Obama Citizenship

Birth Certificate Mentioned on Glenn Beck; Rep Confirms Major Draw-Down on US Banks

By Phil

In the first video (thanks, TheBetrayal), syndicated columnist Star Parker, in an interview with Michelle Maulkin and Stephen Moore discussing the non-vetting of the President’s appointees, mentions (while Beck is speaking) that “we haven’t seen his birth certificate either…”:

The next video (via AmericanDaughter) is significantly more sinister. Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-PA), Capital Market Subcommittee Chair (one of a few Democrats who had the gall to question why the stimulus bill was being fast-tracked), mentioned the following in this video (full transcript follows):

Here?s the facts, and we don?t even talk about these things. On Thursday [September 18] at about eleven o?clock in the morning, the Federal Reserve noticed a tremendous draw-down of money market accounts in the United States, to the tune of $550 billion dollars was being drawn out in the matter of an hour or two. The Treasury opened up its window to help. They pumped a hundred and five billion dollars in the system and quickly realized that they could not stem the tide. We were having an electronic run on the banks. They decided to close the operation, close down the money accounts and announce a guarantee of $250,000 per account so there wouldn?t be further panic out there, and that?s what actually happened.

It?s because of the misconceptions out there that things were done that are misunderstood. We did not give the $700 billion dollars for the purpose of lending money. That was never in the program. It was misconstrued initially and put together with the suggestion by the Secretary of the Treasury that we would be buying what we called ?dirty assets? ? defective mortgages and securities that were held in these banks ? that the government would find a way to create a market, buy them in, take them off the balance sheets of the banks so that the banks could continue to function normally?. I supported that, but also part of the bill, we gave the jurisdiction and authority to the Secretary of the Treasury to make investments in banks. He had very wide authority because quite frankly, we?re not the experts on the Hill as to how to solve this problem. And the problem is a multi-faceted problem, so we gave great flexibility to the Secretary of the Treasury to act?.

I was there when the Secretary and the Chairman of the Federal Reserve came those days and talked with members of Congress about what was going on?. Here?s the facts, and we don?t even talk about these things. On Thursday [September 18] at about eleven o?clock in the morning, the Federal Reserve noticed a tremendous draw-down of money market accounts in the United States, to the tune of $550 billion dollars was being drawn out in the matter of an hour or two. The Treasury opened up its window to help. They pumped a hundred and five billion dollars in the system and quickly realized that they could not stem the tide. We were having an electronic run on the banks. They decided to close the operation, close down the money accounts and announce a guarantee of $250,000 per account so there wouldn?t be further panic out there, and that?s what actually happened.

If they had not done that, their estimation was that by 2 o?clock that afternoon, five-and-a-half trillion dollars would have been drawn out of the money market system of the United States, would have collapsed the entire economy of the United States, and within 24 hours the world economy would have collapsed. Now we talked at that time about what would happen if that happened. It would have been the end of our economic system and our political system as we know it.

And that?s why, when they made the point we?ve got to act and do things quickly we did. Now Secretary Paulson said, ?Let?s buy out these sub-prime mortgages.? That?s when he came to Congress. But he said, ?Give us latitude and large authority to do many things as we decide necessary. And give us seven hundred billion dollars to do that.?

Shortly after we enacted our bill with those very broad powers. The U.K. came out and said, ?No, we don?t have enough money to buy toxic assets. Instead, we?re going to put our money into banks so that their equity grows and they?re not bankrupt.? And so the U.K. started that process and that?s true. It was much cheaper to put more money in banks as equity investment than to start buying their bad assets, because it became early determined that we?d probably have to spend three or four trillion dollars of taxpayer?s money to buy these bad assets. And we didn?t have? we only had seven hundred billion dollars. So Paulson made a complete switch, went in and started putting money in buying securities and reinvesting in the banks of the United States. Why? Because if you don?t have a banking system you don?t have an economy. And although we did that, it wasn?t enough money, and as fast as we did that, the economy has been falling, and the reason last week? We?re really no better off today than we were three months ago because we?v had a decrease in the equity positions of banks because other assets are going sour by the moment?.

Full post as published by The Right Side of Life on February 11, 2009 (boomark / email).