Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › The plot thickens….Confirmed.. Fed Reserve Strongarmed BofA …
- This topic has 265 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 1 month ago by
equalizer.
-
AuthorPosts
-
June 11, 2009 at 9:59 PM #414980June 12, 2009 at 12:05 AM #414299
Aecetia
ParticipantI hope the storm clears the air. We did need change, but I am sure Washington is not yet ready for reform. Time to get to the bottom of the Fed. Go Ron Paul!
June 12, 2009 at 12:05 AM #414538ParticipantI hope the storm clears the air. We did need change, but I am sure Washington is not yet ready for reform. Time to get to the bottom of the Fed. Go Ron Paul!
June 12, 2009 at 12:05 AM #414791ParticipantI hope the storm clears the air. We did need change, but I am sure Washington is not yet ready for reform. Time to get to the bottom of the Fed. Go Ron Paul!
June 12, 2009 at 12:05 AM #414861ParticipantI hope the storm clears the air. We did need change, but I am sure Washington is not yet ready for reform. Time to get to the bottom of the Fed. Go Ron Paul!
June 12, 2009 at 12:05 AM #415015ParticipantI hope the storm clears the air. We did need change, but I am sure Washington is not yet ready for reform. Time to get to the bottom of the Fed. Go Ron Paul!
June 12, 2009 at 10:54 AM #414497LesBaer45
Participant[quote=UCGal][quote=XBoxBoy][quote=davelj]But, alas, he apparently was more concerned about losing his job than about protecting shareholder interests. In my view, for this reason alone he should be fired. [/quote]
I second this view. I mean where is this man’s integrity? I know, I know, integrity, how quaint.
And besides, what kind of negotiator can he be if he caved on the threat of losing his job? Seriously, if the man had any ability as a real negotiator he should have said the heck with you guys. Fire me if you like. How’s that gonna look when I give an interview to the Wall Street Journal telling my side of the story. Hey, sorry, I have a responsibility to my shareholders.
As it stands now, everyone knows he’s a poor negotiator without any integrity. Lots of luck in the future with that reputation.
XboxBoy
[/quote]Fully agreeing with Dave and Xbox on this.
I’ve read the emails, watched part of Lewis’s testimony this morning… There was wrong doing all around – Paulson, Geithner, and Bernanke overstepped. Ken Lewis screwed the shareholders for personal gain. As did his BOD.And just to clarify for the Obama bashers – this happened last year, 2008, pre-Obama. I’m not letting Timmy off the hook since he was Gov. of the NYFed and deeply involved. (I’m NOT a Geithner fan.) I don’t mind bashing BO for things that happened when he was running things – but the timeline doesn’t fit for this incident. Its like blaming Obama for the invasion of Iraq – it doesn’t fit the timeline.
[/quote]
Lots of shenanigans happened on all sides. It all boils down to a lack of upbringing and ethics. I can think of a ton of undereducated know nothings that would have leaned over the table and looked the smartest guys in the room straight in the eyes and told them “bring it, bucko”. “Clint” style. All they ever had was their word and rep, and you wouldn’t take it easily from them.
Personally, I think Bernanke is being set up by Big O. He has someone in mind for that job, and needs Ben to go. Plus a scapegoat is always a handy thing to have.
June 12, 2009 at 10:54 AM #414738Participant[quote=UCGal][quote=XBoxBoy][quote=davelj]But, alas, he apparently was more concerned about losing his job than about protecting shareholder interests. In my view, for this reason alone he should be fired. [/quote]
I second this view. I mean where is this man’s integrity? I know, I know, integrity, how quaint.
And besides, what kind of negotiator can he be if he caved on the threat of losing his job? Seriously, if the man had any ability as a real negotiator he should have said the heck with you guys. Fire me if you like. How’s that gonna look when I give an interview to the Wall Street Journal telling my side of the story. Hey, sorry, I have a responsibility to my shareholders.
As it stands now, everyone knows he’s a poor negotiator without any integrity. Lots of luck in the future with that reputation.
XboxBoy
[/quote]Fully agreeing with Dave and Xbox on this.
