4 ms·

I was hoping the bankers can still be charged under the Patriot act, there is a provision for something to the effet threat to cause financial risk or damage if

by delbel 8y ago

I was hoping the bankers can still be charged under the Patriot act, there is a provision for something to the effet threat to cause financial risk or damage if I remember. Paulson made a direct threat of financial doom if there was no bailout to President Bush. I think there is a way we can declare them enemy combatants and send them to gitmo for their trial. Sorry for typos, typing with a bad finger the last few days.

Ice_cream_suit 8y ago
That is pretty far fetched. Using your sketchy rationale, one could claim that you are threatening Paulson and have you charged with a threat to kidnap Paulson to put him in Guantanamo Bay. And in any legal dispute between you and Paulson, you would be incidental roadkill, in view of his deep pockets. That is why the legal system has semi-reasonable heuristics that govern the range of interpretations that are acceptable.
- delbel 8y ago
  Well I don't have the legal authority to do this. The DOJ would have to look into this. I guess people don't remember how it went down. There was an emergency meeting at the whitehouse, I remember Bush and Nancy Peloski, and a few senators. After the meeting, one of them (perhaps a congressman) was interviewed on the whitehouse lawn and basically said that Paulson told them, if they didn't do this, the entire economy and country would collapse. So he said it in a way that would give him plausible deniability, but if there was evidence that he knew otherwise or coordinate to create a crisis situation, (that is probably the stretch you are missing to connect), which I allege -- because later on we found out that the banks were both buying and shorting securities knowing they would default (and this is a fact), I think this would be evidence to charge him. This is a specific area in the Patriot act for dealing with terrorism threatening financial crisis. Since there is no statue of limitations on this, it would be an avenue to charge him. There is no provision in the Patriot Act for normal citizens to kidnap people and have access to Guantanamo Bay, that's a bizarre and bewildering statement/counter argument to what I am saying. Perhaps people are to young or don't remember how the financial crisis went down. There are plenty of people at Zerohedge that remember. Edit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYrDtpAkppM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYrDtpAkppM
  - Ice_cream_suit 8y ago
    Zerohedge is mildly entertaining, but is prone to anarcho-syndicalist conspiracy theories. It is slightly more credible than the Onion. And Congress-persons are slightly less credible than the Onion.
  - andybak 8y ago
    BTW. It may sound flippant but if you used more paragraph breaks your arguments would be more persuasive. "Wall of Text" ~= "Probably an incoherent rant"

by delbel 8y ago

Ice_cream_suit 8y ago

That is pretty far fetched. Using your sketchy rationale, one could claim that you are threatening Paulson and have you charged with a threat to kidnap Paulson to put him in Guantanamo Bay. And in any legal dispute between you and Paulson, you would be incidental roadkill, in view of his deep pockets. That is why the legal system has semi-reasonable heuristics that govern the range of interpretations that are acceptable.

delbel 8y ago
Well I don't have the legal authority to do this. The DOJ would have to look into this. I guess people don't remember how it went down. There was an emergency meeting at the whitehouse, I remember Bush and Nancy Peloski, and a few senators. After the meeting, one of them (perhaps a congressman) was interviewed on the whitehouse lawn and basically said that Paulson told them, if they didn't do this, the entire economy and country would collapse. So he said it in a way that would give him plausible deniability, but if there was evidence that he knew otherwise or coordinate to create a crisis situation, (that is probably the stretch you are missing to connect), which I allege -- because later on we found out that the banks were both buying and shorting securities knowing they would default (and this is a fact), I think this would be evidence to charge him. This is a specific area in the Patriot act for dealing with terrorism threatening financial crisis. Since there is no statue of limitations on this, it would be an avenue to charge him. There is no provision in the Patriot Act for normal citizens to kidnap people and have access to Guantanamo Bay, that's a bizarre and bewildering statement/counter argument to what I am saying. Perhaps people are to young or don't remember how the financial crisis went down. There are plenty of people at Zerohedge that remember. Edit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYrDtpAkppM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYrDtpAkppM
- Ice_cream_suit 8y ago
  Zerohedge is mildly entertaining, but is prone to anarcho-syndicalist conspiracy theories. It is slightly more credible than the Onion. And Congress-persons are slightly less credible than the Onion.
- andybak 8y ago
  BTW. It may sound flippant but if you used more paragraph breaks your arguments would be more persuasive. "Wall of Text" ~= "Probably an incoherent rant"