Let’s recognize it: the US is a lawless nation, driven into bankruptcy by its own Banking-Justice Racket (BJR). Conditions in Europe are not much different.
SCOTUS, RAKOFF, KOZINSKI, LEON, PHILLIPS
MUELLER, KAISER, MELSON
BERNANKE, SCHAPIRO, DUGAN, MOYNIHAN
PAULSON, MOZILO, SAMUELS
Key Figures in the Banking-Justice Racket (BJR)
Los Angeles, December 5 – “At the bottom line, Morgenson reports, based on Bloomberg’s data, that pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act(2002), all executives of the major banks, who signed on their respective certifications on the SEC quarterly filings (they should’ve switched those to robo-signers, as well), were engaging in Securities Fraud, in collusion with BERNANKE,” says Joseph Zernik, PhD, of Human Rights Alert (NGO).
There is nothing new about this conclusion as well. It is already well-publicized that: [1-3]
- Since early 2008, Bank of America’s financial statements in SEC filings have been “delusional”, and
- Since early 2009, BERNANKE, PAULSON, LEWIS, MOYNIHAN and others were involved in a criminal conspiracy, detailed in Cuomo’s April 2009 letter to the US Senate.
What Morgenson is well-aware of, but only tangentially writes about, [4-6] that this is the reason that US banking executives are immune to both past and future criminality (a unique and often unmentioned feature of the US Constitution): They have incriminating evidence, every step of the way, on top US officers at the TREASURY, FED, SEC, THRIFT, OCC, OTC, FBI, US DOJ, and US JUDICIARY.
In that respect, the repeat fraudulent charades by US Judge JED RAKOFF, in the US District Court in Manhattan, are an integral part of the routine – sprinkling the holy water of justice to purify the racketeers… The tight association between the corrupt US financial institutions and the corrupt US judiciary is particularly alarming.  Judge JED RAKOFF should have been impeached for his conduct in previous performances. 
Congressional initiatives are useless: The US is unable to enforce the Securities Acts, Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002), Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act (2009), and RICO.
Let’s recognize it, once and for all: this is a lawless nation, through organized state crime – the Banking-Justice Racket (BJR) – the People are driven into bankruptcy.
The US Constitution is dead. The People are deprived of life, liberty, and property with no due process of law. 
 11-02-11 Press Release: US Congress Fails to Perform Its Oversight Duties and Impeach Bernanke
 11-08-16 Is Bernanke’s Conduct “treasonous”? Guardian.UK, NewsMax, and more…
 09-04-23 RE: SEC v BAC (1:09-cv-06829) State of New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo Letter to US Congress and analysts’ responses:
 11-04-21 “In Financial Crisis, No Prosecutions of Top Figures” – Because of widespread corruption of the justice system, they are effectively immune…
 08-01-08 Case of Borrower Hills (01-22574) – in the US Bankruptcy Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh. Countrywide’s Three “Recreated Letters” and a Transcript
 11-10-20 Citigroup Settles for $285 Million; No Wall Street Executive Jailed Yet _ Truthout
 11-08-01 Zernik, J: Fraud and corruption in the US courts is tightly linked to failing banking regulation and the financial crisis, 16th World Criminology Congress presentation
11-04-12 PRESS RELEASE: Bribing of State and US Judges by Bank of America Must be a Serious Concern!
 10-12-08 Request No 1 for Investigation, Impeachment of RUBY KRAJICK, Clerk of the Court, US District Court, Southern District of New York, in re: Conduct of Securities and Exchange Commission v Bank of America Corporation(1:09-cv-06829)
10-12-19 Addendum to Request No 1 for Investigation/impeachment of JUDGE RAKOFF and Clerk RUBY KRAJICK, US District Court, Southern District of New York, in re: Conduct of Securities and Exchange Commission v Bank of America Corporation (1:09-cv-06829)
11-02-05 Request No 2 for Impeachment of Judge JED RAKOFF Clerk RUBY KRAJICK, US District Court, Southern District of New York, in Re Conduct of Lindner v Amex (1:10-cv-02228)
 11-06-14 Corruption of the Courts and Failing Banking Regulation in the United States: Dred Scott redux?
11-06-24 Time Magazine – 4th of July Issue: Does the Constitution Still Matter?
11-10-03 Execution of US Citizens by Presidential Directives With No Due Process of Law
11-11-22 Habeas Corpus in the United States – Medieval-Digital Era…
11-12-02 Posse Comitatus Act (1878) and current martial law in the United States
THE NEW YORK TIMES
Secrets of the Bailout, Now Told
Published: December 3, 2011
A â€‚FRESH account emerged last week about the magnitude of financial aid that the Federal Reserve bestowed on big banks during the 2008-09 credit crisis. The report came from Bloomberg News, which had to mount a lengthy legal fight to wrest documents from the Fed that detailed its rescue efforts.
