rooster59

Sessions asks 46 Obama-era U.S. attorneys to resign

62 posts in this topic

Sessions asks 46 Obama-era U.S. attorneys to resign

By Joel Schechtman and Mark Hosenball

 

640x640 (3).jpg

U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions in Washington, U.S., March 6, 2017. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has asked the remaining 46 chief federal prosecutors left over from the Obama administration to resign, including Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara who had been asked to stay on in November by then President-elect Donald Trump.

A Justice Department spokeswoman confirmed the resignation requests applied to Bharara. However, it was not immediately clear if all resignations would ultimately be accepted.

Bharara was unsure where he stood because he did not know if the person who contacted him was aware that Trump had asked him to remain in office, according a source familiar with the matter. Bharara's office handles some of the most critical business and criminal cases passing through the federal judicial system.

U.S. attorneys are political appointees, and the request from Trump's Justice Department is part of a routine process. Not every new administration replaces all U.S. attorneys at once.

Bharara met with Trump in Trump Tower on Nov. 30. Afterward, Bharara told reporters the two had a "good meeting" and he had agreed to stay on.

The Justice Department statement said: "Until the new U.S. attorneys are confirmed, the dedicated career prosecutors in our U.S. attorney’s offices will continue the great work of the department in investigating, prosecuting, and deterring the most violent offenders.”

Robert Capers, U.S. Attorney in Brooklyn, issued a statement saying he had been asked to resign. He said Bridget Rohde, the chief assistant U.S. attorney in that office, would take over his role in an acting capacity.

"It has been my greatest honour to serve my country, New York City and the people of this district for almost 14 years, with the last 17 months serving as United States Attorney," Capers said.

 
reuters_logo.jpg
-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-03-11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Uh-huh. 2 months ago Trump had a meeting with Preet Bharara, who has been aggressively prosecuting financial crimes on Wall Street, was asked by Trump and Sessions about staying on.  Now he's out. Trump has appointed nothing but Wall Street aiders and abetters to every position that has anything to do with watching over the financial industries.  This move is right in keeping with that approach. It's just a matter of time before the next really bad crash occurs.

It's always just a matter of time before crashes occur; that's how the term economic cycles came into being. Fear and greed are the two major determinants of what moves the herd in regards to investing momentum and money flows in and out of markets. It's not really the fault of one political party or another when it comes to major moves in economic cycles. For instance Glass Steagall was repealed during Clinton admin, but many other things had to happen for the build up of leverage and creation of complex derivatives (and many others) etc for the bubble to burst. Legislators have trouble keeping up and mitigation of swings is usually the best outcome, but large moves in economic cycles will always be there. . .

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ramen087 said:

It's always just a matter of time before crashes occur; that's how the term economic cycles came into being. Fear and greed are the two major determinants of what moves the herd in regards to investing momentum and money flows in and out of markets. It's not really the fault of one political party or another when it comes to major moves in economic cycles. For instance Glass Steagall was repealed during Clinton admin, but many other things had to happen for the build up of leverage and creation of complex derivatives (and many others) etc for the bubble to burst. Legislators have trouble keeping up and mitigation of swings is usually the best outcome, but large moves in economic cycles will always be there. . .

Not really, You fail to distinguish between crashes and the normal ups and downs of the business cycle. The last economic crash before 2008 occurred in 1929. Crashes happen because regulators look the other way or don't have the tools to make large financial institutions behave responsibly.

 

Even if Glass Steagall were in effect, it wouldn't have been applicable to shadow banks like Goldman Sachs. You remember Goldman Sachs?  The shadow bank that got a huge bailout? Trump has lots of appointees coming from there including Gary Cohn, the number 2 man at Goldman Sachs.)

