Brent Nyitray
Fairlington Blade
Let the mutherfuker burn!
jnc4p
Kevin S. Willis
Michigoose
lmsinca
markinaustin
Arcanaut
novahockey
quarterback
ScottC
yellojktVital Statistics:
| Last | Change | Percent | |
| S&P Futures | 1439.0 | 4.8 | 0.33% |
| Eurostoxx Index | 2480.9 | 26.7 | 1.09% |
| Oil (WTI) | 91.72 | -0.5 | -0.51% |
| LIBOR | 0.355 | -0.003 | -0.91% |
| US Dollar Index (DXY) | 79.8 | -0.135 | -0.17% |
| 10 Year Govt Bond Yield | 1.62% | -0.02% | |
| RPX Composite Real Estate Index | 194.5 | 0.0 |
Stock index futures are higher as we kick off the 4th quarter. There are no major headlines or economic data this morning. Later this week, we will get the FOMC minutes from the last meeting, and Friday’s jobs report will have market moving potential. Bonds and MBS are up.
Will the fiscal cliff affect housing in any way? Perhaps. One provision in the expiring tax cuts is the 2007 Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act and Debt Cancellation which made the debt forgiveness in short sales non-taxable. Typically debt forgiveness is considered taxable income. If this provision goes away, short sales and mods with principal forgiveness may grind to a halt.
Meanwhile, HUD secretary Shaun Donovan was defending the mortgage interest deduction on the Sunday morning talk circuit over the weekend.
Filed under: Morning Report |
All Things in Moderation 
brent
I’m not familiar, taxable to whom?
LikeLike
Taxable to the borrower. Would make borrowers more reticent to pursue a short sale.
LikeLike
DJ – debt forgiveness is taxable income to the debtor, generally.
Brent – I heard a snippet while half sleeping that G-S thinks QE3 would raise GDP by 3/4%. If so, why would G-S think that?
LikeLike
Mark, I guess they believe that QE will enhance the wealth effect as stocks and housing go up in value.
I can’t imagine it will do anything for actual businesses – the problem with the economy is not that interest rates are too high.
LikeLike
I can’t imagine it will do anything for actual businesses – the problem with the economy is not that interest rates are too high.
My thought, exactly.
Brent and DJ, the debt forgiveness issue in foreclosure is not as big a deal as all that. People who are really insolvent also get to avoid debt forgiveness income, by a general rule. And people who were not really insolvent who gave up the house had to reduce basis in other assets by the amount of the forgiveness income excluded. So it will accelerate income for the solvent but have no effect on the insolvent debtor in foreclosure.
LikeLike
so it’s taxed as capial gains or how?
LikeLike
taxed as income.
LikeLike
” I heard a snippet while half sleeping that G-S thinks QE3 would raise GDP by 3/4%. If so, why would G-S think that?”
so they can sell short on their own account for later.
LikeLike
brent
didn’t know that, ain’t that a bite in the ass!
LikeLike
Another reason to use the bankruptcy system to resolve the housing issues.
LikeLike
mark
is Texas a non recourse state and if so what is the tax treament
LikeLike
Texas permits deficiency collection on a 2 year statute of limitations after foreclosure. The debtor is protected only from a below market foreclosure sale. Example: Debt = $100K. Foreclosure sale is at $70K. Bank sues for $30K. Debtor shows evidence of $90K value at time of sale. Deficiency = $10K. As a practical matter, deficiencies in foreclosure cases get negotiated on that basis.
All forgiven debt is either current income or a gift under general IRC laws.
LikeLike
ty
LikeLike
Romney makes an ass ouf of himself again today in the WSJ
“Under President George W. Bush after 9-11 there were no attacks on America and no deaths as a result of terrorist attacks on Americans. President Obama can’t say the same.”
The next time you go through an airport tell them you don’t have to take off your shoes because Romney says that Richard Reid never tried to take down an American Airlines flight.
Here’s an additional list of all the other Americans and American interests that weren’t attacked either:
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001454.html
I guess that scientist should have never committed suicide because he never made any athrax attacks either.
