The NY Times editors are troubled by Treasury nominee Geithner's tax problems (discussed yesterday, by Byron York, and at the WSJ):
Mr. Geithner must be questioned forcefully about these matters at the hearing next week, and his explanations must be credible. Even in the best of economic times, it would be hard to accept a Treasury secretary — who, after all, is in charge of the Internal Revenue Service — with a cavalier attitude toward paying his taxes. Today, in a time of economic peril, the nation cannot afford a Treasury secretary with a tainted ability to command respect and instill confidence.
Hmm - I am troubled when the NY Times is aligned with grumbling Republican Senators as described by the WaPo, some of whom managed to push back Geithner's confirmation hearing:
Some Republicans continued to express concern. Sen. Charles E. Grassley (Iowa), the senior Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, said he considered the matter a serious infraction, though he added that he is withholding judgment on whether it disqualifies Geithner until the Treasury nominee testifies on Wednesday.
"It's more a matter of principle than the amount of money," Grassley said. "But the amount of money is very significant."
Sen. Jon Kyl (Ariz.), one of two Finance Committee Republicans who insisted that Geithner's hearing be pushed to next week, said, "people are trying to understand what's going on here and not just have this rushed through."
On the other hand, there is this:
But while some Republicans were grumbling about Geithner, others were reluctant to criticize what they view as one of Obama's most politically palatable appointments.
"He's about as conservative a nominee as you could hope for in that position, so people are hesitant to blow the guy up," a senior Senate Republican aide said.
Well, if Geithner leans a bit to the right I can understand why the Times would like to see a bit of a taint on him. And I can see why Mickey is able to find disgruntled Dems who might see a chance for an ideological upgrade at that position.
And left unremarked amidst the acclamations of Geithner's brilliance - why are the NY money-center banks, which fell under his regulatory watch as President of the NY Fed, in such disarray? Is Geithner an example of the smart regulator that would have prevented this crisis (the sort of smart regulator woefully under-employed in England, Germany, Spain and Iceland)?
MORE: The Senate report on tax preparation Geithner style.
THINKING OUT LOUD: Geithner had been a high Treasury official under Clinton and had held impressive jobs since then. As of 2006, when he amended his 2003 and 2004 returns, did he think that no Dem could win the White House in 2008, or did he think that he was not a likely candidate for an Administration job requiring Senate confirmation? Both of those thoughts seem odd.
Geithner creates a crisis in confidence regarding the entire financial situation.
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 11:03 AM
If I'm not mistaken he let regulations lapse.
==========================
Posted by: kim | January 15, 2009 at 11:09 AM
I'm pretty sure that is Bush's fault.
Posted by: MayBee | January 15, 2009 at 11:12 AM
left unremarked amidst the acclamations of Geithner's brilliance -
Depends where you look, I suppose.
Posted by: bgates | January 15, 2009 at 11:13 AM
Now that Geithner is revealed as ethically challenged and his competence is being questioned, the NYT is labeling him as "right."
Interesting
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 11:14 AM
How does Obama's appointment of a self-acknowledged tax cheat help to restore trust in a financial system in serious disarray? What value do the pronouncements of a cheat (and liar - vide signature, 1040) possess?
I still maintain that Geithner may be the most ethical person yet appointed by Obama but the US and world financial markets may well be looking for a slightly higher standard for the person entrusted with the responsibility of oversight of the Democrat vote purchasing giveaway that is supposed to 'fix' a problem which Geithner sat and watched develop.
I believe that the choice of Geithner reflects the utter incompetence of the incoming administration as well as Obama's complete and total disregard for ethical and moral standards of any sort in his decision making and choice of associates.
Welcome to Bubba v2.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 15, 2009 at 11:19 AM
It figures that I would post my lasttidbit, and then they open up a new thread, well here's the last thing I wrote:
Does anybody if in his capacity as Fed
Governor of New York, he said anything about
the speculative bubble, in this five year period, or the subprime market in
particular; you usually hear about
statements from Fed Governors commenting on trends, but that name seems to have escaped me. I think his goose is cooked, and they're already serving him with fau grasse, but not willing to openly concede the point.
