2019 Bank Bailout

[Drareg]

A good article highlighting the fed bailing out wall street in 2019 before covid started, once the WHO declared a pandemic they ramped up the bailout and framed it as covid stimulus.

This is the reason for covid lockdowns and hysteria in general, on top of this they amplified George Floyd to fill the media with anything but bank bailouts, what happened to Floyd happens regularly in America yet this was amplified relentlessly on a global level, ironically they called for defunding the police and using the money for social issues while wall street billionaires were being bailed out for trillions, black, white, asian, hispanic all pay for this.

This has also been done by the ECB in Europe and possibly the Bank of England.

Now we have the marketing arm of central banks and big money the world economic forum calling for a great reset on behalf of big banks, the banks busied themselves with buying up assets like power plants, houses etc while we argue over covid, race wars, trans wars etc, when the reset happens they will keep all of those assets I’m sure, in fact it looks likely many banks will go bust and be forced to hand over the assets to bigger hedge funds basically creating a monopoly.

They will release the names of banks who took these loans on Friday New Year’s Eve, we will probably get a distraction in global media this Friday, think terror attack, in saying that they have grown so carefree they will probably just ignore it.

The Fed Is About to Reveal Which Wall Street Banks Needed $4.5 Trillion in Repo Loans in Q4 2019

By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: December 29, 2021 ~ The conventional wisdom is that the Fed’s recent emergency lending facilities to Wall Street were

wallstreetonparade.com

In the last quarter of 2019 – before there was any news of COVID-19 in the U.S., and months before the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic – the Fed pumped $4.5 trillion in cumulative repo loans to unnamed trading houses on Wall Street – its so-called “primary dealers.”

The collateral that the Fed accepted for the cumulative $4.5 trillion in loans consisted of $3.497 trillion in U.S. Treasury securities; $988.3 billion in agency Mortgage-Backed Securities (MBS); and $15.839 billion in agency debt.

The Fed’s emergency repo loan operations began on September 17, 2019. From September 17, 2019 through the last acknowledged operation on July 2, 2020, the Fed’s repo loans cumulatively totaled $11.23 trillion, made up of the following pledged collateral: $7.137 trillion in U.S. Treasury securities; $4 trillion in agency Mortgage-Backed Securities (MBS) and $91.525 billion in agency debt.

Just how fragile were Wall Street’s trading houses at that time that they needed to continuously roll over loans from the Fed – some on an overnight basis, others for weeks at a time? A quick gauge of the depth of the crisis in the last four months of 2019 is to compare the total of repo loans made in the 2008 financial crisis to those made in 2019. We’ve provided the chart at the top of this article for a quick snapshot.

So the question is, if the pandemic was officially declared on March 11, 2020 and the first case of COVID-19 in the U.S. was confirmed by the CDC on January 20, 2020 – what caused the financial emergency on Wall Street in the fall of 2019 that required trillions of dollars in repo loan bailouts from the Fed?

The Fed has failed to provide any credible answers to that question. At first, the Fed suggested that corporate tax payments were drained from the system causing a liquidity crunch. But look carefully at the chart above. Corporations were making those same tax payments from 2009 through 2018 without causing a financial crisis or the need for trillions of dollars in emergency repo loans from the Fed.

Under Section 1103 of the Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation of 2010, the Fed has to disclose to the public its repo lending operations “on the last day of the eighth calendar quarter following the calendar quarter in which the covered transaction was conducted.” That means that the names of the banks and the amounts they borrowed from the Fed’s repo loan operations for the fourth quarter of 2019 are legally required to be reported this Friday.

 

[haidut]

A good article highlighting the fed bailing out wall street in 2019 before covid started, once the WHO declared a pandemic they ramped up the bailout and framed it as covid stimulus.

This is the reason for covid lockdowns and hysteria in general, on top of this they amplified George Floyd to fill the media with anything but bank bailouts, what happened to Floyd happens regularly in America yet this was amplified relentlessly on a global level, ironically they called for defunding the police and using the money for social issues while wall street billionaires were being bailed out for trillions, black, white, asian, hispanic all pay for this.

This has also been done by the ECB in Europe and possibly the Bank of England.

Now we have the marketing arm of central banks and big money the world economic forum calling for a great reset on behalf of big banks, the banks busied themselves with buying up assets like power plants, houses etc while we argue over covid, race wars, trans wars etc, when the reset happens they will keep all of those assets I’m sure, in fact it looks likely many banks will go bust and be forced to hand over the assets to bigger hedge funds basically creating a monopoly.

They will release the names of banks who took these loans on Friday New Year’s Eve, we will probably get a distraction in global media this Friday, think terror attack, in saying that they have grown so carefree they will probably just ignore it.

