Tim Geithner, Fed Knew of Lloyd's LIBOR Scam. Implicates the 16 LIBOR Banks, BofA, CITI

US knew of Lloyds' role in Libor scandal
Lloyds Banking Group may have been rigging its Libor submissions as early as August 2007, explosive documents released tonight by the Federal Reserve of New York suggest.

The Telegraph of London is reporting that documents and memos leaked late Friday show that Lloyd's, England's part-nationalized, second largest bank had advised and confirmed to Treasury Sec. Geithner, while he was in charge of the N.Y. Fed that the LIBOR rates were being artificially manipulated.

The documents were released after US politicians demanded that the New York Fed reveal all its correspondence with Barclays — fined £290m last month over the rigging of interbank lending rates — amid the escalating scandal that has shaken the City.

The evidence shows that the New York Fed gathered a mass of information about Libor rigging from sources inside Barclays in 2007 and 2008. On April 11, 2008, one Barclays trader told Fabiola Ravazzola, a New York Fed official: “So, we know that we’re not posting, um, an honest Libor... And yet and yet we are doing it, because, um, if we didn’t do it, it draws, um, unwanted attention on ourselves.”

Mr Geithner told Sir Mervyn of the concerns about Libor misrepresentations at a meeting in May 2008. He then wrote his memo on May 27, 2008, urging Sir Mervyn to overhaul Libor.

In the memo Mr Geithner, who is now US Treasury Secretary, implies that he mistrusts the bankers who are left to choose Libor submissions themselves and has lost faith in the British Bankers Association (BBA), the body charged with overseeing the system.

“To improve the integrity and transparency of the rate-setting process, we recommend the BBA work with Libor panel banks to establish and publish best practices for calculating and reporting rates, including procedures designed to prevent accidental or deliberate misreporting,” the memo says.

The memo calls for bank’s “internal and external auditors confirm adherence to these best practices and attest to the accuracy of banks’ Libor rates”.

US knew of Lloyds' role in Libor scandal

When you consider that TRILLIONS of $$ trade on LIBOR "rate swaps," and that the London Interbank Offered (Overnight) Rate is the standard for mortgage loans, auro financing and credit card rates, the impact is almost incalculable.

It has been speculated that at least 14 of the 16 banks that set the rate participated, including Bank of America and CITI

By keeping the rate artifically low, banks make it appear that they have better credit than they did in reality.

Since this started in 2007, the artificially-low rates hid the gross insolvency and lack of reserves that most major banks had while Geithner was in charge of the Federal Reserve, which regulates US banks, and could/should have intervened to end the scam and expose the problems before the banks finally imploded.

Pure Greed and Incompetence.
Screw the public.

When will these money whores start to face real jail time?
When will the public interest outweigh the bankers' interests?

reply to post by jdub297


The sh.t just got real people. Now the US fed reserve is implicated in this libor scandal. Involvement for the last 5 years !

Get ready for some scum-bag elitist to press the red button. Count-down to WW3 starts .......... Now !

S&F

By keeping the rate artifically low, banks make it appear that they have better credit than they did in reality.

I thought they where keeping the rate artificially high and raking in more money through higher interest rates?

reply to post by jdub297


the 16 banks under investigation:
Barclays
Lloyds Banking Group
Bank of America
CITIBank
Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi
Credit Suisse
Deutsche Bank
HSBC
HBOS (now part of Lloyds)
JPMorgan
RaboBank
RBC (Royal Banl of Canada)
RBS (Royal Bank of Scotland)
UBS (United Bank of Switzerland)
West LB (Germany)
Norinchuckin

Thieves and scoundrels.
They should all be broken up, speculative trading ended and returned to retail and commercial banking, their primary function, rather than acting as speculators and sel-aggrandizing manipulators.

reply to post by jdub297


Remember when we all thought Mr Geithner was the BAD guy ? Turns out, he was trying to stop the corruption. My mind is blown, you guys have no idea.

Originally posted by kwakakev

By keeping the rate artifically low, banks make it appear that they have better credit than they did in reality.

I thought they where keeping the rate artificially high and raking in more money through higher interest rates?

These are the rates at which banks can borrow from each other if they need to cover short-term needs.
These are NOT the rates they charge the public.
If you look at your adjustable-rate mortgage or credit card agreement, they are set to some percentage ABOVE LIBOR!.

