By William K. Black
San Francisco, CA: November 23, 2014
In December 2013 NPR interviewed me about one the great disgraces of the Obama administration – its refusal to prosecute either the officers or HSBC for laundering roughly $1 billion over the course of the decade for Mexico’s Sinaloa drug cartel. The NPR story doesn’t name the cartel or inform the listener that it is one of the world’s most violent drug cartels, or that HSBC also routinely violated the money laundering laws on transactions involving tens of trillions of dollars, and covered up its numerous violations of U.S. sanctions on Iran and Burma.
The original NPR story presented my comments on Treasury’s opposition to brining criminal charges. Those comments were subject to what NPR labeled a “clarification” which meant they were removed from the program.
Pavlina appeared on NPR’s Morning Edition with Scott Horsley this morning, Oct 3. Topic of discussion was economic disconnect. You can listen here.
By William K. Black
We have further proof about how thin-skinned Treasury Secretary Geithner was, but we have it in the form of a weird May 29, 2013 story by Ben Protess in the New York Times. The story is in part about me, though it doesn’t mention me, because it is a story that notes that Treasury was able to convince NPR to remove from its December 13, 2013 broadcast a statement I made criticizing Geithner – an action that NPR took and noted, but without naming me as the source of the criticism. The weird part of the NYT story is that while it confirms the accuracy of the statement I made about Geithner it asserts that the statement by the unidentified “academic” criticizing Geithner was false. Continue reading
By Stephanie Kelton
This morning, I appeared on Tom Ashbrook’s radio show, along with Paul Krugman and Stan Collender. I wish there had been more time to explore Paul Krugman’s very important point that one sector’s deficit spending becomes another sector’s surplus. This is a core point that we make all of the time on this blog. Cutting the deficit cuts the non-government surplus dollar-for-dollar. So any plan to cut $4 trillion in deficit spending is a plan to reduce the non-government surplus by $4 trillion. The ordinary American will gleefully support deficit reduction (as polling shows), but I’m confident that you’d get a very different reaction if you asked them whether they support cutting their own surplus by trillions of dollars. Almost no one recognizes that the former implies the latter.