What a complete idiot Romney can be at times.
LikeLike
For you libertarians, here is the argument for voting for Romney:
In other words, hold your nose and vote for the lesser of two evils.
LikeLike
“bannedagain5446, on October 1, 2012 at 9:49 am said:
What a complete idiot Romney can be at times.”
The more the campaign goes on, the more it appears that Romney is just parroting what he read on a conservative blog in a bid to play to the base, but without actually agreeing with it or even thinking through the argument. That’s the best expatiation for his making a hash of the 47% argument by conflating it with President Obama’s base.
It reminds me of Rich Lowry’s observation:
“The overall impression of Romney at this event is of someone who overheard some conservative cocktail chatter and maybe read a conservative blog or two, and is thoughtlessly repeating back what he heard and read.”
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/322478/romneys-comment-rich-lowry
LikeLike
Don Juan:
Here’s an even whackier one (I think):
Lyme disease as vote getter. What are we coming to?
LikeLike
jnc:
I agree verbally, but this was in a WSJ op-ed for Chrissakes!
(of course Ruper Murdoch probably agrees with him)
LikeLike
“yellojkt, on October 1, 2012 at 9:53 am said:
…
In other words, hold your nose and vote for the lesser of two evils.”
Stopping bad legislation is Mitch McConnell’s job, and he’s much more competent at it than Romney would be.
This is the first election that I can recall where the Libertarians have run a legitimate candidate with actual executive experience in government, and I intend to reward them with my vote. The longer the election season goes on, the happier I am with Gary Johnson. I doubt that a lot of their supporters can say the same for Obama or Rommey.
LikeLike
michi
That’s an away game that my team bus can’t reach. A man has to know his limitations.
LikeLike
Also Yellow, the easy counterargument to that point is that Republicans will go along with expanding the government if there’s a Republican president. With a Democrat, they are more willing to block measures.
LikeLike
DJ:
Ha! 🙂
LikeLike
jnc:
This is the first election that I can recall where the Libertarians have run a legitimate candidate with actual executive experience in government, and I intend to reward them with my vote.
While you’re right, wouldn’t it have made more sense for him to run for the Senate and try to get into the legislating side rather than the executive side? Just thinking of where he would stand a chance of getting elected and his voice heard, rather than the position he’s in now where only political wonks (and his former constituents) know who he is.
LikeLike
I can’t find the quote, but I believe he ruled out a Senate run b/c he thinks he’d have to funnel pork to the state to get re-elected. or something to that effect.
LikeLike
NoVA:
he’d have to funnel pork to the state to get re-elected.
Surely not! I mean, Rand Paul isn’t doing anything like that, is he? (she says with an expression of wide-eyed innocence)
LikeLike
I tied GJ’s absence from the debates to the Iran War prospects at PL this morning and incurred dismay [and ridicule from Liam]. It is true that optional interventionism is unexamined by Ds when posed by a D POTUS, as several of you have noted.
I have supported every optional intervention when it occurred, based in large part on trust. It has cost us so much in the ME that I am finally a bit more diffident, or gun shy. Thus I at least want a serious discussion – a serious national discussion – about Iran.
LikeLike
Rand Paul is fascinating.
http://reason.com/blog/2012/09/10/rand-paul-reaches-out-to-libertarians-an
This gets into the best way to change the system — from within or on the outside. Rands comments about new england and the west coast are interesting.
LikeLike
“markinaustin, on October 1, 2012 at 11:30 am said:
It is true that optional interventionism is unexamined by Ds when posed by a D POTUS, as several of you have noted.”
And entitlement expansion is unexamined by R’s when posed by a R POTUS.
Also Krugman is projecting again:
To the extent that the election is a referendum on what President Obama says that he wants to do on entitlements, then a better case can be made that it’s an endorsement of the “Grand Bargain”, not the “entitlements as usual” argument that Krugman is making.
LikeLike
Mark, regarding your RIF argument there’s no automatic cut that takes effect on January 2013?