By keeping the rate low, it makes it appear that the bank is a better credit risk than it really is.
A higher LIBOR would potentially cause a "run" on a bank by showing that their credit was not as good as others.
These banks kept the LIBOR artificially low to create a false sense of security.
Tim Geithner knew in 2007/2008 and gave the 16 banks a list of "suggestions," whivh they (of course) ignored.

He could've "blown the whistle" and put an early end to the problems that grew worse as time passed; until there was no credit left among them and the gov't stepped in with TARP to free-up their capital reserves.

Ron Paul has been advocating to audit or end the Fedreal Reserve, which is a private bank given governmental powers to set monetary policy, i.e., interest rates!
The fox was guarding the henhouse!

The illuminati line of bull is reaching a crescendo. Here comes the fat lady she's gonna sing...


This is all a smokescreen.

Originally posted by skepticconwatcher
reply to post by jdub297

 

Remember when we all thought Mr Geithner was the BAD guy ? Turns out, he was trying to stop the corruption.

Tim Geithner could've gone public and ended this in 2007, with far less damage than we vfaced in 2008 and 2009. Instead, he and the private Federal Reserve kept quiet and allowed US banks, which HE was supposed to be regularing, to continue their participation and deceit; stealing from the public and commercial borrowers who ultimately paid the taxes and fees that bailed them out.

Please tell us how Sec. Geithner "was trying to stop the corruption."
All he did was offer a list of 6 "guidelines" that he well knew would be ignored, and kept his mouth shut!

Please tell us how he kept JPMorgan, CITI and BofA from "playing the game" in 2007 or 2008 or 2009. He was responsible for regulating them as chief of the Fed in 2008 and 9, and as Treasury Sec. in 2009 and 2010 and 2011, when we were still holding ownership interests.

reply to post by jdub297


Isn't it cool how the banks can set their own credit scores!

I only we had the same ability. It's like everything else though, one rule for them another for us...

There was a statement released by the SFO (serious fraud office) apparently saying that no high level bankers will be ever be held accountable again. Nice that!

Originally posted by skepticconwatcher
reply to post by jdub297

 

Remember when we all thought Mr Geithner was the BAD guy ? Turns out, he was trying to stop the corruption. My mind is blown, you guys have no idea.

That would be great! Except.... remember this?

We might need to consider that this was leaked intentionally. The Fed is ran by executives of each of those banks. Could it be that they leak inflamatory info to get the public up in arms and then the restructuring comes in. One world bank...Just a thought.

this is one of the reason why our states and cities are having such are hard time...

while the banks are raking in huge profits!
this wasn't done just so that the banks could give the impression that they were more credit worthy!!
there was a huge amount of profit made through this scam. and we, the taxpayers are the one paying the tab!!!


www.youtube.com...#!

Originally posted by dawnstar
this is one of the reason why our states and cities are having such are hard time...

No, some of our states and cities tried to play the speculation game that the banks sold them to "protect" their bond financing with swaps. The foolish and over-extended cities (especially in California) were gambling with taxpayer-funded bonds thinking they would get a windfall to pay themselves and their public employee pensions with the proceeds. As amateursm they didn't know what they were doing speculating.

while the banks are raking in huge profits!

Profis, in and of themselves are not evil.
Trying to maximize bank profits by gambling is.
Before Bill Clinton and his Treasury appointees Robert Rubin and Tim Geithner pushed for the elimination of Glass-Steagall, banks were not allowed to speculate with swaps and CDOs; they had to limit their profit-making to the traditional bank business of making loans to business and consumers.

Sadly, Barack Obama has chosen those same people to guide our "recovery."

Unfortunately, his economic appointments leave a lot to be desired.
[H]e chose Lawrence Summers to head the council and Timothy Geithner to be Treasury Secretary. ...
Both were disciples of Robert Rubin when he began to deregulate the financial industry as Clinton’s Treasury Secretary in the late 1990s.
...
Summers also helped knock down Glass-Steagall, the wall erected in the New Deal to keep commercial banks and investment houses separate.

Then as Treasury Secretary, Summers approved the deregulation of the financial industry even further. He and Clinton signed off on the Commodity Futures Modernization Act that removed oversight from the credit default swaps and derivatives trading that have so imperiled our economy.

