We've recently had the good fortune to interact with the producer and host of RT's Capital Account, a weekday financial show broadcast on cable in a few select markets and on YouTube for the rest of us. Lew Rockwell(hopefully, no stranger to the readers of these pages) recently interviewed them individually for his twice-weekly podcast.
Tuesday, Lew featured Capital Account's host, Lauren Lyster, wherein they discussed the "success of a truth-telling TV show." The interview offers a rare, behind-the-scenes glimpse at the makings of one of the few TV shows available to non-main stream media darlings (many of whom, according to Ms. Lyster tend to "get it right") and, of course, their faithful followers.
They covered such topics as, "Does watching TV news make you stupid?", why not talking down to viewers does not have to hurt ratings, Hillary Clinton's lunch-content tweets, Jon Corzine's latte preferences, and (more seriously) the production of a show that caters to entrepreneurs and the challenges facing individuals. As Lauren concedes, "You can't do actual good work that questions the establishment and still be accepted by them." (Sorry, Summers.)
Lew also gets into Lauren's working relationship with Capital Account producer, Demetri Kofinas, including how they began collaborating. On that note, Lew separately interviewed Demetri several months ago in a segment titled, Finally Honest TV. Particularly interesting is the exploration of his insights into the problems facing his homeland, Greece, and his background in radio.
A student of Austrian economics (no thanks to the NYU economics department), Demetri also discusses how true capitalism empowers the individual through savings, and how we are in a bull market in alternative media (thanks to an historical corresponding vacuum of alternative information).
Both Lauren and Demetri are quick to acknowledge those who paved the way for a show like Capital Account, such as Max Keiser and Alex Jones. Indeed, the business model for a truth-telling TV show is being proven each day, as artificial and actual barriers to entry are lowered.
Here are the hard links to the interviews with Lew Rockwell:
The FDIC just released a report titled "Issuer Reported Debt Details" for the Debt Guarantee Program (DGP) portion of its Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (TLGP), which shows a total of $618 billion in debt was issued by banks that was ultimately guaranteed by US taxpayers. According to the FDIC's release:
"Under the DGP, the FDIC guaranteed debt that was issued between October 2008 and October 2009 by participants in the program. The guarantee expires at the end of this year, by which time almost all debt issued under the program will have matured. The information being disclosed includes for each registered issuance of FDIC guaranteed debt the: 1) issuer name; 2) CUSIP or other identifier; 3) issue date; 4) maturity date; 5) rate type; 6) interest/discount rate at issuance; 7) amount of unsecured debt; and 8) unsecured debt total fee."
EconomicPolicyJournal.com has analyzed the more than 9,500 bank debt issues disclosed by the FDIC. It found that Bank of America, NA and its holding company, Bank of America Corporation borrowed over $111 billion, of which $69 billion was issued at zero percent (0%), the most of any bank at that rate.
Other banks that were able to borrow at zero percent include Citigroup Funding (through Citibank, NA), General Electric Capital, Goldman Sachs Group and HSBC USA. Of the largest borrowers, Merrill Lynch & Co.was able to finance nearly all of its $19.8 billion in debt at zero percent.
General Electric Capital was the single entity that borrowed the most pursuant to the FDIC-guaranteed program at $130.9 billion, though Citigroup Funding (a holding company) and Citibank, NA borrowed a combined total of $162.0 billion. JP Morgan entities borrowed $42.5 billion and Goldman Sachs Group borrowed $37.5 billion.
Following is a table compiled by EconomicPolicyJournal.com of the borrowing entities sorted by amounts borrowed:
Total
$618,413,398,408
General Electric Capital Corporation
$130,850,166,935
Citigroup Funding Inc.
$128,997,377,222
BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION
$64,079,465,128
Bank of America, National Association
$46,976,837,903
JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.
$40,534,011,955
GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC., THE
$37,652,426,455
Citibank, National Association
$33,056,511,373
MORGAN STANLEY
$30,256,932,941
Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc
$19,786,359,000
CITIGROUP INC.
$13,850,000,000
WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
$9,500,000,000
GMAC LLC
$7,400,000,000
American Express Bank, FSB.
$5,900,000,000
John Deere Capital Corporation
$4,913,503,000
HSBC USA INC.
$4,616,910,000
U.S. Bank National Association
$4,282,285,453
Regions Bank
$4,200,000,000
PNC Funding Corp
$3,900,000,000
U.S. BANCORP
$3,001,458,750
SunTrust Bank
$3,000,000,000
STATE STREET CORPORATION
$2,839,431,500
State Street Bank and Trust Company
$2,450,000,000
Union Bank, National Association
$2,210,000,000
JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association
$1,978,370,371
Sovereign Bank
$1,350,000,000
Bank of the West
$1,002,889,124
Keybank National Association
$1,000,000,000
KEYCORP
$937,500,000
Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria Puerto Rico
$686,440,926
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORPORATION, THE
$603,448,298
The Huntington National Bank
$600,000,000
SUNTRUST BANKS, INC.