LikeLike
Mark, regarding your RIF argument there’s no automatic cut that takes effect on January 2013?
Sequestration for FY 2013 takes effect on some day in January, probably 1-2-13. When/if that happens, DOD will notify its contractors what contracts are terminated or partially terminated for the convenience of the government.
We can assume that contracts near completion will not be terminated but that contracts in the early stages will be, but we do not know that. Perhaps all contracts will be modified. The time for RIF notice is when the contractor receives the termination of contract for the convenience of the government, b/c before then the contractor cannot know who it will have to terminate, or when. This will be a massive undertaking if it happens. Before 1-2-13 no contractor knows that it will have to sustain a RIF, and it does not know what projects are to be affected.
LikeLike
Some actual good news:
“The Burmese Odd Couple
By BILL KELLER
Published: September 30, 2012”
LikeLike
More from Krugman
This election is, as I said, shaping up as a referendum on our social insurance system, and it looks as if Mr. Obama will emerge with a clear mandate for preserving and extending that system. It would be a terrible mistake, both politically and for the nation’s future, for him to let himself be talked into snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
I think he’s trying to warn Obama off the Grand Bargain, but I doubt it will work.
jnc, I thought you didn’t believe that’s really what Obama wanted. I’m only voting for him because the alternative is worse and I think he’ll at least soften the blow. Cuts are coming though if people resist an increase in taxes to pay the health care costs of today and tomorrow.
LikeLike
“lmsinca, on October 1, 2012 at 12:07 pm said:
jnc, I thought you didn’t believe that’s really what Obama wanted.”
I said based on what Obama says he wants (“balanced plans” and all those vague generalities from the convention).
His actions to date don’t match the rhetoric, but I certainly haven’t heard him taking a public stand that’s close to what Krugman is arguing for and thus I don’t think that Obama’s reelection will constitute a mandate for Paul Krugman.
LikeLike
Here we go again, someone comparing the ACA to Romney Care, and wondering why Republicans pretend to hate it.
IF Mitt Romney’s pivots on President’s Obama’s health care reform act have accelerated to a blur — from repealing on Day 1, to preserving this or that piece, to punting the decision to the states — it is for an odd reason buried beneath two and a half years of Republican political condemnations: the architecture of the Affordable Care Act is based on conservative, not liberal, ideas about individual responsibility and the power of market forces.
This fundamental ideological paradox, drowned out by partisan shouting since before the plan’s passage in 2010, explains why Obamacare has only lukewarm support from many liberals, who wanted a real, not imagined, “government takeover of health care.” It explains why Republicans have been unable since its passage to come up with anything better. And it explains why the law is nearly identical in design to the legislation Mr. Romney passed in Massachusetts while governor.
There is this though:
Social conservatives’ hostility to the health care act is a natural corollary to their broader agenda of controlling women’s bodies. These are not the objections of traditional “conservatives,” but of agitators for prying, invasive government — the very things they project, erroneously, onto the workings of the president’s plan. Decrying the legislation for interfering in the doctor-patient relationship, while seeking to pass grossly intrusive laws involving the OB-GYN-patient relationship, is one of the more bizarre disconnects in American politics.
Obamacare draws fire from this segment of “conservatives” because it fortifies the other side in their holy war. Coverage for birth control and abortion has not been introduced by the law; but it has been neutralized economically across all health plans, as part of the plan’s systemic effort to streamline fragmented health insurance markets and coverage.
The real problem with the health care plan — for Mr. Romney and the Republicans in general — is that political credit for it goes to Mr. Obama. Now, Mr. Romney is in a terrible fix trying to spin his way out of this paradox and tear down something he knows is right — something for which he ought to be taking great political credit of his own.
LikeLike
lms:
Social conservatives’ hostility to the health care act is a natural corollary to their broader agenda of controlling women’s bodies.
What tripe.
