Bush Admin. Hatched Wall Street Bailout Weeks (or Months) Ago

 by Deb Cupples |    According to Roll Call, White House spokesperson Tony Fratto insisted that the Bush Administration's plan for the $700+ billion Wall Street bailout was not "slapped together"; rather, it was hatched weeks or months ago. 

In short, Adminsitration officials were ravenously eying our tax dollars but refused to inform us taxpayers and our representatives in Congress about The Plan.  Then, the Administration revealed The Plan and demanded from Congress a rush vote. 

The timing and manipulative hide-the-ball aspects of the Administration's actions inspired Empty Wheel to ask three questions:

"A) First...,  the Bush Administration refused to admit Iraq was FUBAR even while, for seven months, they were drumming up a new strategy because it was FUBAR. They did so because they didn't want to affect the mid-term elections. So has the Bush Administration been formulating a plan to bail out their buddies, in secret, because they didn't want to let the voters know how badly they had fucked up the American economy before November?

"B) And if that is true, how much worse has the economy gotten--and how much more expensive will the bailout be--because the Bushies were trying to hide yet another colossal Republican failure?

"C) Or, did they simply not tell us about their fuck-up so they could spring the $700,000,000,000 surprise on us on a Friday and demand results by Monday? The Shock Doctrine at work!" (Empty Wheel)

They're valid questions, especially given the Bush Administration's penchant for manipulating us taxpayers and refusing to protect our interests.

Empty Wheel is not off base when wondering if President Bush may outright intend to enrich Wall Street pals at our expense. As Truthout reported, President Bush flatly opposes any bailout plan that limits the compensation of Wall Street execs -- some of the same people who recklessly or knowingly drove their companies and our nation's economy toward the cliff's edge.

It's not hard to believe.  Given that President Bush misled our nation into a war that has so far cost thousands of American lives and hundreds-of-billions of American dollars, why would Mr. Bush have qualms about funneling hundreds of billions of tax dollars to people who helped put him in office?

Frankly, I hope that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will put impeachment back on the table.  I don't care that Mr. Bush will be out of office in January anyway.

I don't care that the Senate does not have the numbers to convict him.  It would be cathartic for our nation if the history books to flag Mr. Bush's name as one of two successfully impeached presidents.

Memeorandum has commentary.

Other Buck Naked Politics Posts:

* Executives Skate out of Disaster with Millions

* Bailout: Ignore the Sales Pitch -- Bush Plan is Not the Only Option

 * What Could we do with $700 Billion (Instead of bailing out Crooks)?

* Conyers Slams Mukasey over Blind Eye Toward Interior Dept.

* Paulson Finally Admits Need for Oversight in Bailout (and Rewrites Recent History)

* Schumer Asks the $550 Billion Questions: Why So Much Right Now?

.

Comments

[Howard]

REGARDING OUR ECONOMY ...
What's the rush? There always seems to be time to fix things, but never enough time to do it right the first time around. Remember ... "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure". The consequences of whatever is decided will dramatically affect Americans for decades ... so, why not take the proper time and steps to properly explore all alternatives. Newt suggested taking a step back and creating a plan B ... perhaps calling upon the people who advised Ronald Reagan, and turned the economy around back then. Besides, we should let the FBI investigation play out, before we decide to make a permanent decision. Like all good carpenters ... going back to Jesus ... I say: "Measure twice, cut once".

[Deb Cupples (Buck Naked Politics)]

Howard,

I soooo agree with you about measuring twice and cutting once.