What was that Libby trial all about, how many times was Rove required to meet with Fitz? Jesus Mary and Joseph can’t Fitz or someone get this compulsive liar off our streets. This is just more abuse watching Plame get slapped or “kicked in the gut” by Karl’s filthy lies.

Jane Hamsher is right. Karl Rove and Limbaugh must be brothers.

We are watching, pushing and praying that this is true. So far not looking so good. Send out that Sergeant at Arms

Hey Turdblossum! Knock yourself out! And while you’re at it, you might want to decide if you’d like to be the husband or the wife.

what then?

If people really knew the types of bets that were made and the possible exposures, I doubt they would have any faith left in any financial institution with ties to Wall Street.

Heard someone on Air America over the weekend say that the International Bank of Settlements thinks the worldwide exposure to CDS may be 1000 trillion dollars. The guest described the types of hedging that are the bases for these swaps….versions of gambling that would not be allowed in any casino anywhere in the world. Hell, the mob wouldn’t have taken those bets.

We’re not being told the full scope of this tsunami.

In the meantime, everything I’m reading at this point anyway seems deliberately designed to obfuscate and confuse — more kabuki. At a time when clarity and defined purpose would be a much, much better choice, IMHO.

completely agree.

at some point i hope people learn that transparency is required for long term institutional trust.

btw, here’s some dean baker from sunday (h/t hugh):

Just so people are clear about what’s at stake right now: The banks are bankrupt. And we should probably say that about fifty thousand times. The banks are bankrupt. So, when people are talking about, when President Obama and others are talking about how we’re going to deal about their troubled assets, what they are really talking about is how can we keep them afloat when they are in fact bankrupt without making it really obvious that we’re giving them taxpayer dollars.

There was an article in the Washington Post today that was talking today about one of the problems with these plans to buy up the bad assets is that we might pay too much. That’s not the problem, that’s the point. They want to pay too much because if we paid the correct price, if we paid the market price, the banks would be bankrupt, they’d have to own up to that and they’d be out of business.

So, what they are trying to do is hand money to the banks and pretend it’s something other than handing money to the banks. And that’s why it’s so difficult, because the obvious thing to do is simply to take them over. Then you get all these people saying you want to nationalize the banks. I go no, I want the market to work, they’re bankrupt and a bankrupt company is taken over my a bankruptcy judge. Bankruptcy judges don’t work well in operating large banks, so what we would have to do is have the government step in and in effect run them, get their books back in order and sell them back to the private sector. So, that’s actually the market solution. They don’t want the market solution. They want the government welfare solution.