As night follows day, the Dems closed the ANWR window, all but ensuring that oil prices will spike up with the next crisis in a)Nigeria, b)Saudi Arabia, c)Russia/
Caucasus, d)Venezuela (Chavez getting his mojo back, or chaos if he is deposed, or
e)any Gulf Coast hurricane. One of the other truly loathsome things I've hated about this election, besides the obvious is it's ability to empower the stupidest possible policy advisers. Lubchenco, Holdrim, Chu, Salazar, Browner. Our gal up in Alaska, raised objections to this particular idiocy, but will they hear her down here, and more importantly will 'any of the 'wizards of smart' take her warning seriously. My guess, it's going to be another one of those silent 'I told you so'
in 2012.
Posted by: narciso | January 15, 2009 at 10:55 AM
Clarice, did you get my message
Posted by: narciso | January 15, 2009 at 11:22 AM
It is a testament to the Capitol and media myopia that his lack of fitness was not immediately apparent to everyone who vetted him and read the record. period.
If he can't fill out his damned tax form and pay his taxes with all that assistance from the IMF he's unfit for office. And taking child care deductions for overnight camp is really the whipped cream on the sundae.
The man suffers from the same flaws as so many here..a sense that he's so special and entitled to so much , the rules do not simply apply to him.
Posted by: clarice | January 15, 2009 at 11:23 AM
I had vowed to keep track but did not. Have any of you a bullet-point short list of Obama's backtracks since the election.
We are in need of a wallet-sized "I told you so" card.
Posted by: sbw | January 15, 2009 at 11:28 AM
narciso. I just did and responded..twice..two posters now have offered to cover what should be almost all your expenses.
Posted by: clarice | January 15, 2009 at 11:28 AM
sbw
Jim Geraghty at NR is likely to have the list. Search for "expiration date." He blogs at Campaign Spot.
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 11:32 AM
The number of people opining on this without seeming to have read the Senate's report is pretty shocking.
I'm going to link it one more time in case TM wants to link it.
There is simply no way you can read that and come away thinking it was too complicated for him to have figured it out.
Posted by: MayBee | January 15, 2009 at 11:34 AM
He won't be confirmed.
How come we don't hear much about "failure to vet" anymore? Not long ago it was evidence of unfitness for the presidency.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 15, 2009 at 11:39 AM
Since neither Paulson or Geithner seem to understand the Markets and how to make them work.May I suggest a man who understand all the in & outs of Wall Street.Bernie Madoff for Sec.of Treasury.At least we know what kind of man he is
Posted by: jean | January 15, 2009 at 11:44 AM
LOL Jean. He's probably as good as the rest of them.
Posted by: Jane | January 15, 2009 at 11:49 AM
What is the evidence that he leans to the right? I've observed him at close hand for four or five years and have no clue of his politics, other than the understanding that for some reason the New York Fed president is traditionally a Democrat.
Posted by: jimmyk | January 15, 2009 at 11:57 AM
What is the evidence that he leans to the right?
He only wants a $1 Trillion stimulus package. A true left-leaner like Krugman thinks $4 Trillion is about right.
Posted by: MayBee | January 15, 2009 at 11:58 AM
We'll be hearing the good ol' honest-mistake defense a lot over the next few years.
"We were all laughing about it on the way over here," Clinton mused about another blameless, well-meaning national treasure. "All of us who've been in his office always found him buried beneath papers."
Haw-haw.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 15, 2009 at 12:00 PM
No need to worry about Geithner's qualifications. He learned everything he knows from Robert Rubin.
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 12:00 PM
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/01/the_geithner_grossup_grossout.html>IMF employees know says someone who prepared their returns
Posted by: clarice | January 15, 2009 at 12:06 PM
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/01/the_geithner_grossup_grossout.html>Cite
Posted by: clarice | January 15, 2009 at 12:08 PM
MayBee,
Thank you for reposting that link. I read through it quickly last night and missed the fact that the IMF splits overseas pay from domestic pay in the document provided to Geithner. That aligns perfectly with the instructions for the SE form and the IRS Field Advisory.
