First, the link. Here is the entire Patrick Byrne interview. It's a great one. He's lucid, on point, and reveals a lot of backstory detail I for one know about, and know to be true.
It's a largely fair interview, however being the Easter Bunny, I of course found fault once it moved into discussion of naked short selling.
The most annoying part about the interview is this sort of disbelieving tone when it comes to NSS that the interviewer takes. Sort of a, "You'll just need to make up your own mind as to whether there is anything to all this" shtick that is insulting, given the recent rules published by the SEC acknowledging that it is very real, and is a problem. Sort of like saying, "You'll just have to make up your own mind" about whether gravity exists, or the earth is round.
Since when is knowable fact the thing of opinion? And since when did journalism stop being about reporting knowable fact, and instead start being about pretending that everything is a matter of opinion?
The other annoyance is this sort of repetition of every hackneyed attack ever used by the quisling members of the Wall Street suckup brigade. ""Shouldn't you be running your company instead of pursuing this?" "Doesn't this all sound like conspiracy theory?" I understand that the interviewer wants to know why Patrick is doing what he does, but it seems like the description of the looting of the financial system was met with a ho hum, and it was more interesting to ask why Patrick cares whether the bad man is raping the lady next door.
What does that have to do with whether or not this information is knowable, factual, and true? Answer: It doesn't. It is ad hominem. It steers away from whether it is true, and instead goes after the messenger, and attempts to label the data in a pejorative way.
The other thing that is annoying, certainly to me, is the attitude that this is all crazy talk, and couldn't possibly happen. Which ignores the last 1000 years of history, where in fact big money does in fact wield tremendous power, and afford control over virtually every aspect of civilization. Just in the 1930's, we learned in the Pecora hearings, that the banks had in fact done every legal and illegal thing they could think of to rip off the country. The S&L operators did that in the 80's. Time and time again it has happened, and we get the host of the podcast acting as though Patrick is describing flying pigs. Either this is profound ignorance of the most basic fabric of reality, or it is an act.
When Eisenhower warned of the military/industrial complex hijacking the country's agenda, and using the apparatus of the government to further its own agenda of profit making at the expense of the nation (that includes the financial industry), do ya think that was just for fun? Sort of idle chit chat as his last speech to the nation? Off on a drunk?
How can you not be aware of the history of the topics you are discussing? This stuff is only wild eyed if you have zero knowledge of the past.
--------------------------------
Is it just me, or does it now seem as though the largest financial institutions in the US are basically houses of cards? So here is a question. Why did these same banks and brokers pay out tens of billions of dollars just a few short months ago, in bonuses, when it had to be clear that the actual performance of those getting the bonuses was to essentially bankrupt the entities they worked for, by taking extreme risk, and creating junk paper they understood to be junk? Why isn't anyone examining why all those guys get to keep the money, when it was really predicated on a sham?
On a related note, it's kind of fitting that Wall Street's favorite foil for reform, Spitzer, turns out to be a scumbag. That would be Cramer's buddy, and Herb's idol, who is actually now revealed to be a two faced whoref-cker, and apparently one that is overpaying for it, thus a bad shopper or negotiator. Now, don't get me wrong. Nothing wrong with being a john, if you are straightforward about it. Been going on forever, and apparently business is booming. The problem I have here is that you have a guy who holds himself out to be honest guy, filled with ethics and virtue, and he is himself violating the laws he is sworn to uphold. Imagine that. Lying liars and the lies they tell. How completely unexpected.
In yet more footdragging, the SEC is again requesting more comments on tougher naked short selling rules. How many years can the comments be requested? I cannot wait until the newly created NIPC drops their bomb on the SEC. The logic is pretty simple, and nothing new, but it is now synthesized in a way they can't weasel out of. Should be fun to watch them squirm.