It is dispiriting, of course, that we are still learning about the billions provided to various financial firms during the crisis. Another sad element to this mess is that getting the truth requires the legal firepower of an organization as rich as Bloomberg.
But thatâ€™s the way our world works. Billions are secretly showered on troubled financial institutions to stave off disaster. Individuals get little or no help.
Here are some of the new figures:
Among all the rescue programs set up by the Fed, $7.77 trillion in commitments were outstanding as of March 2009, Bloomberg said. The nationâ€™s six largest banks — JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley — borrowed almost half a trillion dollars from the Fed at peak periods, Bloomberg calculated, using the central bankâ€™s data.
Those six institutions accounted for 63 percent of the average daily borrowings from the Fed by all publicly traded United States banks, money management and investment firms, Bloomberg said.
Numbers for individual companies were equally astonishing. For example, the Fed provided Bear Stearns with $30 billion to see it through its 2008 shotgun marriage with JPMorgan. This was in addition to the $29.5 billion in assets purchased by the Fed from Bear to assist in the buyout by JPMorgan. Citigroup, meanwhile, tapped the Fed for almost $100 billion in January 2009 —” its peak during the crisis — and Morgan Stanley received $107 billion in Fedd loans in September 2008.
Some may see all this as ancient history or as ho-hum disclosures that confirm what everybody already knew — that our banks were on the prrecipice and that only hundreds of billions of dollars could save them. The Fed says that the money it lent in these programs was paid back without generating any losses.
But the information is revealing nonetheless. The fact is, investors didnâ€™t know how dire the situation was at these institutions. At the same time that these banks were privately thronging the teller windows at the Fed, some of their executives were publicly espousing their firmsâ€™ financial solidity.
During the first three months of 2009, for example, when Citigroupâ€™s Fed borrowing apparently peaked, Vikram Pandit, its chief executive, hailed the companyâ€™s performance. Calling that first quarter the best over all since 2007, Mr. Pandit said the results showed â€œthe strength of Citiâ€™s franchise.â€
Citiâ€™s earnings release didnâ€™t detail its large Fed borrowings; neither did its filing for the first quarter of 2009 with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Other banks kept silent on these activities or mentioned them in passing with few specifics.
These disclosure lapses are disturbing to Lynn E. Turner, a former chief accountant at the S.E.C. Since 1989, he said, commission rules have required public companies to disclose details about material federal assistance they receive. The rules grew out of the savings and loan crisis, during which hundreds of banks failed and others received government help.
The rules are found in a section of the S.E.C.â€™s Codification of Financial Reporting Policies titled â€œEffects of Federal Financial Assistance Upon Operations.â€ They state that if any types of federal financial assistance have â€œmaterially affected or are reasonably likely to have a future material effect upon financial condition or results of operations, the management discussion and analysis should provide disclosure of the nature, amounts and effects of such assistance.â€
Given these rules, Mr. Turner said: â€œI would have expected some discussion in the management discussion and analysis of how this has had a positive impact on these banksâ€™ operating results. The borrowings had to have an impact on their liquidity and earnings, but I donâ€™t ever recall anybody saying â€˜we borrowed a bunch of money from the Fed at zero percent interest.â€™ â€
I asked officials at Citigroup and Morgan Stanley about these disclosures. Jon Diat, a spokesman for Citigroup, said the bankâ€™s disclosures in its quarterly filings with the S.E.C. â€œwere entirely appropriate.â€ He added that Citi and other financial services firms â€œutilized numerous government programs that provided significant funding capacity and liquidity support which helped increase the flow of credit into the economy.â€
Morgan Stanley pointed to its annual report for 2008, which mentioned the various Fed programs and the bankâ€™s ability to tap them. The filing noted that the Fed was authorized to extend credit to Morgan Stanleyâ€™s broker-dealer units in both the United States and Britain but contained no dollar amounts used.
Of course, there is stigma associated with a company tapping into federal assistance programs. This is the Fedâ€™s main argument for keeping its operations under wraps. And companies want to avoid frightening investors by disclosing their reliance on this type of emergency cash, even if it is only temporary.
But keeping this information from shareholders is no way to engender their trust. And a lack of investor confidence often translates to depressed valuations among companiesâ€™ shares. If investors doubt that a company is coming clean about its financial standing — the current worry is how expossed our banks are to European debt woes — its stock price will suffer. This is veery likely one of the reasons that big bank stocks trade at such low price-to-earnings multiples today.