Summers was Rubin’s disciple. And Timothy Geithner is Summers’s disciple.

www.progressive.org...

this wasn't done just so that the banks could give the impression that they were more credit worthy!!
there was a huge amount of profit made through this scam. and we, the taxpayers are the one paying the tab!!!

Actually, if the banks had been forced to be honest about their books and bets, they couldn't have taken advantage of the fake LIBOR to keep their swaps and CDOs safe.

And now, today, we have Summers, Geithner, Bernanke et al still "running the show."
Hope and Change, you know.

reply to post by jdub297


ya, I know, we should have all had our eyes open in the early 2000's and saw that the banks were not playing with a full deck of cards, no, they weren't honest people and we all should have known that. the homeowners should have known that, the ones running the pension programs should have known that, and of course, our local and state gov'ts should have known that. oh yes, it's all the fault of that hope and change guy, even though most of it was set while bush was in office. yep, got ya.....
this is all the fault of our local gov't officials, who were just trying to save their taxpayers a little money, who thought, like most do that when the economy blew up, that variable rate would skyrocket. oh, yes, we should have all known that the aliiance between banks and gov't would allow them to manipulate the entire market to bend it whichever way they chose it to bend so they could stand at the end waiting for the cash to come pouring in....

sorry for any infraction of the terms and conditions of use...

break 'em up or let them fail !!!

heck, is ma' bell was a threat, these bankers are a dirty nuke with zombie rabies

reply to post by dawnstar


It boggles my mind how some people can be so ignorant of the obvious or who just refuse to accept facts, but would prefer to twist and spin things to fit their own personal bias.

Originally posted by dawnstar
reply to post by jdub297

 

ya, I know, we should have all had our eyes open in the early 2000's and saw that the banks were not playing with a full deck of cards, no, they weren't honest people and we all should have known that.

Unfortunately, Clinton and his cronies believed that by openoing up credit markets, and even new markets like CDOs, they coiuld bypass his tax and spend politics by generating spending through the extension of credit to the non-creditworthy, including banks.

the homeowners should have known that,

Anyone who applied for a home loan with "Liar Loans" knew they couldn't afford the payments, but went along with the offers of HELOCs and 125% mortgages because it was "free money."

the ones running the pension programs should have known that,

Yes, when you promise to pay someone in the future for the rest of their life, you should have money set aside to do that.

and of course, our local and state gov'ts should have known that.

I'm glad we agree.

oh yes, it's all the fault of that hope and change guy, even though most of it was set while bush was in office.

Nope, it started when Bill Clinton felt your pain and opened up credit lines to the non-creditworthy. The hope and change guy merely employs the same players and policies, but now just gives the money away while the Taxpayers "borrow" it from China, et al.

yep, got ya

You will never get it.
...

this is all the fault of our local gov't officials, who were just trying to save their taxpayers a little money,

How does spending money you do not have and have not planned foer "save the taxpayer" anything? Do you think they just go to the money tree and get it?

[quote] who thought, like most do that when the economy blew up, that variable rate would skyrocket.

"Like most of us do?" There are many people, cities and states that did not beleive in "free credit" or a never-ending supply of credit, regardless of qualifications and commitments, and who believe that when when you want something, you should be able to afford it.

oh, yes, we should have all known that the aliiance between banks and gov't would allow them to manipulate the entire market to bend it whichever way they chose it to bend so they could stand at the end waiting for the cash to come pouring in.

When the hope and change guy took control of Bank of Anerica, CITI, AIG, GM and others, and gave Chrysler to his political supporters, how could you NOT see this?...

you work for one of those too big to fail banks by any chance??

Major T&C violation there, to ask for personal information.
I do not; but I was raised with a good education and common sense. You can't buy or borrow those, you have to work for them.

Too many people believe that government is the solution to all our problems and that credit is a good thing, no matter that neither makes sense in reality.

Face it, whether it was L.A., Chicago, New York, California, Clinton, Bush or Obama, we would not be here today but for government intervention to alter basic rules and to believe their promises that they have a better way to do things other than the way things work without government trying to be "fair" or "help out."

Ever heard of "self-reliance?" Ever lived in a place where neighbors help neighbors, other than by driving them to the welfare office? Ever paid for a doctor's service yourself, without letting insurance "take care of" you?

When we give up or reject personal responsibility, we are giving some of our freedom away to others to control.
Or, is that what you prefer?

Unless the board members, CEO's and major shareholders of these banks go to jail, then it's all meaningless.