$576,000,000
New York Community Bank
$512,000,000
Wilmington Trust Company
$460,000,000
The Bank of New York Mellon
$436,964,547
METLIFE, INC.
$397,436,000
Associated Bank, National Association
$395,000,000
Fifth Third Bank
$285,000,000
Wachovia Bank, National Association
$271,452,170
ZIONS BANCORPORATION
$254,892,500
Wells Fargo Bank, National Association
$250,868,606
Sovereign Bancorp, Inc.
$250,000,000
USAA Capital Corporation
$221,000,000
Texas Capital Bank, National Association
$149,900,656
HSBC Bank USA, National Association
$125,688,079
Oriental Bank and Trust
$105,000,000
WASHINGTON FIRST FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.
$90,638,211
NEW YORK COMMUNITY BANCORP, INC.
$90,000,000
Amalgamated Bank (Pooled Funding Trust 1)
$85,000,000
National Consumer Cooperative Bank (Pooled Funding Trust 1)
$75,000,000
AnchorBank, FSB (Pooled Funding Trust 1)
$60,000,000
Provident Bank (Pooled Funding Trust 1)
$51,500,000
Banner Bank
$50,000,000
Integra Bank National Association (Pooled Funding Trust 2)
$50,000,000
Renasant Bank (Pooled Funding Trust 2)
$50,000,000
The Frost National Bank
$46,936,918
Amboy Bank (Pooled Funding Trust 1)
$46,000,000
Sterling Bank
$42,750,000
Bank of the Cascades
$41,000,000
Superior Bank (Pooled Funding Trust 2)
$40,000,000
First Merchants Bank NA (Pooled Funding Trust 2)
$36,352,000
American National Bank (Pooled Funding Trust 2)
$35,000,000
Access National Bank (Pooled Funding Trust 1)
$30,000,000
Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB (Pooled Funding Trust 1)
$30,000,000
State Bank of Long Island (Pooled Funding Trust 2)
$29,000,000
Preferred Bank (Pooled Funding Trust 1)
$26,000,000
Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company
$24,250,000
RBS Citizens, National Association
$22,641,280
The Park Avenue Bank (Pooled Funding Trust 1)
$20,000,000
Lafayette Bank and Trust Company, NA (Pooled Funding Trust 2)
$16,530,000
First Merchants Bank of Central Indiana, NA (Pooled Funding Trust 2)
$15,011,000
Patriot Bank (Pooled Funding Trust 1)
$15,000,000
Carver Federal Savings Bank
$14,068,000
BAC Florida Bank
$14,000,000
NCB, FSB
$13,688,000
Comerica Bank
$13,066,197
Commerce National Bank (Pooled Funding Trust 2)
$11,107,000
Community FirstBank of Charleston (Pooled Funding Trust 1)
$10,300,000
Crescent Bank (Pooled Funding Trust 1)
$10,100,000
The Bank of Holland
$10,000,000
TCM Bank, National Association
$9,550,000
CHAMBERS BANCSHARES, INC.
$8,460,000
BankTrust
$7,921,779
Nara Bank
$7,281,438
Enterprise Bank & Trust
$7,250,000
CNB BANCSHARES, INC. (Pooled Funding Trust 2)
$6,500,000
The Bank of Northern Michigan
$6,000,000
The La Porte Savings Bank (Pooled Funding Trust 1)
The FDIC just released "Issuer Reported Debt Details" for the Debt Guarantee Program (DGP) of its Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (TLGP)--meaning a detailed list of which banks borrowed on the backs of the taxpayer during the financial panic and how juicy the terms were. A total of $618 billion was guaranteed by the FDIC over an approximate one year period. According to the FDIC's release:
"Under the DGP, the FDIC guaranteed debt that was issued between October 2008 and October 2009 by participants in the program. The guarantee expires at the end of this year, by which time almost all debt issued under the program will have matured. The information being disclosed includes for each registered issuance of FDIC guaranteed debt the: 1) issuer name; 2) CUSIP or other identifier; 3) issue date; 4) maturity date; 5) rate type; 6) interest/discount rate at issuance; 7) amount of unsecured debt; and 8) unsecured debt total fee."
Here is a snapshot of the first page:
Immediately noticeable is that, while the interest rates at which 1st Source Corporation was able to issue the FDIC-backed commercial paper were low, they still had to pay interest. Which brings us to Bank of America:
After the first 11 lines, the rate drops to zero...and stays there for a total of 1,352 issues totaling $69,205,303,031.[1]
While several other institutions were able to take advantage of 0% rates on a portion of their debt funding (including Citibank, General Electric Capital, Goldman Sachs Group and HSBC), only Merrill Lynch & Co. was able to finance nearly all of its $19,786,359,000 in debt issued at 0%.
Who borrowed the most? Preliminary analysis reveals it is General Electric (GE) Capital, with 4,328 issues totaling $130,850,166,935.
Developing...