 

But Dodd Frank did address the problems created by shadow banks and other large financial institutions. One way to tell that is by how vociferously these institutions oppose it. And now Trump wants to get rid of Dodd Frank and has appointed Wall Street yes men to keep on eye on Wall Street. Clearly, that's going to end well.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Not really, You fail to distinguish between crashes and the normal ups and downs of the business cycle. The last economic crash before 2008 occurred in 1929. Crashes happen because regulators look the other way or don't have the tools to make large financial institutions behave responsibly.

 

Even if Glass Steagall were in effect, it wouldn't have been applicable to shadow banks like Goldman Sachs. You remember Goldman Sachs?  The shadow bank that got a huge bailout? Trump has lots of appointees coming from there including Gary Cohn, the number 2 man at Goldman Sachs.)

 

But Dodd Frank did address the problems created by shadow banks and other large financial institutions. One way to tell that is by how vociferously these institutions oppose it. And now Trump wants to get rid of Dodd Frank and has appointed Wall Street yes men to keep on eye on Wall Street. Clearly, that's going to end well.

Goldman didn't need the money. They had to take it to help avoid a run on the banks who woúld have failed. Shadow banks?

Goldman would surely have preferred to remain strictly a partnership. They run their firm more like a partnership than any firm on The Street. Don't blame them.   

Crashes & bubbles are extreme ups and downs in the economic cycle. 

Pre-emptively placing the blame kn the sitting US President does nothing but feed into the 'by any means necessary' mantra of those who disliked Mr. Trump as soon as (or maybe even prior to) his campaign began. 

I prefer to trust the current US Gov'ts elected official on both sides of the aisle to review the changes are work towards the optimal result. If you want to sick with your clairvoyance which foresees a poor outcome, you're welcome to it. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not trust either the Republicans or Democrats to do the right thing when you have the wrog leader. Trmp loves wall Stret because they helped finance him and keep him rich. getting rid of regulation is what Wall Street wants so they can play loose and fast with their clients money. Without regulation- they are as bad as the boiler rooms that bilk investors.  Not one person was indicted or jailed from the 2008 meltdown and the financial industry has been fined billions for shady practices. When some of thes people are jailed for their manipulation and greed- then I will believe Governmen cares.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

I do not trust either the Republicans or Democrats to do the right thing when you have the wrog leader. Trmp loves wall Stret because they helped finance him and keep him rich. getting rid of regulation is what Wall Street wants so they can play loose and fast with their clients money. Without regulation- they are as bad as the boiler rooms that bilk investors.  Not one person was indicted or jailed from the 2008 meltdown and the financial industry has been fined billions for shady practices. When some of thes people are jailed for their manipulation and greed- then I will believe Governmen cares.

Actually, I think one or two lower level people were convicted.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

 

"I prefer to trust the current US Gov'ts elected official on both sides of the aisle to review the changes are work towards the optimal result."

Really? So instead of applying your mind to such matters, you just want to think happy thoughts?   The fact is that Dodd Franks is working. And now Trump and virtually all the major financial institutions on wall st. want to see it defanged.  Or do you believe that Wall Street is sincerely working for the welfare of all Americans and not just itself?  And the Republicans and Trump are working to enact their wishes for the benefit of everyone?. Apparently, you believe that what's good for Goldman Sachs is good for the USA.

And Gary Cohn was the guy the mortgage division of Goldman Sachs reported to. The division that got fined 550 million dollars.

"Betting Against – Both JP Morgan Chase and Goldman Sachs worked with hedge funds to bet against the toxic mortgages after the crash had started. They made money by selling short on the financial catastrophe they had created. JP Morgan was fined $296.9 million and Goldman Sachs was fined $550 million for actions"

https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikecollins/2015/07/14/the-big-bank-bailout/#451d70862d83

As for Goldman not needing the bailout:

http://seekingalpha.com/article/164946-why-is-goldman-a-bank-holding-company

And, of course, they lied about the 2.9 billion of AIG bailout money it kept:

http://www.businessinsider.comers/goldman-sachs-aig-bailou

 

bailouts? make that LOANS that were repaid with interest.  gs was way too smart to turn it down and avoid currying favor with the government... they spun off their best proprietary trading people and invested in the hedge funds created by them... they only became a bank holding company after the repeal because that change made sense but only AFTER the repeal, not BEFORE the repeal.  why does government on the DEM and REPUB side osf the aisle solicit GS employees past and present... those people know their stuff better than just about anyone on The Street, that's why...

