which can be reached by using this link to the Site-Summary Page of The Hologlobe Press: Summary). Barack Obama's having the power to take over a bank or financial institution could give Barack Obama the power to restrict when one bank or financial institution could get larger by buying another bank or financial institution, saying that the investment would be unsound (under whatever rules he might use or pretend to use). Since 2008, the federal government has taken control or partial control of some big banks, and if Barack Obama were to get the power to take over any bank or financial institution, Barack Obama would have the ability to take over--at any time--all banks or financial institutions, such as little banks and little financial institutions of a single town, such as a community bank, and Barack Obama could think about taking over little credit unions.
By having the power to take over a bank or financial institution, Barack Obama could directly affect business and industry in the country as no U.S. President has ever done or could ever do. Barack Obama likes to use coercion, and Barack Obama--through under-the-table means--could tell banks and financial institutions to what entities they could lend money. Barack Obama would be able to use coercive means to make banks and financial institutions give loans to people who support him. Barack Obama could make it clear--in under-the-table means--that employees of banks and financial institutions should make donations to Barack Obama's campaigns or political associates, and Barack Obama could simply use threats that will go something like--I will take over your bank or financial institution if you do not do what I say (of course, Barack Obama's pressure would be delivered by associates, such as a Rahm Emanuel-type person). Barack Obama could use behind-the-scenes force to make managers and operators or owners of banks and financial institutions keep quiet about Barack Obama or Barack Obama's policies--they could not publicly criticize anything about Barack Obama, or Barack Obama would take over their bank or institution.
A U.S. President should not have the power to close any bank or financial institution on some rule that says the U.S. President can if it looks as if the failure of the bank or financial institution could hurt the country because it is a vague reason and because that might be the reason given to the public but not be the real reason!So I have made the main case for not putting the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (or wherever it will be called) into law, but I have not finished giving you information to work with. I must say first that the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Agency Act has a name that makes it sound that the act will be good for the "consumer," but titles to things can be used to deceive people, as the title of this act does. Also, I report that the bill passed the U.S. House of Representatives by a vote of 223 to 202; no Republican in the U.S. House of Representatives voted "yes" for the bill, and twenty-seven Democrats voted "no," and all the "yes" votes belonged to Democrats (you are urged to see my document entitled Enemies of the United States of America: Politicians Who Have Hurt You and Your Family by Voting "Yes" on Bad Federal Bills, which can be reached by using the link at the end of this document). Today, you should expect that Democrats (who are in some way Marxists, such as hard-line communities) will say anything to convince the naive and stupid of the population that the bill when it becomes an act or law will be good for the country and will be good for the people. Here are examples of people who have already passed along the lie:
In essence, it has been U.S. Senator Christopher Dodd (a Democrat related to Connecticut) who has been pushing through a financial-reform bill, and Wednesday, April 14, 2010, Christopher Dodd made some statements on the floor of the U.S. Senate that you should be aware of. Christopher Dodd said, "...I've been so dismayed over these last twenty-four hours, there are members of this body repeat the utter falsehoods concocted by special interests whose jobs and pensions are plenty secure--Thank you very much!--that this bill will lead to more bailouts. Mr. President, it's straight from the Wall Street special interests' talking points. That's what they're determined to do--defeat this bill by suggesting somehow there's a bailout provision in this bill. Nothing can be further from the truth! The bill as drafted ends bailouts...." And Christopher Dodd also said, "...Cracking down on the biggest players is critical to ending bailouts. And if a Wall Street firm does become too large or too complex and poses a great threat to our financial stability, the federal reserve has the power to restrict its risky activities, restrict its growth, and, Mr. President, even to break up those institutions...." (Incidentally, Rush Limbaugh reported on Thursday, April 15, 2010, during his syndicated radio show entitled The Rush Limbaugh Program that the bill creates a new slush fund (in essence, made up of money taken from the financial institutions through law and fees), which can be used to, in essence, take over financial institution in the future).
Ask yourself: Who is going to determine when something is too big or too complex and what is wrong with something that is complex?