LikeLike
From your linked article:
“The president’s program extends the current health care system — mostly employer-based coverage, administered by commercial health insurers, with care delivered by fee-for-service doctors and hospitals — by removing the biggest obstacles to that system’s functioning like a competitive marketplace. ”
This statement is false. It does extend the current system to cover more people, but the biggest obstacle to the system functioning like a competitive marketplace is employer provided health insurance subsidized by the tax code.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/05/health_reform_for_beginners_th.html
As long as they try to maintain the “firewall” in the ACA between the employer provided insurance and the subsidized exchanges, it will fail to control costs.
LikeLike
jnc
but the biggest obstacle to the system functioning like a competitive marketplace is employer provided health insurance subsidized by the tax code.
I agree but isn’t that another Republican aspect to the current system that Republicans want to preserve.
LikeLike
McCain proposed eliminating the subsidy in 2008 with a refundable tax credit for individuals. Obama slammed him for it.
Insurers don’t particularly like it either — easier to sell to companies than individuals.
LikeLike
Scott
What tripe
Glad I didn’t say it then.
LikeLike
This should end well.
LikeLike
“Dems Let Obama Off the Hook for Bad Economy”
http://www.cnbc.com/id/49243546
Ya think?
LikeLike
“The Futures Now: New Web Show to Debut Tuesday”
http://www.cnbc.com/id/49242957
A webshow, could be interesting.
(nat gas at $3.50, right on time or maybe even a little early, $4 by year end. remember in the spring when it was $2 and it was going to be cheap nat gas until the end of time?)
LikeLike
“In the case of Greece, under last-chance pressure from its international creditors, the governing coalition tentatively agreed on an austerity package that includes some of the most severe cuts in public pensions ever imposed in a developed country. Pension payouts to retirees would be trimmed by as much as 10 percent.
And then there was Spain, where last Thursday the government of Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy introduced one of the most draconian budgets in the country’s history. It was intended to reassure international investors and demonstrate the fiscal discipline that the euro zone was demanding of Madrid.
The markets need reassuring: Spain has a stubbornly high budget deficit, its banks require tens of billions of euros in rescue loans and the government may soon have little choice but to request European aid.
Nevertheless, Mr. Rajoy declined to cut pensions or even to freeze them. Instead, his budget would actually increase payouts 1 percent next year on pensions for former public employees as well as on the social security payments that go to all retired Spaniards.”
http://www.cnbc.com/id/49236443
“Severe” is the new moderate!
LikeLike
Sigh. Just when you think it can’t get any worse:
“Mitt Romney doesn’t need new zingers. He needs new policies.
Posted by Ezra Klein on October 1, 2012 at 11:13 am
Behind in the polls and facing mounting panic among his donors, Mitt Romney is readying his secret weapon for the debates: Zingers.
“Mr. Romney’s team has concluded that debates are about creating moments and has equipped him with a series of zingers that he has memorized and has been practicing on aides since August,” reports the New York Times.
Pro tip: If your strategy to turn the presidential election around relies on Romney’s sense of comic timing, you might want to prepare a Plan B, as well. ”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/10/01/mitt-romney-doesnt-need-new-zingers-he-needs-new-policies/?hpid=z2
LikeLike
From the NYT that is the basis of Erza’s piece.
“During preparations, fewer than a dozen advisers are in the room. Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts plays Mr. Romney. Aides press Mr. Obama about unemployment, taxes and foreign policy, and try to be “as annoying as a White House correspondent,” as one put it. “You want to push the button and see how he will react,” the aide said.
That’s hilarious. Thinking that we have an adversarial press that’s ever asked Obama a tough question, let alone a follow up.
Re: zingers — *facepalm* — I can’t imagine something coming off more scripted and fake that a focused group tested one-timer that by definition isn’t a one-timer b/c it wasn’t spontaneous.
LikeLike
I can’t imagine something coming off more scripted and fake that a focused group tested one-timer
To be fair, Lloyd Bentsen’s “You’re no Jack Kennedy” came off pretty well, even though it was scripted. But you can’t do that effectively multiple times in a debate.
LikeLike
as annoying as a White House correspondent
Maybe they’re thinking of when Jay Carney is talking to them. Because otherwise, I agree with you about Presidential pressers.