The man is a liar and a cheat - an Obama man to the core.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 15, 2009 at 12:08 PM
Hugh Hewitt is in favor of confirming him.
The guy's toast.
Posted by: creepy dude | January 15, 2009 at 12:12 PM
How come we don't hear much about "failure to vet" anymore? Not long ago it was evidence of unfitness for the presidency.
This isn't a failure to vet. This is vetting, knowing the problems, and thinking you can just slide it on by. This is dishonesty on several levels.
Posted by: Pofarmer | January 15, 2009 at 12:15 PM
When he took his last job, he thought he was going to be Fred Governor of NY.
Posted by: Ralph L | January 15, 2009 at 12:15 PM
Bad, thanks for the "expiration date" pointer.
Posted by: sbw | January 15, 2009 at 12:15 PM
"This is dishonesty on several levels."
Pofarmer,
How is that a drawback to working for a President who is even more dishonest? Is Geither more dishonest than Pritzker or Richardson? Do his transgressions rise to the level of taking a payoff from a felon to stack state boards?
A decent argument can be made that the vetting process revealed that Geithner would fit right in and work very well with other cabinet members. His lack of ethics mark him as eligible for membership in the Obama inner circle.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 15, 2009 at 12:23 PM
I saw a comment that the true complication of the IMF system is that employees assume because they are paid as contractors for tax purposes, they can take self-employment business expense deductions and set up self-employment IRAs. Apparently they cannot.
So that's why we keep hearing it is so confusing.
Posted by: MayBee | January 15, 2009 at 12:27 PM
Maybe we can get the republicans to vote against confirmation if we lie and tell them Geithner's a republican.Surely Graham and Voinovich would never tolerate such a thing in a Bush nominee.
Posted by: clarice | January 15, 2009 at 12:32 PM
Poor Geithner, none of his deduction issues were complicated, just the normal things every taxpayer deals with in filing their tax returns.
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 12:33 PM
I haven't heard anything out of John McCain on this issue. Is he lockstep with Graham?
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 12:34 PM
A decent argument can be made that the vetting process revealed that Geithner would fit right in and work very well with other cabinet members.
Yes, but even they realized that Pritzker wouldn't pass the smell test, and Richardson wasn't going to either.
My initial reaction was that the Senate would be too afraid not to confirm him because of the state of the economy, but if he's the butt of Jay Leno jokes, as someone reported in the previous thread, maybe he really is toast. That would certainly make my day.
I now wonder whether the apparent favorable market reaction to his nomination was simply that Wall Street recognized him to be a pushover who would favor all sorts of giveaways to financial institutions.
Posted by: jimmyk | January 15, 2009 at 12:38 PM
Easy to check if all his mistakes favored him. An innocent, ignorant, man would have favored the government with some of his mistakes.
=======================================
Posted by: kim | January 15, 2009 at 12:44 PM
Rick:
I still maintain that Geithner may be the most ethical person yet appointed by Obama but the US and world financial markets may well be looking for a slightly higher standard for the person entrusted with the responsibility of oversight of the Democrat vote purchasing giveaway
I prayed last night that you would be named Treasury Secretary.
Well, it wasn't so much a supplication for it to happen, it was more a lament that it won't.
Posted by: hit and run | January 15, 2009 at 12:44 PM
Probably, Santorum, just had a op ed, where he suggests McCain is ready to be the 60th Senator to break the filibuster, the ultimate stab in the front to Sarah, for her efforts to keep Chambliss in the Senate, to keep the campaign above the waterline; just like we speculated. Yes you heard me right, "Honorable Men', all, like Brutus and Cassius. Than again, gave a backhanded endorsement of her, which is a little surprising considering how he was regarded because of his pro-family and defense policy. Frum picked up on. So, his judgement is kind of hinky to say the least. Daddy, are the drillers just going traipse back to the Orinoco, over the North Slope; so they can get nationalized again when prices rise. Wouldn't surprise me in the least, with the sealing of an oil drum at ANWR; thanks to Pelosi & Reid.