I’ve read the emails, watched part of Lewis’s testimony this morning… There was wrong doing all around – Paulson, Geithner, and Bernanke overstepped. Ken Lewis screwed the shareholders for personal gain. As did his BOD.And just to clarify for the Obama bashers – this happened last year, 2008, pre-Obama. I’m not letting Timmy off the hook since he was Gov. of the NYFed and deeply involved. (I’m NOT a Geithner fan.) I don’t mind bashing BO for things that happened when he was running things – but the timeline doesn’t fit for this incident. Its like blaming Obama for the invasion of Iraq – it doesn’t fit the timeline.
[/quote]
Lots of shenanigans happened on all sides. It all boils down to a lack of upbringing and ethics. I can think of a ton of undereducated know nothings that would have leaned over the table and looked the smartest guys in the room straight in the eyes and told them “bring it, bucko”. “Clint” style. All they ever had was their word and rep, and you wouldn’t take it easily from them.
Personally, I think Bernanke is being set up by Big O. He has someone in mind for that job, and needs Ben to go. Plus a scapegoat is always a handy thing to have.
June 12, 2009 at 10:54 AM #414991Participant[quote=UCGal][quote=XBoxBoy][quote=davelj]But, alas, he apparently was more concerned about losing his job than about protecting shareholder interests. In my view, for this reason alone he should be fired. [/quote]
I second this view. I mean where is this man’s integrity? I know, I know, integrity, how quaint.
And besides, what kind of negotiator can he be if he caved on the threat of losing his job? Seriously, if the man had any ability as a real negotiator he should have said the heck with you guys. Fire me if you like. How’s that gonna look when I give an interview to the Wall Street Journal telling my side of the story. Hey, sorry, I have a responsibility to my shareholders.
As it stands now, everyone knows he’s a poor negotiator without any integrity. Lots of luck in the future with that reputation.
XboxBoy
[/quote]Fully agreeing with Dave and Xbox on this.
I’ve read the emails, watched part of Lewis’s testimony this morning… There was wrong doing all around – Paulson, Geithner, and Bernanke overstepped. Ken Lewis screwed the shareholders for personal gain. As did his BOD.And just to clarify for the Obama bashers – this happened last year, 2008, pre-Obama. I’m not letting Timmy off the hook since he was Gov. of the NYFed and deeply involved. (I’m NOT a Geithner fan.) I don’t mind bashing BO for things that happened when he was running things – but the timeline doesn’t fit for this incident. Its like blaming Obama for the invasion of Iraq – it doesn’t fit the timeline.
[/quote]
Lots of shenanigans happened on all sides. It all boils down to a lack of upbringing and ethics. I can think of a ton of undereducated know nothings that would have leaned over the table and looked the smartest guys in the room straight in the eyes and told them “bring it, bucko”. “Clint” style. All they ever had was their word and rep, and you wouldn’t take it easily from them.
Personally, I think Bernanke is being set up by Big O. He has someone in mind for that job, and needs Ben to go. Plus a scapegoat is always a handy thing to have.
June 12, 2009 at 10:54 AM #415059Participant[quote=UCGal][quote=XBoxBoy][quote=davelj]But, alas, he apparently was more concerned about losing his job than about protecting shareholder interests. In my view, for this reason alone he should be fired. [/quote]
I second this view. I mean where is this man’s integrity? I know, I know, integrity, how quaint.
And besides, what kind of negotiator can he be if he caved on the threat of losing his job? Seriously, if the man had any ability as a real negotiator he should have said the heck with you guys. Fire me if you like. How’s that gonna look when I give an interview to the Wall Street Journal telling my side of the story. Hey, sorry, I have a responsibility to my shareholders.
As it stands now, everyone knows he’s a poor negotiator without any integrity. Lots of luck in the future with that reputation.
XboxBoy
[/quote]Fully agreeing with Dave and Xbox on this.
I’ve read the emails, watched part of Lewis’s testimony this morning… There was wrong doing all around – Paulson, Geithner, and Bernanke overstepped. Ken Lewis screwed the shareholders for personal gain. As did his BOD.And just to clarify for the Obama bashers – this happened last year, 2008, pre-Obama. I’m not letting Timmy off the hook since he was Gov. of the NYFed and deeply involved. (I’m NOT a Geithner fan.) I don’t mind bashing BO for things that happened when he was running things – but the timeline doesn’t fit for this incident. Its like blaming Obama for the invasion of Iraq – it doesn’t fit the timeline.