LikeLike
Mike’s comment reminded me that I meant to post this, which is recollection from candidates on the debates: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/for-obama-and-romney-dos-and-donts-from-past-presidential-debates/2012/09/27/8977a2e4-0665-11e2-a10c-fa5a255a9258_story_1.html
“The debate coverage focused on [Lloyd Bentsen’s] Kennedy line. People came up afterwards and said, “You should have had a lot of comebacks on that.” I said: “Okay, fine, you tell me what. The most interesting comeback would have been, ‘Now wait a second, if my memory is correct, you voted for Senator [Lyndon] Johnson in those days. You weren’t even for Senator Kennedy when he was running for president, so what’s this buddy-buddy business?’ That was the best one.”
— Vice President Dan Quayle, on his 1988 debate with Lloyd Bentsen
Also, this was interesting, as it’s calling for an actual debate.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-to-turn-obama-and-romneys-faceoff-into-a-real-debate/2012/09/28/99d97ace-08bb-11e2-a10c-fa5a255a9258_story.html
LikeLike
This report explains a lot:
Full article available in pdf format at the link.
LikeLike
“markinaustin, on October 1, 2012 at 2:34 pm said:
The time for RIF notice is when the contractor receives the termination of contract for the convenience of the government, b/c before then the contractor cannot know who it will have to terminate, or when. This will be a massive undertaking if it happens. Before 1-2-13 no contractor knows that it will have to sustain a RIF, and it does not know what projects are to be affected.”
I thought that’s why Congress passed the law mandating that the Administration detail the sequester cuts in advance.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-14/obama-sequestration-report-warns-of-devastating-impact-of-cuts.html
I’m not sure if the case against RIF notices is as cut and dried as DoL says. There’s also this:
“Sequestration’s defense equation
Sequestration’s defense equation
By Michael Hoffman Thursday, September 6th, 2012 11:28 am
The Pentagon’s top buyer tried to simplify sequestration planning for defense industry executives clamoring for details on the federal budget cuts that will reduce defense spending over the next decade.
“If you want to know what will happen to your program, look at how much money you expect to have in your budget next year and cut 11 percent,” Frank Kendall, U.S. undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, told defense industry officials at the ComDef 2012 conference in Washington Wednesday.”
http://www.dodbuzz.com/2012/09/06/sequestrations-defense-equation/
LikeLike
I thought that’s why Congress passed the law mandating that the Administration detail the sequester cuts in advance.
I did not know this. In advance of an actual sequester? How far in advance? Announced when? That date, if it exists, could trigger RIF notice, if I were representing the contractor.
LikeLike
Banned finally gets his own WaPo column:
“Wary Americans saving more, even as government encourages risk
By Danielle Douglas, Monday, October 1, 3:00 PM
Americans are pouring record amounts of money into savings even though interest rates on those accounts are at historic lows, new federal data show, a sign that ordinary people are missing out on a booming stock market and recovering real estate sector.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/the-mattress-trap/2012/10/01/2bd72c96-0425-11e2-9b24-ff730c7f6312_story.html
LikeLike
From Nova’s link on the debates;
Who knows? Maybe one day there will be candidates who will see it as politically advantageous to reveal themselves in this way. In the meantime, take note of a meaningful rule change announced this year by the presidential debate commission. For the first time, in the first and third events, the candidates will each get two minutesto respond to the opening question for each 15-minute segment, and then “the moderator will use the balance of the time in the segment for a discussion.” That could mean up to 11 minutes of free-wheeling talk between the candidates. In a 90-minute debate, that could happen six times.
That is not insignificant. And if the candidates use that time not to make speeches or repeat talking points, or to ignore an important question that was just asked, but instead to listen, engage and think in a way the audience can witness, we just might get a presidential debate that deserves the label.
It could potentially be an interesting debate on Wed. I was planning on participating in the comments at the PL because it’s usually so quiet here at night, but if anyone is interested in doing our own live commentary here I’ll stick around and participate. Let me know.