Robert Reich is a well-known Democrat (he, for example, worked in the U.S. Bill Clinton administration), and this man made a comment that shows the Democrats, such as defective-thinker Barack Obama (a communist and supporter of "Black Liberation Theology"), want to control the banks and financial institutions in the country completely, and that comment, which was made on Wednesday, April 14, 2010, during an appearance on Campbell Brown's weekday show, was: "...Well all pay every time a bank gets into trouble, Campbell. No bank should be too big to fail. In fact, I would personally rather, in the bill, there be a limit on the size of all banks. No bank should be larger than a hundred-billion dollars in assets...." (Why did Robert Reich use the "hundred-billion dollars" figure? Where did he come up with that figure?)
You should see that the Marxists, such as Barack Obama, all of which are evil persons and enslavers, are working to change the financial system of the country into a fascist/communist system in which the government has complete control of everything!Let me explain a rule. I show in documents of mine that are available on the Internet that Barack Obama has an ill mind and is insane; evidence can be found in such documents as Nonsense Statements and Quotations of Barack Obama and Madness in a President and Other Matters of a Defective Mind. There is a "Rule of Man" that notes, when said informally--When a crazy man is able to set the rules, the rules will be crazy. It is publicly known that big federal acts signed into law by Barack Obama since January 20, 2010, are defective laws, and two such laws at the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010. Now, Barack Obama wants to pass a sweeping financial-reform law for the country.
Generally speaking, during the week of Sunday, April 10, 2010, the push was on in earnest by Barack Obama and by high-ranking Democrats, such as those in the U.S. Senate, to pass a sweeping financial-reform legislation into law.
It must be remembered that the economic crash of 2008 is tied to Democrats almost exclusively. There are a number of documents or books that show why the economic crash of 2008 happened; for example, my document entitled THOUGHTS AND PIECES OF LOGIC for the individual woman and the individual man shows some general reasons for the crash, and the book entitled Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto (which was written by Mark R. Levin and published in 2009) shows more factors than my document does. For this document, I will report that, generally speaking, Democrats were able to put federal laws into effect, beginning with the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, that forced entities that lend money for mortgage loans to lend money to people who were bad risks, and those loans, which would become known as "subprime loans," were packaged into investment vehicles, such as mortgage-backed securities, which people invested in so that they could be make money over time (that earned money would come to them as people paid off their mortgage loans), and, over the years, trillions of dollars of bad loans ended up as the underlying material of investments (such as "derivatives"), and then a lot of people defaulted on their mortgage loans, and investments based on bad loans crashed. By the way, for a while in the mid-1990s, Barack Obama worked for ACORN (a defective left-wing entity), which was involved in pressuring entities that where involved in lending money for mortgage loans to lend money to people who were very unlikely to pay off their mortgage loans, and one incident in which he was involved was the Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Federal Savings Bank case of Illinois in 1994 (Corsi, Jerome R. "Obama worked with ACORN voter project; Represented group in an effort to get mortgages for subprime buyers." WorldNetDaily, 14 May 2009, 11:25 p.m. Eastern; Schilling, Chelsea. "Unearthed! Obama's twisted ACORN roots" Tracked timeline of president's ties to group immersed in scandals." WorldNetDaily, 18 September 2009, 12:10 a.m. Eastern.).
Keep in mind: Financial institutions have been regulated by the federal government and by state governments for decades and decades, and two of the main federal laws are the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 and the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 (which is also known as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999).
Now, let me get back to the idea of financial-reform legislation, focusing on some related background news. In 2007 and 2008, Goldman Sachs through its political action committee donated $994,759 to the election campaign of Barack Obama (Yoon, Robert. "Goldman Sachs was top Obama donor." CNN, 20 April 2010, 5:50 p.m. EDT.) Over 2009 and early 2010, the political action committee of Goldman Sachs and people who were employees of Goldman Sachs gave more donations to Democrats than to Republicans, and, in fact, the statistics show, in essence, the Democratic Party received a little more than twice as much as the Republican Party did (Fritze, John. "Goldman political contributions under attack." USA Today, 21 April 2010.). U.S. Senator Harry Reid (a Democrat related to Nevada and the head of the U.S. Senate) was involved with a fundraiser hosted by the president of Goldman Sachs in early 2010 (Murray, Mark. "REID DODGES QUESTIONS ON GOLDMAN $$$." MSNBC, 20 April 2010, 4:54 p.m.); in the past, Harry Reid had received campaign contributions from people associated with Goldman Sachs. On Friday, April 17, 2010, it became public knowledge that the Security and Exchange Commission (or the SEC), which is a federal-government entity, charged Goldman Sachs with having sold investments that Goldman Sachs knew were going to fail (incidentally, five persons make up the board of directors of the SEC, and on January 20, 2009, Barack Obama had appointed Mary L. Schapiro to be the chairman of the board of the SEC, and on January 27, 2009, Mary L. Schapiro had been sworn in as the chairman of the SEC). (By the way, a number of people who have worked at Goldman Sachs have close ties with Barack Obama today; for example, Rahm Emanuel, who is Barack Obama's Chief of Staff, worked for Goldman Sachs in the past.),
Keep this in mind: "Derivatives" were created by Wall Street people to do something with the risky mortgage loans that were being put in the marketplace, especially in the 1990s by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae (something had to be done with the risky mortgage loans, since they could not be made and kept in a drawer to gather dust and spider webs); "derivatives" have always been risky investment vehicles that people or entities can decide on buying or not buying, and, for example, an entity that decides to buy a derivative takes the chance that the underlying material of the derivative could go bad. (Incidentally, any investment is subject to risk and failure, and that has been a rule of investing and economics for centuries.)