[/quote]
Lots of shenanigans happened on all sides. It all boils down to a lack of upbringing and ethics. I can think of a ton of undereducated know nothings that would have leaned over the table and looked the smartest guys in the room straight in the eyes and told them “bring it, bucko”. “Clint” style. All they ever had was their word and rep, and you wouldn’t take it easily from them.
Personally, I think Bernanke is being set up by Big O. He has someone in mind for that job, and needs Ben to go. Plus a scapegoat is always a handy thing to have.
June 12, 2009 at 10:54 AM #415215Participant[quote=UCGal][quote=XBoxBoy][quote=davelj]But, alas, he apparently was more concerned about losing his job than about protecting shareholder interests. In my view, for this reason alone he should be fired. [/quote]
I second this view. I mean where is this man’s integrity? I know, I know, integrity, how quaint.
And besides, what kind of negotiator can he be if he caved on the threat of losing his job? Seriously, if the man had any ability as a real negotiator he should have said the heck with you guys. Fire me if you like. How’s that gonna look when I give an interview to the Wall Street Journal telling my side of the story. Hey, sorry, I have a responsibility to my shareholders.
As it stands now, everyone knows he’s a poor negotiator without any integrity. Lots of luck in the future with that reputation.
XboxBoy
[/quote]Fully agreeing with Dave and Xbox on this.
I’ve read the emails, watched part of Lewis’s testimony this morning… There was wrong doing all around – Paulson, Geithner, and Bernanke overstepped. Ken Lewis screwed the shareholders for personal gain. As did his BOD.And just to clarify for the Obama bashers – this happened last year, 2008, pre-Obama. I’m not letting Timmy off the hook since he was Gov. of the NYFed and deeply involved. (I’m NOT a Geithner fan.) I don’t mind bashing BO for things that happened when he was running things – but the timeline doesn’t fit for this incident. Its like blaming Obama for the invasion of Iraq – it doesn’t fit the timeline.
[/quote]
Lots of shenanigans happened on all sides. It all boils down to a lack of upbringing and ethics. I can think of a ton of undereducated know nothings that would have leaned over the table and looked the smartest guys in the room straight in the eyes and told them “bring it, bucko”. “Clint” style. All they ever had was their word and rep, and you wouldn’t take it easily from them.
Personally, I think Bernanke is being set up by Big O. He has someone in mind for that job, and needs Ben to go. Plus a scapegoat is always a handy thing to have.
September 30, 2009 at 2:50 PM #462373davelj
Participant[quote=davelj][quote=flu]
WASHINGTON (AP) — Congressional investigators say they have seen internal documents that prove the Federal Reserve threatened to force the ouster of Bank of America CEO Kenneth Lewis if he didn’t follow through with plans to buy Merrill Lynch & Co.[/quote]
While I don’t support the Federal Reserve threatening bank CEOs as these emails imply… all Ken Lewis had to do was say, “No. I don’t like the deal. Fire me.”
But, alas, he apparently was more concerned about losing his job than about protecting shareholder interests. In my view, for this reason alone he should be fired. How, after all, did he manage to put the bank into a position where the Fed could strong arm him? That’s HIS (and the directors’) fault.
Here’s the bottom line, folks – and something that most bankers forget: When you accept FDIC insurance, as all banks do, the US Government is a major partner in your enterprise. If you’re uncomfortable with that, you need to find another line of work.
Ken Lewis put both his bank and his career into perilous positions in which he was susceptible to strong-arm tactics on behalf of one of his business partners (The Fed). And instead of falling on his sword, he chose to follow the keep-my-job-at-all-costs route and screw his shareholders.
Again, I’m not crazy about the Fed’s tactics in this case. But the REAL villain in this situation isn’t the Fed – it’s just a not-for-profit partner in BofA. The real villain is Ken Lewis.[/quote]
Finally, this asshole is leaving. I can guarantee you it wasn’t by choice.