Posted by: narciso | January 15, 2009 at 12:57 PM
"Yes, but even they realized that Pritzker wouldn't pass the smell test, and Richardson wasn't going to either."
There's probably some sort of initiation involved for those in charge of the vetting process for the Obama Administration - maybe they had to wear a dirty diaper as a bib for two weeks?
As far as the market reaction - it might have been to Summers rather than Geithner. Right now the market seems to be having a little indigestion concerning Zombiegroup and BAC. Perhaps Geithner could test the market by explaining how things will all be better in the morning (without mentioning which morning).
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 15, 2009 at 12:58 PM
Didn't know whether to post this here or on the martian farts thread:
This is a great moment for the inauguration train ride. I so hope it's televised...
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 01:00 PM
The biggest problem for Geithner is that wehn he repaid his 2003 and 2004 taxes in 2006, he didn't bother to repay his 2001 and 2002 taxes.
I may be wrong, but I was always told that the IRS can audit back 3 years, but if they find problems, they can go back 7 years.
If I'm right then .. somebody at the IRS should be in a shitload of trouble about now.
Posted by: Neo | January 15, 2009 at 01:01 PM
Posted by: Neo | January 15, 2009 at 01:05 PM
Neo, Geithner worked in the Treasury Dept during 2000,2001, and part of 2002.
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 01:05 PM
So he lied to his employer.
Posted by: Neo | January 15, 2009 at 01:07 PM
Holder has said the magic invocation, just like Open Sesame, or Abracadabra,
'waterboarding is torture' and "Gitmo must go, if not today, tomorrow." Hope those slugs from Ceti Alpha 6 are easy to dislodge from Joe and Victoria. It's something I take no joy in saying, but this is really putting "hope over experience" and you know how I feel about that trope.
Posted by: narciso | January 15, 2009 at 01:10 PM
You're being awfully hard on him Neo. He "intended" to do the right thing but couldn't figure out what that was.
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 01:10 PM
"I haven't heard anything out of John McCain on this issue."
Bliss it is in this dawn to be alive.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 15, 2009 at 01:12 PM
And don't forget, he's going to save us from the financial crisis which is so complicated we don't need to know how the tarp money is being spent.
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 01:13 PM
lol DoT
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 01:13 PM
sbw:
We are in need of a wallet-sized "I told you so" card.
Well you you know what I say...
You cannot spell “OBAMA’S PROMISES TO BRING YOU HOPE AND CHANGE ARE BULLSHIT” without
I T-O-L-D Y-O-U S-O
Posted by: hit and run | January 15, 2009 at 01:22 PM
Dixon has handled questions surrounding her conduct with her typical aplomb, by flipping off the press.
Pretty tacky of her stealing Obama's move like that.
Ann Coulter or somebody should be organizing a whistlestop tour tracing Obama's steps. I'm imagining stops like...
the Metropolitan Correction Center, Chicago to visit Friend of Barry, Tony Rezko
Governor Dead Meat's Mansion to see how former Obama ally (sshhh!) Blago is doing
1/2 an hour north to Racine, WI to ask the mayor whether there's anything to these child pron charges
Columbus, Ohio to help Obamista and confidential records enthusiast Helen Jones-Kelley clean out her desk
??? Ohio to visit Illegal Alien Auntie, who at last report is still violating the immigration laws Obama pretended to insist must be obeyed
Philly to thank columnist/rabble rouser Fatimah Ali for threatening a "race war" if Obama lost
Baltimore for the photo op with Dixon...
what other stops would be good?
Posted by: bgates | January 15, 2009 at 01:26 PM
O/T There was an item in the WSJ stating "The White House was hit with a last minute court order to preserve emails". Anybody have any idea what court that is?