LikeLike
Sigh. Looks like I overestimated the benefits of gridlock. Apparently letting the existing farm bill expire reverts back to a worse one from 1949 in terms of some subsidies:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/10/01/congress-just-let-the-farm-bill-expire-its-not-the-end-of-the-world-yet/
LikeLike
banned
This should end well.
Assuming I know what you’re talking about ………………….hahahahahaha
LikeLike
“markinaustin, on October 1, 2012 at 3:30 pm said: Edit Comment
I thought that’s why Congress passed the law mandating that the Administration detail the sequester cuts in advance.
I did not know this. In advance of an actual sequester? How far in advance? Announced when? That date, if it exists, could trigger RIF notice, if I were representing the contractor.”
It was in the link. The report came out September 14th. It was mandated by a law passed on August 7th, the Sequestration Transparency Act. There’s a full OMB breakdown.
LikeLike
Good piece by Mohamed A. El-Erian on QE Infinity:
“What the Fed’s Historic Bet Means for You
By Mohamed A. El-Erian
Oct 1 2012, 1:51 PM ET”
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/10/what-the-feds-historic-bet-means-for-you/263094/
LikeLike
Full Sequester OMB Report link:
Click to access Combined_STAReport_Watermark.pdf
LikeLike
Full Sequester OMB Report
While a RIF notice would not be required, reading pp. 57-62 there could be some contractors who might know what they were faced with. A RIF notice can be rescinded, of course. For most, this is not specific in the way contractors would need to know: which projects are being cut?
LikeLike
American Express may owe some of us money
Lulu–
I was planning on doing the debate thing on the PL, but it might be more fun here. The jumping box over there will probably be driving us all bonkers!
LikeLike
I will follow here. If I actually watch the debate I will participate, here.
LikeLike
The actual, literal trolling may be intolerable as well, especially given the recent increase in the use of multiple identities.
LikeLike
“SPRINGFIELD — A closer look at the state’s FY2012 budget is prompting new questions about whether Illinois could seek a federal bailout on pensions. The debate concerns a line in the FY2012 budget proposal that says “significant long-term improvements will come only from additional pension reforms, refinancing the liability and seeking a federal guarantee of the debt.”
Some suggest Illinois’ mounting pension debt could make the state a prime candidate for a bailout. Critics, however, say other states should not have to chip in. Governor Quinn’s office was not available for comment, but has reportedly said Illinois does not plan to turn to Washington to fix pensions.”
. . . until after the elections .
LikeLike
Okay, that’s four of us potentially. No reason we can’t go back and forth a little. I’ll put up an open post earlier in the day and schedule it for that night. We’re meeting with our tax guy that afternoon (OMG, OMG, OMG) but I’ll be back in time for the debate. Hopefully we’ll have enough commenters to make it worthwhile.
LikeLike
lms
Tell him you want to do the Caymans thing, but literally not just the bank accounts.
LikeLike
Hmm.
“JPMorgan Chase Lawsuit By New York AG A First For White House Task Force
Posted: 10/01/2012 6:02 pm EDT Updated: 10/01/2012 6:05 pm EDT
New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has sued JPMorgan Chase over mortgage-backed securities related to the 2008 financial crisis, according to a tweet by CNBC.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/01/jpmorgan-chase-lawsuit-new-york-ag-white-house_n_1930678.html
LikeLike
I don’t think he’s smart enough to figure that out banned, but he’s a nice guy with a few good ideas and cheap. BTW, we’re still sitting on our money in the stock market, I have one company (oil) that bounces up and down about 10 points and every time it’s down I buy a few more shares.
LikeLike
“NEW YORK (Reuters) – New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman on Monday filed a lawsuit against JPMorgan Chase & Co for fraud over faulty mortgage-backed securities packaged and sold by the former Bear Stearns.
The lawsuit alleged a “systematic abandonment of underwriting guidelines” in the selling of home loans that went into securities peddled by Bear Stearns. JPMorgan acquired Bear Stearns in 2008, at the start of the financial crisis.”