***************************
Bank of America CEO Lewis leaving by year’s end
NEW YORK – Ken Lewis, the embattled CEO of Bank of America Corp., is leaving the company, succumbing to nearly a year of strife that followed his company’s acquisition of Merrill Lynch & Co.
The bank said in a statement late Wednesday that Lewis, 62, would retire as CEO and also leave the company’s board by the end of the year. The company said his successor will be selected by the time he steps down Dec. 31.
The news, coming after shareholders had stripped Lewis of his chairman’s title earlier this year, wasn’t surprising because of the heavy pressure he came under after the Merrill deal. Lewis had said he would stay on as CEO until after the company’s financial problems were resolved, a process expected to take several years.
However, with the bank also under heavy criticism from government officials, Lewis was increasingly seen as vulnerable.
Since the Merrill deal closed Jan. 1, it was learned that the investment bank with the knowledge of Bank of America executives, gave billions of dollars in bonuses to employees even as it asked for more bailout money from the government. The deal was forged a year ago at the height of the financial crisis.
September 30, 2009 at 2:50 PM #462566Participant[quote=davelj][quote=flu]
WASHINGTON (AP) — Congressional investigators say they have seen internal documents that prove the Federal Reserve threatened to force the ouster of Bank of America CEO Kenneth Lewis if he didn’t follow through with plans to buy Merrill Lynch & Co.[/quote]
While I don’t support the Federal Reserve threatening bank CEOs as these emails imply… all Ken Lewis had to do was say, “No. I don’t like the deal. Fire me.”
But, alas, he apparently was more concerned about losing his job than about protecting shareholder interests. In my view, for this reason alone he should be fired. How, after all, did he manage to put the bank into a position where the Fed could strong arm him? That’s HIS (and the directors’) fault.
Here’s the bottom line, folks – and something that most bankers forget: When you accept FDIC insurance, as all banks do, the US Government is a major partner in your enterprise. If you’re uncomfortable with that, you need to find another line of work.
Ken Lewis put both his bank and his career into perilous positions in which he was susceptible to strong-arm tactics on behalf of one of his business partners (The Fed). And instead of falling on his sword, he chose to follow the keep-my-job-at-all-costs route and screw his shareholders.
Again, I’m not crazy about the Fed’s tactics in this case. But the REAL villain in this situation isn’t the Fed – it’s just a not-for-profit partner in BofA. The real villain is Ken Lewis.[/quote]
Finally, this asshole is leaving. I can guarantee you it wasn’t by choice.
***************************
Bank of America CEO Lewis leaving by year’s end
NEW YORK – Ken Lewis, the embattled CEO of Bank of America Corp., is leaving the company, succumbing to nearly a year of strife that followed his company’s acquisition of Merrill Lynch & Co.
The bank said in a statement late Wednesday that Lewis, 62, would retire as CEO and also leave the company’s board by the end of the year. The company said his successor will be selected by the time he steps down Dec. 31.
The news, coming after shareholders had stripped Lewis of his chairman’s title earlier this year, wasn’t surprising because of the heavy pressure he came under after the Merrill deal. Lewis had said he would stay on as CEO until after the company’s financial problems were resolved, a process expected to take several years.
However, with the bank also under heavy criticism from government officials, Lewis was increasingly seen as vulnerable.
Since the Merrill deal closed Jan. 1, it was learned that the investment bank with the knowledge of Bank of America executives, gave billions of dollars in bonuses to employees even as it asked for more bailout money from the government. The deal was forged a year ago at the height of the financial crisis.
September 30, 2009 at 2:50 PM #462911Participant[quote=davelj][quote=flu]
WASHINGTON (AP) — Congressional investigators say they have seen internal documents that prove the Federal Reserve threatened to force the ouster of Bank of America CEO Kenneth Lewis if he didn’t follow through with plans to buy Merrill Lynch & Co.[/quote]
While I don’t support the Federal Reserve threatening bank CEOs as these emails imply… all Ken Lewis had to do was say, “No. I don’t like the deal. Fire me.”
But, alas, he apparently was more concerned about losing his job than about protecting shareholder interests. In my view, for this reason alone he should be fired. How, after all, did he manage to put the bank into a position where the Fed could strong arm him? That’s HIS (and the directors’) fault.