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 15, 2009 at 01:28 PM
Everyone relax! Even if the Geithner nomination flames out, Zero could appoint a man with plenty of experience in baiting and switching billions of dollars of "rescue" money. Yes, folks, I give you . . . Hammerin' Hank Paulson. :-))
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 15, 2009 at 01:30 PM
??? Ohio to visit Illegal Alien Auntie, who at last report is still violating the immigration laws Obama pretended to insist must be obeyed
I think that was Rhode Island.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 15, 2009 at 01:30 PM
Boston, I think...
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 01:30 PM
Cap'n,
Auntie Illegal is trying to stay ahead of the INS 'til Tuesday.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 15, 2009 at 01:32 PM
Bgates, how about Detroit. http://thevimh.blogspot.com/2008/08/obama-free-kwame.html>He's a big Kwame fan
Posted by: hit and run | January 15, 2009 at 01:37 PM
Cuomo Finds Open Barn Door
No horses though. I hope Madoff is having a pleasnat day - working on the details concerning Dem pols whom he has "helped" over the years for his 'Let's Make A Deal' presentation to the SDNY folks.
Is Geithner really the fellow we want investigating Madoff's tax chiseling clients (hi, Chuckie!)
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 15, 2009 at 01:40 PM
Poor Bill. He makes Geithner seem so___________. LUN
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 01:44 PM
Boston, I think...
Out here in the frozen Midwest, all those Kennedy-infested Eastern states are indistinguishable.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 15, 2009 at 01:47 PM
He "intended" to do the right thing but couldn't figure out what that was.
Sounds like the "Madoff Story"
Posted by: Neo | January 15, 2009 at 01:52 PM
She was discovered in Boston, but fled to Ohio.
Hit, Doh! Detroit is a natural. A swing up through Michigan would be a nice way to visit the poor starving UAW officials, and see all the jobs Granholm has created distributing checks in the state's unemployment offices.
Posted by: bgates | January 15, 2009 at 01:52 PM
he's going to save us from the financial crisis which is so complicated we don't need to know how the tarp money is being spent.
a man with plenty of experience in baiting and switching billions of dollars of "rescue" money
Others have pointed out here that it's impossible to say how the money is being spent because money is fungible. If you give a $billion to a $100 billion institution there is no meaningful way to say that it was spent on X unless you know what the counterfactual is. (There may be sophisticated econometric ways of gauging the impact treating it as a sort of uncontrolled experiment). But generally this is not a meaningful criticism of the TARP.
The real problem with the TARP is that there seems to be no way (or at least no effort) to gauge the efficacy of the program in terms of its ultimate goal of stabilizing the institutions and stabilizing the credit markets, and therefore no way even to learn as we go along what works and what doesn't.
Posted by: jimmyk | January 15, 2009 at 01:53 PM
He "intended" to do the right thing but couldn't figure out what that was.
You can't just wait for the right thing to pop up, screaming, "Do me! Do me!"
...
Never mind.
Posted by: bgates | January 15, 2009 at 01:55 PM
I love that touch of trying to pass off his kid's overnight camp as child care expenses..What a two bit chiseler.
Posted by: clarice | January 15, 2009 at 01:58 PM
You can't just wait for the right thing to pop up, screaming, "Do me! Do me!"
Is this thread about mr. bad?
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 02:02 PM
Kim said it best: Somehow all these "mistakes" seem to have been in his favor.
Posted by: jimmyk | January 15, 2009 at 02:02 PM
"The Big Money Behind Geithner"
Hi guys,
Haven't posted over the past months but lurk here fairly frequently...always enjoy the informative, friendly and witty exchanges.
I noticed the above titled article over on Accuracy in the Media's website and thought I'd pass it on (sorry that I've forgotten how to turn the URL into a link):
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/the-big-money-behind-geithner/
Posted by: MaidMarion | January 15, 2009 at 02:04 PM
Cheney didn't even giggle while swearing in Burris....
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 02:04 PM
MaidMarion's link. LUN
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 02:06 PM
I have the expertise of Jihad all thanks to God and I know the financial expenses so one businessman's donation is sufficient to help in any of these fronts.