It will be interesting to see whether the S.E.C. does anything to enforce its rules that companies disclose federal assistance in financial filings, either in the recent past or in the future. You could certainly argue that requiring such disclosures is even more important nowadays, given that so many banks are considered too big to fail and that the taxpayer will undoubtedly be asked once again to rescue them from their mistakes.
â€œThese banks and the Fed have never believed in transparency,â€ Mr. Turner said. â€œI actually think their thought process is sorely flawed. If the banks knew this stuff was going to be made public theyâ€™d behave differently. Instead of runs on the bank youâ€™d have bankers doing things intelligently to avoid getting into trouble.â€
What an idea!
Joseph Zernik, PhD
Human Rights Alert (NGO)
The 2010 submission of Human Rights Alert to the Human Rights Council (HRC) of the United Nations was reviewed by the HRC professional staff and incorporated in the official HRC Professional Staff Report with a note referring to “corruption of the courts and the legal profession and discrimination by law enforcement in California.”
Flag Counter: 128
Total Reads: 660,060
Total Item Views: 585,338
WHAT DID THE EXPERT SAY ABOUT THE CURRENT FINANCIAL CRISIS?
* Foreclosure fraud: The homeowner nightmares continue
CNN (April 7, 2011)
* About 3 million homes have been repossessed since the housing boom ended in 2006… That number could balloon to about 6 million by 2013
Bloomberg (January 2011)
* “…a system in which only the little people have to obey the law, while the rich, and bankers especially, can cheat and defraud without consequences.”
Prof Paul Krugman, MIT (2011)
WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA?
* “…judges tried and sentenced a staggering number of people for crimes they did not commit.”
Prof David Burcham, Dean, Loyola Law School, LA (2001)
* “This is conduct associated with the most repressive dictators and police states… and judges must share responsibility when innocent people are convicted.”
Prof Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean, Irvine Law School (2001)
* “Innocent people remain in prison”
* “…the LA Superior Court and the DA office, the two other parts of the justice system that the Blue Panel Report recommends must be investigated relative to the integrity of the system, have not produced any response that we know of…”
LAPD Blue Ribbon Review Panel Report (2006)
WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN CALIFORNIA?
* “…corruption of the courts and the legal profession and discrimination by law enforcement in California.”
United Nations Human Rights Council Staff Report (2010)
WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE STATE COURTS IN THE UNITED STATES?
* “On July 26, 2010, Laurence Tribe, Senior Counsel for the United States Department of Justice, Access to Justice Initiative, delivered an important speech to the Conference of Chief Justices, challenging them to halt the disintegration of our state justice systems before they become indistinguishable from courts of third world nations.”
Prof Laurence Tribe, Harvard Law School (2010), per National Defender Leadership Institute (2010)
WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE CONDITIONS IN THE PRISON IN MONROE COUNTY, TENESSEE?
* “What goes on there is more like gulags of centuries ago.”
WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES?
* “More than 100 law professors have signed on to a letter released today that proposes congressional hearings and legislation aimed at fashioning “mandatory and enforceable” ethics rules for Supreme Court justices for the first time. The effort, coordinated by the liberal Alliance for Justice, was triggered by “recent media reports,” the letter said, apparently referring to stories of meetings and other potential conflicts of interest involving Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas among others.”
More than 100 law professors, as reported by the Blog of the Legal Times (February 2011)
WHAT DID CHIEF JUDGE OF THE US COURT OF APPEALS, 5TH CIRCUIT, SAY ABOUT THE US JUSTICE SYSTEM?
* “The American legal system has been corrupted almost beyond recognition…”
Chief Judge, US Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit, Edith Jones, speaking before the Federalist Society of Harvard Law School (February 2003)
WHAT DID THE CHAIR OF THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE SAY ABOUT THE US JUSTICE SYSTEM?
* In a speech in Georgetown University, Senator Leahy, Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee called for a “Truth and Reconciliation Commission” on the US Department of Justice.
Transcript of Senator Leahy speech (2009)
Human rights, freedom of the speech, government corruption, and more, will be discussed in:
Love, Peace, Justice
empowering the People through
date to be scheduled
To join our email list send subscribe message to Joseph Zernik, PhD:
WATCH THE YOUTUBE VIDEOS:
 From Jerusalem to the Wall Street Protesters: we must bring this Robber Baron Era to an end!
 Guantanamera: From Jerusalem to Guantanamo Bay — the US has lost all credibility as a Civil Society
 Boris announcing dream party Jerusalem al-Quds 2012
 “Come to Jerusalem,” says Mr Take It Easy…