Skip to comments.Fed Chairman Bernanke Should Apologize to Ron Paul
Posted on 02/24/2010 8:45:22 PM PST by Captain Kirk
It seems in vogue these days to apologize for wrong doings. I am not really sure why Tiger Woods apologized on worldwide television to golfers, his wife, his mother, to me, to you...to the entire world, for what appears a personal matter, but I tell you who needs to apologize publicly is Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. He needs to apologize for his snarky, condescending attitude toward Congressman Ron Paul when Paul ,
1. asked Bernanke about allegations that the Federal Reserve was involved in funneling money to Saddam Hussein, when Hussein was a favorite of the U.S.,
2. asked about allegations that the Fed was involved in transferring Watergate money.
Bernanke labeled the allegations "bizarre."
Naturally, mainstream media took up on Bernanke's cue, and are reporting Paul's allegations without the back story. Here is the back story.
Fed chairman Bernanke simply doesn't know Fed history as well as Ron Paul (Or the history conveniently slipped his memory). As far as Watergate, I always thought it was pretty common knowledge that the money ended up in the burglars' hands through some pretty fishy means. Even wikipedia has part of the story:
[Watergate burglar Bernard] Barker had attempted to disguise the origin of the funds by depositing the donors' checks into bank accounts which (though controlled by him), were located in banks outside of the United States. What Barker, Liddy, and Sloan did not know was that the complete record of all such transactions are held, after the funds cleared, for roughly six months. Barkers use of foreign banks to deposit checks and withdraw the funds via cashiers checks and money orders in April and May 1972 guaranteed that the banks would keep the entire transaction record at least until October and November 1972.
(Excerpt) Read more at economicpolicyjournal.com ...
Cute....now do you have argument about the specifics in the article? Waiting to hear your fact-based analysis. Cheers.
The world just does not make sense any more.
Waiting for anybody to explain why anything in this matter is thought to be “odd” on the part of the Fed.
Move along. Nothing to see here. Don’t ask questions. Helicopter Ben is the most brilliant economist of modern times.
Exactly, the Fed was a partner in the crime in the nationalization of large sections of the American economy (all without constitutional authorization) and Ron Paul is a “loon.” Yeah right.
So everything that goes through a bank is the fault of the Federal Reserve?
And the point is...
Let me guess...
It’s all the Jews’ fault?
It seems the Christian-haters and Fed-fans really have it out for Ron Paul.
How would Bernanke (born December 13, 1953) know anything first hand about Watetgate and the Fed?
They are getting really desperate if they think his questions about Watergate payoffs (which have been widely reported for over three decades by mainstream historians and journalists) will discredit him. Their near hero worship of Bernanke (an out and out socialist) is pathetic.
Paultard (I really don’t know, I didn’t bother to read it) tries to spin Rep. Paul’s “bizarre” performance on the Hill.
Sorry folks, I keep forgetting not to feed the loonies.
And shame on him for not treating a Wikipedia snippet as a gospel.
. The institution he heads has records and other information covering this period. All Paul was saying that the Federal Reserve should open up all its historical records and Bernanke is the main in charge of this information. How is that "crazy?" Government agencies release records on decades old historical events all the time. Heck, the FBI only recently investigated the Emmett Till killing which occured in 1955! Why is helicopter Ben exempted from doing this?
Quick, can you tell me about the scandals in President Abraham Lincoln’s administration?
You can’t? And you call yourself an American?
Cute....now could you provide us with a specific argument on how Paul’s points on Watergate are meritless and do not deserve further inquiry? Waiting patiently.
Do you have an argument on why Paul is wrong in this case? Did you bother to read the article?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.