Guess who's asking for a bailout now?
Osama bin Laden...
For all that gloating about how the US is not doing so hot because of the financial meltdown and those "evil wars," he appears to be doing worse...
Wonder if he was invested with the Indian Madoff?
Posted by: Stephanie | January 15, 2009 at 02:06 PM
btw, I found out the answer to my previously posed question, a timeline of which is LUN. Anybody know what the deal is on CREW? The National Security Archives bunch sounds like a legit concern for historical purposes but even those can have nested vipers with malign intent.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 15, 2009 at 02:08 PM
Perhaps we cab get Fitz to look at the evidence and parse Eric Holders statements regarding the Rich pardon. I wonder if there is some way to, say, find out he lied is some obscure manner . And then lets say, maybeeee......oh nevermind.
Posted by: BobS | January 15, 2009 at 02:09 PM
bad: I wonder if he told Durbin to go f.... himself. Damn. Another missed opportunity.
Posted by: BobS | January 15, 2009 at 02:11 PM
hit: I T-O-L-D Y-O-U S-O
Tee, hee!
Posted by: sbw | January 15, 2009 at 02:13 PM
Captain: Anybody know what the deal is on CREW?
Why do you toss red meat at JOM animals?
Posted by: sbw | January 15, 2009 at 02:15 PM
Contributors to The Group of Thirty, which is a 501(c)3 by the way:
ABN AMRO Holding NV
American International Group
Arab Bank Plc.
Arab Fund for Economic and Social Development
Asociacion Española de Banca (AEB)
AXA Japan Holding Co. Ltd.
Axis Capital
Austrian National Bank
Banca d'Italia
Banco Central de Chile
Banco de Mexico
Banco de Portugal
Banco Mercantil
Banco Santander Central Hispano
Banque Centrale du Luxembourg
Bank Leumi le Israel BM
Bank of Greece
Bank of East Asia, Ltd.
Bank of New York
Bank of Nova Scotia
Barclays Bank PLC
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
BNP Paribas Bank
Brown Brothers Harriman & Co.
Central Bank of Malta
The Challenger Foundation
CIB Bank Ltd
Citi
Credit Suisse
Dah Sing Financial Group
Danmarks National Bank
Debs Foundation
Den Danske Bank A/S
Deutsche Bank AG
Deutsche Börse AG
Dubai Financial Services Authority
Euroclear
Euronext
Federal Reserve Bank of New York
Geoffrey Bell and Co.
Goldman Sachs and Co.
Gulf International Bank
Henry Kaufman & Company, Inc
Hong Kong Monetary Authority
HSBC Holdings plc
ING Group
JPMorgan Chase
Lehman Brothers
LCH Clearnet Group Limited
Merrill Lynch
Monetary Authority of Singapore
Munich Re AG
Morgan Stanley & Co., Int'l
National Bank of Hungary
NewSmith
Nordea Bank
Norges Bank
People’s Bank of China
Reserve Bank of Australia
Reserve Bank of India
Reuters Holdings Plc.
Saudi Arabian Monetary Authority
Schroders plc
Sella Holding Banca
Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken
Soros Fund Management
Standard & Poor's
Sullivan and Cromwell
Sveriges Riksbank
Swedbank
Swiss National Bank
Swiss Re
UBS
UniCredito Italiano
Whitehead Foundation
Zurich Group
Who is hot for Geithner at Treasury? Geithner the Righty according to NYT...
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 02:16 PM
Why do you toss red meat at JOM animals?
Posing that at AoS would be like in "Jurassic Park" when they lowered the cow into the raptor pit.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 15, 2009 at 02:19 PM
I think the guy must have some funky personality disorder. It's almost as if he wanted to disgrace himself. As tax schemes go, this is one of the dumbest I've ever seen, and I can think of no credible scenario that suggests he didn't know exactly what he was doing. I've heard stories about very rich people who steal hotel towels, etc. Maybe he's a closet nut case. Who knows, maybe we need a crazy tax cheat at Treasury?