 

fines? you make the cash, you pay the corporate taxes, and you deal with the rest later, like every other business in the world

 

please stop using keywords on google to locate links in order to justify your anti-Trump bias....

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ID: 18   Posted (edited)

But we will see 46 puppets becoming gainfully employed.

Interesting that those will be the people responsible for looking into potential criminal activity by the boss.

Edited by darksidedog
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ramen087 said:

bailouts? make that LOANS that were repaid with interest.  gs was way too smart to turn it down and avoid currying favor with the government... they spun off their best proprietary trading people and invested in the hedge funds created by them... they only became a bank holding company after the repeal because that change made sense but only AFTER the repeal, not BEFORE the repeal.  why does government on the DEM and REPUB side osf the aisle solicit GS employees past and present... those people know their stuff better than just about anyone on The Street, that's why...

 

fines? you make the cash, you pay the corporate taxes, and you deal with the rest later, like every other business in the world

 

please stop using keywords on google to locate links in order to justify your anti-Trump bias....

In the case of CDOs there was a huge amount of evidence that massive fraud was committed. Which is why Goldman Sachs got fined 550 million dollars.

And no one with any sense would doubt that Goldman hires intellectually formidable people.  The best that money can buy.  What's that got to do with their ethics?

And your criticism of me for citing links is bizarre.  It's called marshalling evidence.  I guess now that fake news websites are off limits you're at a loss for find some to support your contentions.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

In the case of CDOs there was a huge amount of evidence that massive fraud was committed. Which is why Goldman Sachs got fined 550 million dollars.

And no one with any sense would doubt that Goldman hires intellectually formidable people.  The best that money can buy.  What's that got to do with their ethics?

And your criticism of me for citing links is bizarre.  It's called marshalling evidence.  I guess now that fake news websites are off limits you're at a loss for find some to support your contentions.

It's time for you to grow up and recognize, as I have previously stated, that it is what might be construed as legal that management approves, not what is ethical.  

I assure you legal counsel reviewed the actions and in house counsel or higher manager on the finance side said 'do it'.

If the action was taken without approval an employee has gone rogue; sometimes that includes a manager who puts pressure on his/her subordinates. 

If you can make money on an idea legally, you do it. You are incredibly naive to think otherwise. 

 

gathering evidence? c'mon man.... they're are a zillion stories on the net to back just about any point of view... 

'

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ID: 21   Posted (edited)

14 minutes ago, Ramen087 said:

It's time for you to grow up and recognize, as I have previously stated, that it is what might be construed as legal that management approves, not what is ethical.  

I assure you legal counsel reviewed the actions and in house counsel or higher manager on the finance side said 'do it'.

If the action was taken without approval an employee has gone rogue; sometimes that includes a manager who puts pressure on his/her subordinates. 

If you can make money on an idea legally, you do it. You are incredibly naive to think otherwise. 

 

gathering evidence? c'mon man.... they're are a zillion stories on the net to back just about any point of view... 

'

I'm being naïve?  So that's the way you think the world works?  That there's one standard of justice for everyone? Rich or poor?

ANd what makes your accusation of naiveté even more ludicrous is that you are the party who wrote, "I prefer to trust the current US Gov'ts elected official on both sides of the aisle to review the changes are work towards the optimal result."

And as for sources on the net. I use real news sources done by serious researchers and journalists.  Not dubious posts that originally began in Macedonia.

Edited by ilostmypassword

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

             It's not only rude, to fire so many attorneys by telling them to clear their desks and be out within hours......  it also bolsters the known fact that Trump and his people are trying to enact cover-ups on many fronts.    Many, if not all of those attorneys were working on cases.  Now all their thousands of hours of taxpayer-paid work will be down the toilet.   