------------------------
[1] The issued debt spans both the holding company, Bank of America Corporation (pictured above) and the actual bank, Bank of America, N.A. Also note that total debt issued does not necessarily reflect total debt outstanding at any given time.
Is LIBORgate the crime of the century? Or is the real crime yet to come? As has long been alleged at EconomicPolicyJournal.com, the biggest manipulators of short term rates are the central bankers themselves. Yet, they (unfortunately) have been ignored by the MSM in this mess--even the Bank of England, which appears to be directly culpable. (See also this article from Business Insider, which reveals that the Fed itself already killed the LIBOR market long ago.)
Nevertheless, the central banksters,who never let a good [appropriately planned] crisis go to waste, apparently have an even more manipulated scheme to follow. We discussed this today on RT's Capital Account with Lauren Lyster (link below), along with a diversion into the timing of the whole LIBOR scandal, which happily coincides with the potential court-ordered release of Eliot Spitzer emails that might publicly exonerate Hank Greenberg and AIG (don't worry, CNBC is already on board). If there were ever a moment when Wall Street and DC diverged in recent memory, it is now.
Last week, Chairman Bernanke spoke off-the-cuff to the House in a Q&A session and mentioned three potential alternatives to LIBOR. It seems the global central bankers have already planned a September 9th meeting this year to discuss exactly that. And, while details are sketchy at present, whatever replaces the benchmark--to which approximately $500 trillion in notional financial products are pegged--is guaranteed to have the most powerful of influences behind it.
According to Bloomberg, this meeting, to be headed by Bank of England Governor Mervyn King, will be conducted [behind closed doors], only to be followed up by another [semi-secretive] meeting amongst the policy-makers at the international Financial Stability Board.
To date, the only central bankers talking are Bernanke and his Canadian (Bank of Canada Governor) counterpart, Mark Carney. Mr. Carney, echoing Mr. Bernanke, laughably said, "There is an attraction to moving toward obviously [sic] market based rates if possible," he said.
Market based indeed.
Both Bernanke and Carney mentioned repos (repurchase contracts, presumably of Treasurys/T-Bills) and OIS (overnight indexed swap rates) as replacements, and a third addition by Mr. Bernanke is actual T-Bill rates. Remarkably, there have been few discussions (though see this Stone & McCarthy report at ZH) of this game changing event--which could literally decide the fate of not only money markets themselves, but the life and death of the largest financial institutions (their living wills now cemented in the Eccles Building archives).
If one delves into the OIS alternative, even more decidedly non-"market based" potential for manipulation exists. First, OIS is a derivative rate based on an average of the Federal Funds rate--the rate the Fed prefers to manipulate to "target" short term interest rates. However, the "Fed Funds" market is drastically different than years past since the Fed committed to near-ZIRP policy (since December 2008) and since having gained the ability (in October of 2008) to pay banks interest for the money they "keep out of the system" by parking it at the Fed (so-called Interest On Excess Reserves, or IOER).
According to the Fed itself, the largest lenders/sellers of Fed Funds are the Federal Home Loan Banks and other GSEs (principally, Freddie and Fannie). This is because, as non-deposit taking institutions, they are not eligible to earn the 0.25% interest the Fed pays to banks. Instead, they earn income on their extra cash by lending it to banks, which, in turn, deposit it at the Fed to collect IOER. Further, according to an email sent by a senior Fed economist to an EPJ reader, the GSEs prefer to lend only to a few banks (presumably JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, and the usual suspects). Here is the quote (emphasis ours):
Anecdotal evidence suggests that all of the housing-related entities are willing to lend to the same few banks, which limits the possibility for competition to raise market rates.
Thus, a LIBOR "alternative" that uses the OIS rate as its substitute switches from an average of declared rates by 14 or so banks to an average Fed Funds rate determined by back-door dealings between the largest government sponsored failures (GSFs?) in history and the compromised TBTF banks with whom they prefer to transact. At least the Fed (and the administration) can sleep knowing this scheme limits competition to push rates to the upside.
None of this is to discount the fact that the large banks wantonly manipulated LIBOR for their own gain on a day to day basis. Nor are we are not attempting to mitigate their culpability for such. Were we given the chance to indict the banksters for LIBOR or for nothing at all, guess which we would choose (though, we'd insist throwing Corzine in for good measure).
The point is that after all the show trials and show hearings on LIBOR, all we are guaranteed is that the central planning oligarchy will have its tentacles more firmly entrenched in its manipulation scheme of the entire finance sector. The question is only which power centers will be directing the circus.
Our Capital Account appearance begins approximately twelve minutes in (though don't miss the must-hear comments by Marc Faber regarding China and other matters):
Lew also gets into Lauren's working relationship with Capital Account producer, Demetri Kofinas, including how they began collaborating. On that note, Lew separately interviewed Demetri several months ago in a segment titled, Finally Honest TV. Particularly interesting is the exploration of his insights into the problems facing his homeland, Greece, and his background in radio. 