Here’s the bottom line, folks – and something that most bankers forget: When you accept FDIC insurance, as all banks do, the US Government is a major partner in your enterprise. If you’re uncomfortable with that, you need to find another line of work.
Ken Lewis put both his bank and his career into perilous positions in which he was susceptible to strong-arm tactics on behalf of one of his business partners (The Fed). And instead of falling on his sword, he chose to follow the keep-my-job-at-all-costs route and screw his shareholders.
Again, I’m not crazy about the Fed’s tactics in this case. But the REAL villain in this situation isn’t the Fed – it’s just a not-for-profit partner in BofA. The real villain is Ken Lewis.[/quote]
Finally, this asshole is leaving. I can guarantee you it wasn’t by choice.
***************************
Bank of America CEO Lewis leaving by year’s end
NEW YORK – Ken Lewis, the embattled CEO of Bank of America Corp., is leaving the company, succumbing to nearly a year of strife that followed his company’s acquisition of Merrill Lynch & Co.
The bank said in a statement late Wednesday that Lewis, 62, would retire as CEO and also leave the company’s board by the end of the year. The company said his successor will be selected by the time he steps down Dec. 31.
The news, coming after shareholders had stripped Lewis of his chairman’s title earlier this year, wasn’t surprising because of the heavy pressure he came under after the Merrill deal. Lewis had said he would stay on as CEO until after the company’s financial problems were resolved, a process expected to take several years.
However, with the bank also under heavy criticism from government officials, Lewis was increasingly seen as vulnerable.
Since the Merrill deal closed Jan. 1, it was learned that the investment bank with the knowledge of Bank of America executives, gave billions of dollars in bonuses to employees even as it asked for more bailout money from the government. The deal was forged a year ago at the height of the financial crisis.
September 30, 2009 at 2:50 PM #462984Participant[quote=davelj][quote=flu]
WASHINGTON (AP) — Congressional investigators say they have seen internal documents that prove the Federal Reserve threatened to force the ouster of Bank of America CEO Kenneth Lewis if he didn’t follow through with plans to buy Merrill Lynch & Co.[/quote]
While I don’t support the Federal Reserve threatening bank CEOs as these emails imply… all Ken Lewis had to do was say, “No. I don’t like the deal. Fire me.”
But, alas, he apparently was more concerned about losing his job than about protecting shareholder interests. In my view, for this reason alone he should be fired. How, after all, did he manage to put the bank into a position where the Fed could strong arm him? That’s HIS (and the directors’) fault.
Here’s the bottom line, folks – and something that most bankers forget: When you accept FDIC insurance, as all banks do, the US Government is a major partner in your enterprise. If you’re uncomfortable with that, you need to find another line of work.
Ken Lewis put both his bank and his career into perilous positions in which he was susceptible to strong-arm tactics on behalf of one of his business partners (The Fed). And instead of falling on his sword, he chose to follow the keep-my-job-at-all-costs route and screw his shareholders.
Again, I’m not crazy about the Fed’s tactics in this case. But the REAL villain in this situation isn’t the Fed – it’s just a not-for-profit partner in BofA. The real villain is Ken Lewis.[/quote]
Finally, this asshole is leaving. I can guarantee you it wasn’t by choice.
***************************
Bank of America CEO Lewis leaving by year’s end
NEW YORK – Ken Lewis, the embattled CEO of Bank of America Corp., is leaving the company, succumbing to nearly a year of strife that followed his company’s acquisition of Merrill Lynch & Co.
The bank said in a statement late Wednesday that Lewis, 62, would retire as CEO and also leave the company’s board by the end of the year. The company said his successor will be selected by the time he steps down Dec. 31.
The news, coming after shareholders had stripped Lewis of his chairman’s title earlier this year, wasn’t surprising because of the heavy pressure he came under after the Merrill deal. Lewis had said he would stay on as CEO until after the company’s financial problems were resolved, a process expected to take several years.
However, with the bank also under heavy criticism from government officials, Lewis was increasingly seen as vulnerable.
Since the Merrill deal closed Jan. 1, it was learned that the investment bank with the knowledge of Bank of America executives, gave billions of dollars in bonuses to employees even as it asked for more bailout money from the government. The deal was forged a year ago at the height of the financial crisis.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.