Posted by: Old Dad | January 15, 2009 at 02:20 PM
I should have been more clear.
Geithner belongs to The Group of Thirty, a 501(c)3 supported by contributions from the above list.
Thanks Maid Marion for the link.
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 02:21 PM
CREW is a sham partisan democrat outfit who are misusing their non-profit status and should be investigated themselves.
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | January 15, 2009 at 02:22 PM
Thanks TS9; I suspected as much.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 15, 2009 at 02:24 PM
Top, don't forget to mention CREW member Melanie Sloane's history with... Ta Da... Chuck Schumer!
Posted by: sbw | January 15, 2009 at 02:25 PM
Geitner belongs to a group funded by contributions from many of the same groups and banks receiving TARP money and at least one hedge fund.
During Geithner's years at the helm of the New York Fed, oversight was pretty lax.
Gee, I wonder if there was any connection?
LUN
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 02:28 PM
That list at the LUN reads like a who's who of those "wiz kid Harvard grad managed companies" who are having trouble managing their companies and asking for TARP funds...
could the Group of 30 be a group of socialists draining our treasury to cripple us and topple the "capitalist pigs?"
Rot from within...
Posted by: Stephanie | January 15, 2009 at 02:31 PM
Hey Maid Marion, nice to see you!
Posted by: Jane | January 15, 2009 at 02:34 PM
anyone got any clues why the NYT's is now calling it "international wiretaps" instead of "domestic eavesdropping"?
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | January 15, 2009 at 02:38 PM
Meanwhile, Hillary sails through on a 16-1 vote.
Maybe Geithner is just a decoy. They already knew about all this, after all, and crooks aren't exactly the first people to ascribe innocent motives to each other.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 15, 2009 at 02:41 PM
anyone got any clues why the NYT's is now calling it "international wiretaps" instead of "domestic eavesdropping"?
maybe the "V" on their keyboard isn't working...
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 02:41 PM
Extraneous, I've had a similar doubt. What is being snuck through behind the scenes while the cabinet drama has us distracted?
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 02:44 PM
bad,
You are being really bad today, and that is really good. ::grin::
Posted by: Sue | January 15, 2009 at 02:55 PM
There is a lot more LUN
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 02:55 PM
thanks Sue
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 02:56 PM
narciso,
Be sure to watch Glen Beck's debut on Fox. His first guest is Sarah Palin!
Posted by: Sue | January 15, 2009 at 03:01 PM
WSJ: LUN
The IMF appears to be pushing back. Geithner needs to find a new whipping boy...
There's alway the "greedy" or "stupidity" defense...
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 03:09 PM
I like the "To Catch a Thief" defense: Geithner admits he was gaming the system and points out there is no one better to spot a scammer than a scammer.
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 03:14 PM
Our curresnt economic downturn is shaping up to be nothing more than the biggest bank heist in the history of mankind....and we, the American taxpayers, are left holding the bag and their dirty ski masks.
Posted by: Publius | January 15, 2009 at 03:14 PM
TaxProff round-up of opinion regarding Geithner: LUN
I know ESL parents who do their own taxes and didn't have issues with that..or any other part of their return..
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 03:31 PM
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | January 15, 2009 at 03:37 PM
Geez a US Airways jet has gone down in the Hudson river.
Posted by: Jane | January 15, 2009 at 03:43 PM
Oh my there is a USAIWAYS plane floating in Hudson River
Posted by: jean | January 15, 2009 at 03:44 PM
The child and dependent tax credit is also a phase out (IIRC)... it is reduced as your income rises... I don't think a $398K income gross income is going to be reduced enough by deductions (unless he played fast and loose with those, too..) so that he would qualify...so did he just take it and not read the rules?
No way he used software without overriding some major warning signs...I'm beginning to wonder if he didn't fill in the "blank SS and medicare" with fictional numbers and pretend he did pay them... and then deduct them.
Posted by: Stephanie | January 15, 2009 at 03:47 PM
Stephanie, you are such a kill-joy...hee hee
Posted by: bad | January 15, 2009 at 03:50 PM