Justice is not only uncovering the truth, but holding those who caused the problem accountable.

We seem to do a great job at the first thing, not so much on the 2nd.

`tenth

]reply to post by jdub297


umm...

the law that repealed the glass steagall was sponsered by a republicans, and very few voted against it, so I am taking it that "clinton and his croonies included the republicans in washington??

Too many people believe that government is the solution to all our problems and that credit is a good thing, no matter that neither makes sense in reality. Face it, whether it was L.A., Chicago, New York, California, Clinton, Bush or Obama, we would not be here today but for government intervention to alter basic rules and to believe their promises that they have a better way to do things other than the way things work without government trying to be "fair" or "help out." Ever heard of "self-reliance?" Ever lived in a place where neighbors help neighbors, other than by driving them to the welfare office? Ever paid for a doctor's service yourself, without letting insurance "take care of" you? When we give up or reject personal responsibility, we are giving some of our freedom away to others to control. Or, is that what you prefer?

yes, I've heard of self reliance.....
matter of fact, if you go through these forums enough, I am sure you will find me saying this more than once...

"Dependency leads to servitude!!""

I am not looking for the gov't to solve my problems, but I am fully demanding that they quite creating problems for me to wrangle my way through! nieghbors helping neighbors, ya, back in the good ole days, think they ended in the 80's. paying for my own medical care ended about the same time...
my pediatrician let us pay off our bill by doing work around her office....
now, well, my doctor must be having problems with self reliance also since he has given up his freedom to do such things when he joined one of those big healthcare corps!!! I wouldn't be able to pay my medical bills now without the insurance and the help my boss provides by covering a good portion of it....

When we give up or reject personal responsibility, we are giving some of our freedom away to others to control. Or, is that what you prefer?

ya know, I could rephrase this a little bit...

When we take away a person's abililty to take on their responsibility, by outsourcing their jobs, by pushing down wages through immigration, by having trade agreements that only benefit the country we are agreeing to trade with, by pushing to put welfare moms back to work without any requirement as to how much they should make (pay that doesn't even provide the funds for the childcare), by pushing to have the minimum wage laws done away with, by pushing to have the public school systems done away with, and on and on.....well we are forcing people into the state of dependency...and thus SERVITUDE!!
which, I would have to say, it seems to me that both political parties seem to prefer it that way!!!

personally, I am not in that much debt, the house we paid for, yes we have an adjustable rate mortgage, yes it's paid on time every money, no we didn't lie on our loan application! that doesn't mean there isn't lies on it, only that if there is, they were put there after we signed the documents and well...without our knowledge. I work for a living, my husband works for a living, our kids are having problems, but we are helping them, so no, we aren't depending on anyone but ourselves!!!
we moved out of NY because, well the state fiscal policies were just too danged crazy!

but still, this reeks of a scam, and I will remind you, that one of the ways the bush administration managed to keep the cost of those wars from biting us in the backend was that he drastically cut the funding for medicaid and medicare to the states, along with alot of other funding I am sure. but I remember the medicaid the most because that was the justification I was hearing from the state and local guys for hiking up taxes year after year!! I think that federal pollicy had a pretty big part in NY being in a bind to begin with....and then well, we ended up with bush and gang proclaiming how we should be an ownership society, how great a tool adjustable rate mortgages were, ect...and well, then well the property values started to go up, and the local fiscal problems faded away.........how convenient!!
and now, we find that they were also manipulating the libor rates to suit their needs....at the expense of those local and state gov'ts...hmmm....

seems to me that neither party really has a desire for small gov't either, but rather they want to be the only gov't running the show!!!

Originally posted by mee30
reply to post by jdub297

 

Isn't it cool how the banks can set their own credit scores!

I only we had the same ability. It's like everything else though, one rule for them another for us...

There was a statement released by the SFO (serious fraud office) apparently saying that no high level bankers will be ever be held accountable again. Nice that!

From what I've read of this, the DoJ has granted immunity from prosection to some banks, for cooperation, but not an individual.

Given that this DoJ and SEC have "settled" claims against CITI and other on a recurrent basis for the same offenses, I don't see anything coming of this in the U.S. courts, other than more "settlements.".

Here is a great interview with Greg Hunter and Max Keiser. Hunter points out during the interview that JP Morgan is leveraged 2000 to 1 in interest rate swaps... this why they kept he rates so low!