 

Obviously you didn't bother to read the story and instead opted to spew your hate-filled rant instead.

 

I'll put it here for you again, READ IT: "The Justice Department statement said: "Until the new U.S. attorneys are confirmed, the dedicated career prosecutors in our U.S. attorney’s offices will continue the great work of the department in investigating, prosecuting, and deterring the most violent offenders.”

 

This is a normal occurrence in every change of President when the opposite party takes over. No one is being asked to "clear their desks and be out within hours" !  

You wouldn't happen to work at CNN or BBC by chance would you?  Stick to the facts.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ID: 23   Posted (edited)

27 minutes ago, sstuff3 said:

 

Obviously you didn't bother to read the story and instead opted to spew your hate-filled rant instead.

 

I'll put it here for you again, READ IT: "The Justice Department statement said: "Until the new U.S. attorneys are confirmed, the dedicated career prosecutors in our U.S. attorney’s offices will continue the great work of the department in investigating, prosecuting, and deterring the most violent offenders.”

 

This is a normal occurrence in every change of President when the opposite party takes over. No one is being asked to "clear their desks and be out within hours" !  

You wouldn't happen to work at CNN or BBC by chance would you?  Stick to the facts.

actually, they are being asked to submit their resignations immediately. "The dedicated career prosecutors" cited by the justice department are underlings, not the chief prosecutors. Now, to be fair to Trump, it may well be that some resignation will be refused.

The fate of Preet Bharara, who has been very aggressive in prosecuting Wall St. malefactors, will be particularly interesting to witness. He was asked by Trump and Sessions to stay on. So if they have truly reversed their postion...well I wouldn't be a bit surprised. Given the large number of Wall Street insiders in the Trump administration, I can't see how he would let Bharara stay on.

Edited by ilostmypassword
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The facts are that the wealthy 1% are getting even wealthier off the backs of the other 99%. That is why Bernie Sanders and even Hillary clinton supported a revised tax code that redistributes wealth away from the Wealthy back to the middle class and poor. The big banks; Wall Street and their so called 'money products'; Big Pharma; Big Insurance have stolen money from the average American for so long they actually have people convinced that is the way business is done. The facts and the truth are that America is run by exploitative and materialistic capitalists who believe 'greed is good' and now they have the greediest of all as theie President. A man who has used the bankruptcy laws 4 times to avoid paying things like severance to his workers and payment to contractors; a man whose so called Trump University was a scam in which he settled for $25 million so he wouldn't lose in court; and even using the eminent domain laws to evict elderly people so he could build a parking lot for his casino which eventually went broke.

Then throw in CEO's who are 'given' absurd salaries in the millions where the lowest worked is getting minimum wage while the company loses market share and eventually dissolves or is stripped bare in a corporate takeover.

During the 2008 corporate meltdown- banks foreclosed  illegally on so many that they were forced to  compensate people who lost their homes. They should have been sent to jail for fraud.  

I don;t have to search the Internet to prove any of this. It is common knowledge amongst even the perpetrators themselves that they were 'laughing all the way to the bank' while millions of Americans were going broke and the financial products industry using tax dollars to stay afloat.

The executives from these industries and huge wealthy corporations now form part of Trump's cabinet and are supported by a Congress that will continue to make the wealthy super wealthy while more American go broke and die  because they refuse to consider even healthcare a human right.

None of this avarice can be defended as it is not only ethically wrong- it is downright immoral.

Want to live in a Socialist country where the wealth of those who worked hard to earn it is "redistributed", go ahead, there are 1,000's of flights out of the US daily.

America was built on Capitalism and it should remain that way. Those who work hard have the opportunity to rise to the top. That's the "American Dream" and many people, including legal immigrants, have benefited. Don't like it? There are other places in the world you can go that may suit your beliefs.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

BANGKOK 31 March 2017 05:35
Sponsors