So, during the week of Sunday, April 17, 2010, the public was hearing such ideas from Democrats that financial reform was necessary to stop another economic crash from taking place, and some would talk about "derivatives (as would, on April 21, 2010, U.S. Congressman Gary Peters, who was related to Michigan, while being interviewed by Frank Beckmann of The Frank Beckmann Show on WJR-AM, Detroit), but Democrats were not making clear that they were pushing financial reform that would give the federal government the power to, in essence, take over any bank or financial institution and change the management or close down any bank or financial institution and sell off the assets.
Keep in mind this set of words spoken by Robert Gibbs (the Press Secretary for the White House) on Monday, April 19, 2010: "...The SEC doesn't notify the White House of its enforcement actions and, certainly, it didn't do so in this case [the case related to Goldman Sachs]. There was plenty of evidence Friday morning before the SEC got involved of the need to create new rules...the desire of the American people to see those put into law. The President will travel to New York on Thursday to once again make the case to the American people about why financial reform is so important to get done and to get done quickly. The American people want us not to play politics with this important issue but instead to get something done, and that's the case the President will push this week...."
On April 21, 2010, John Harwood (of CNBC) interviewed Barack Obama on television, and one thing that Barack Obama said was: "...I gave a speech about financial-regulatory reform in 2007, before our current crisis in 2008, before we fully knew what this crisis was going to be. We've released financial reform as a package over a year ago, and so we're not 'Johnny Come Lately's' to this thing. We've been pushing this hard throughout. The SEC is an entirely independent agency that we have no day-to-day control over, and they never discussed with us anything with respect to the charges that will be brought, so this notion that somehow there would any attempt to interfere in an independent agency is completely false...." [Remember: Barack Obama is a perpetual liar, as I clearly show in my document entitled Nonsense Statements and Quotations of Barack Obama, which can be reached by using this link: Quotes.]
Note: You are urged to see my document entitled The Crud Around Barack Obama: My Rule--"Like Mind's Get Together", which shows how defective Barack Obama is by the associates that he has and which can be reached by using this Crud link.On Thursday, May 20, 2010, the U.S. Senate passed its version of the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009 (H.R. 4173), and it was passed with 59 "yes" votes and 39 "no" votes, and a U.S. House of Representatives version of the proposed act had passed through the U.S. House of Representatives on December 11, 2009, with 223 "yes" votes and 202 "no" votes, and now the two bills must be merged into one bill through joint committee work. Then joint committee work was done. On June 30, 2010, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the new version of the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009, and on July 15, 2010, the ew version of the bill was passed on the U.S. Senate. All that had to be done with the bill is have it signed by Barack Obama, and it was on July 21, 2010, that Barack Obama made the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009 a law.
P.S. #1: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 gives the federal government--Barack Obama--real-time access to the financial accounts of all citizens of the United States of America, and if the Barack Obama gets the power to take control of any bank or financial institution, what would you have or would you have anything?
P.S. #2: If the size of financial institutions in the United States of America are restrict in their size, they would very likely end up smaller than what financial institutions in other countries could be, such as those controlled by evil governments, and that would make U.S.A.-based financial institutions weaker than entities in other countries in the world marketplace.