Well at least that Federal Task Force was a good applause line in the State of the Union!
LikeLike
lms
You mean you don’t believe in one million electric vehciles by 2015?
LikeLike
jnc
corked
LikeLike
banned
Nope, I have the inside scoop. Our daughter begins working in the industry on November 29th.
LikeLike
“WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Supreme Court seemed skeptical on Monday of allowing victims of human rights abuses to sue in American courts against the foreign corporations accused of aiding in the atrocities.
But in oral arguments in one of the court’s biggest human rights cases in years, some justices suggested they might not close U.S. courts to similar claims against individuals, including those who take refuge in the United States, or to claims involving U.S. companies.
In the case, the first of the court’s new term, 12 Nigerians accused Anglo-Dutch oil company Royal Dutch Shell Plc of complicity in a violent crackdown on protesters by military ruler Sani Abacha from 1992 to 1995.
Esther Kiobel filed her suit in 2002 on behalf of victims including her husband, Barinem, who was executed in 1995.
Her case was based on a 1789 law known as the Alien Tort Statute that had been dormant for nearly two centuries before lawyers began using it in the 1980s to bring international human rights cases in U.S. courts.”
http://news.yahoo.com/human-rights-focus-u-supreme-court-060109012–finance.html
Sometimes sanity wins one . . . we hope.
LikeLike
jnc
especially given the recent increase in the use of multiple identities.
Yes, I’ve noticed that. Seems that someone is unraveling or something. Signing in under numerous handles all at the same time, recommending his own posts under each name, and assuming he’s fooling everyone. Have you seen the latest, a riff on Liam’s name. There’s no love lost between Liam and I but sheesh…………….
LikeLike
Can’t imagine what our current school-age children will live to see.
http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_t3#/video/health/2012/10/01/early-cohen-ear-on-arm.cnn
LikeLike
“bannedagain5446, on October 1, 2012 at 4:24 pm said:
“NEW YORK (Reuters) – New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman on Monday filed a lawsuit against JPMorgan Chase & Co for fraud over faulty mortgage-backed securities packaged and sold by the former Bear Stearns.
The lawsuit alleged a “systematic abandonment of underwriting guidelines” in the selling of home loans that went into securities peddled by Bear Stearns. JPMorgan acquired Bear Stearns in 2008, at the start of the financial crisis.”
Well at least that Federal Task Force was a good applause line in the State of the Union!”
Banned – Interesting choice of initial litigation. No good deed goes unpunished.
As a reminder from four years ago:
Next time, get the waiver of liability up front.
LikeLike
jnc:
Mr. Lewis, paging Mr. Ken Lewis.
(everything Paulson knew he learned at Goldman . .. shudder)
LikeLike
Mr. Lewis, paging Mr. Ken Lewis.
And THAT one will leave a mark.
LikeLike
buuubbububububut you said I was a “made” guy Mr. Paulson, Why are you pointing that gun at me and telling me to get in the car?
LikeLike
This can’t be good.
The Romney campaign is experiencing what some officials believe could be the beginning of a mass exodus of big money donors diverting their cash away from the Republican presidential hopeful and toward Republican candidates for the House and Senate races more likely to win in November, the FOX Business Network has learned.
The trend isn’t at the acute stage, at least not yet, said one person with direct knowledge of the matter. This person, a major player in Romney’s New York fundraising circles, confirmed to FOX Business that a few New York donors have backed away from financial commitments to the Romney campaign and instead said they will spend their money to help the Republicans hold on to the House of Representatives, and pick up seats in the Senate.
But another person with direct knowledge of the matter says the trend, though nascent, is more geographically broad based, and reflects an increasing degree of anxiety both with what they believe is the tentative nature of the Romney campaign, and recent poll numbers that show President Obama with a lead, particularly in key battleground states, that some Republican contributors are starting to believe is insurmountable.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/government/2012/10/01/big-money-donors-toward-house-senate-races/#ixzz286MmQIwA
LikeLike