P.S. #3: Let me see if you are paying attention. Let us say that there is a financial institution called "Bob Daily Bank." The managers of Bob Daily Bank are highly supportive of the Democrat Party and Barack Obama and might be friends of Barack Obama's. Let us say that you are a manager of a bank called "Good Neighbor Bank." The managers of Bob Daily Bank want to buy your bank. You do not want to become a part of Bob Daily Bank. If the federal government has the power to take over any bank, the managers of Bob Daily Bank could secretly get in contact with the Obama administration, and the Obama administration could come to your bank and pressure you to sell to Bob Daily Bank, such as by telling you (in private) to sell or the administration will audit your bank and would probably find a problem, and then the Obama administration close your bank, put you out of a job, and would sell off your assets of your bank (which would probably be sold to Bob Daily Bank). And that is how corrupt government people can take control of the banking industry of a county and sell financial institutions to their cronies.
***Note: In essence, the story of the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009 is continued in the document entitled The So-Called "Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009": Deception Lies, and the Government Takeover, which can be reached by using this link: Protection?.
Bibliography (materials not listed in the body of the document):
"Bank holding company." Wikipedia.com, 26 March 2010.
"Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act." Wikipedia.com, 21 April 2010.
"National Banking Act." Wikipedia.com, 14 April 2010.
"Subprime mortage crisis." Wikipedia.com, 20 April 2010.
"U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission." Wikipedia.com, 20 April 2010.
Gordon, Marcy. "GOLDMAN ACCUSED OF FRAUD BY SEC." Detroit Free Press, 17 April 2010, p. 7A.
Malkin, Michelle. "All the president's Goldman Sachs men." Michelle Malkin, 21 April 2010, 05:51 a.m. (http://michellemalkin.com....)
O'Brien, Michael. "Republicans pressure Reid to return campaign cash from Goldman." The Hill, 19 April 2010, 04:40 p.m. ET. (http://thehill.com....)
Note: On April 21, 2010, I went to the Web site for the Security and Exchange Commission, and I read the document entitled "SEC Biography: Chairman Mary L. Schapiro, and the general Web-site address for the SEC was http://www.sec.gov....
###
Note: This document was originally posted on the Internet on April 14, 2010.
Note: This document is known on the Internet as www.hologlobepress.com/banks.htm.
For further reading, you should see the
document entitled Conservatism for
Children and What Conservatism Means,
which can be reached by using this link:
Conservatism.
For further reading, you should see the
document entitled Madness in a President
and Other Matters of a Defective Mind,
which can be reached by using this link:
Madness.
For further reading, you should see the
document entitled Barack Obama Exposed:
Inside the Unrepairable Flawed Mind,
which can be reached by using this link:
Flawed.
For further reading, you should see my
document entitled Nonsense Statements
and Quotations of Barack Obama, which
can be reached by using this link: Quotes.
For further reading, you should see the
document entitled THOUGHTS AND
PIECES OF LOGIC for the individual
woman and the individual man, which
can be reached by using this link: Logic.
For further reading, you should see the
document entitled Enemies of the United
States of America: Politicians Who Have
Hurt You and Your Family by Voting
"Yes" on Bad Federal Bills, which can
be reached by using this link: Enemies.
For further reading, you should see the
document entitled Never Forget These
Media "Darlings" ?: A Guide for the
Individual in the United States of
America, which can be reached by
using this link: Media.
For further reading, you should see the
document entitled A Little History of
Barack Obama Events: A Show of
Deconstruction, which can be reached by
using this link: History.
For further reading, you should see the
document entitled Lessons for Children
about Politics and Dangerous People,
which can be reached by using this
link: Children.
For further reading, you should see the
document entitled The Next Elections:
What Has to be Done to Protect the
United States of America, which can
be reached by using this link: Elections.
For further reading, you should see the
document entitled World Tyranny:
Warnings about the Insane Who are
Trying to Create a Communist World
Country, which can be reached by
using this link: World.Note: Many other documents exist at the
Web site for The Hologlobe Press that will
give you information about the bad that Barack
Obama and his associates are doing to the
United States of America, such as the Michigan
Travel Tips documents and the T.H.A.T.
documents that have been published since
the fall of 2008.To get to the Site-Summary Page for The
Site-Summary Page for The Hologlobe
Press, you may use this link: Summary.
To get to the main page for The Hologlobe
Press, you may click on this link now:
www.hologlobepress.com.###