The Fed Is About to Reveal Which Wall Street Banks Needed $4.5 Trillion in Repo Loans in Q4 2019

By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: December 29, 2021 ~ The conventional wisdom is that the Fed’s recent emergency lending facilities to Wall Street were

wallstreetonparade.com

In the last quarter of 2019 – before there was any news of COVID-19 in the U.S., and months before the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic – the Fed pumped $4.5 trillion in cumulative repo loans to unnamed trading houses on Wall Street – its so-called “primary dealers.”

The collateral that the Fed accepted for the cumulative $4.5 trillion in loans consisted of $3.497 trillion in U.S. Treasury securities; $988.3 billion in agency Mortgage-Backed Securities (MBS); and $15.839 billion in agency debt.

The Fed’s emergency repo loan operations began on September 17, 2019. From September 17, 2019 through the last acknowledged operation on July 2, 2020, the Fed’s repo loans cumulatively totaled $11.23 trillion, made up of the following pledged collateral: $7.137 trillion in U.S. Treasury securities; $4 trillion in agency Mortgage-Backed Securities (MBS) and $91.525 billion in agency debt.

Just how fragile were Wall Street’s trading houses at that time that they needed to continuously roll over loans from the Fed – some on an overnight basis, others for weeks at a time? A quick gauge of the depth of the crisis in the last four months of 2019 is to compare the total of repo loans made in the 2008 financial crisis to those made in 2019. We’ve provided the chart at the top of this article for a quick snapshot.

So the question is, if the pandemic was officially declared on March 11, 2020 and the first case of COVID-19 in the U.S. was confirmed by the CDC on January 20, 2020 – what caused the financial emergency on Wall Street in the fall of 2019 that required trillions of dollars in repo loan bailouts from the Fed?

The Fed has failed to provide any credible answers to that question. At first, the Fed suggested that corporate tax payments were drained from the system causing a liquidity crunch. But look carefully at the chart above. Corporations were making those same tax payments from 2009 through 2018 without causing a financial crisis or the need for trillions of dollars in emergency repo loans from the Fed.

Under Section 1103 of the Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation of 2010, the Fed has to disclose to the public its repo lending operations “on the last day of the eighth calendar quarter following the calendar quarter in which the covered transaction was conducted.” That means that the names of the banks and the amounts they borrowed from the Fed’s repo loan operations for the fourth quarter of 2019 are legally required to be reported this Friday.

Further down in the article they list some of the banks that borrowed first. Looking at that list, one immediately sees that this is a global crisis, not just a US one. Hence, only a global "pandemic" could have provided (temporary) cover for the massive bailout going on worldwide. My bet is that IF we get the full release on Friday it will paint a picture that the entire "developed" world is insolvent. At least every major financial institution from "developed" countries is, and my bet is that the list includes Chinese (by proxy) and possibly Russian banks as well. If we survive this week, it would be interesting to see how the stock markets will react to this release. It would be both hilarious and scary if on Monday Jan 3, 2022 the stock market goes up again. Then again, it would not be too strange - i.e. if most of "civilization" is financially (and morally) insolvent, the stock "market" is by definition a charade, and whether it goes up or down means nothing.

 

[Kayaker]

What significance does it have to people who don't own stock that they'll release names of corporations who borrowed money from the government two years ago?

 

[haidut]

What significance does it have to people who don't own stock that they'll release names of corporations who borrowed money from the government two years ago?

Since the list of institutions getting bailed out includes depositor banks and money market funds, it does have quite a significance for Main Street Joe, as it suggests even "safe" financial institutions are likely insolvent and regular people's deposits/savings are basically gone. That could easily trigger a run on the banks if those news become more widely known. Which is probably why the ongoing IMF "simulations" (i.e. what is being planned as next steps in the "pandemic" hoax) for cyber attacks on the financial system include a run on the depositor banks, triggering bank collapses and thus Fed intervention to nationalize those bank/deposits and potentially replace them with CBDC.

The global financial system is likely insolvent

Vigilant user @Drareg recently posted a few threads of interest to those who want to know just how deep the rabbit hole goes when it comes to the elite's financial shenanigans. One of the threads was an interesting analysis by a Reddit user, which shows that most publicly traded company around...

raypeatforum.com

 

[Herbie]

I listened to Thomas Sowell who said that 2008 was caused by the government making banks lend to people they would not have before (higher risk) and so they bailed them out because it was their fault. The banks get the blame. Not to say banks are not at fault as well.

He also said of all Industry’s, the banking sector is the closest connected to the government and difficult to separate, almost the same thing. If the banks want to do something it has to be approved by government.

 

[Dhair]

I listened to Thomas Sowell who said that 2008 was caused by the government making banks lend to people they would not have before (higher risk) and so they bailed them out because it was their fault. The banks get the blame. Not to say banks are not at fault as well.

He also said of all Industry’s, the banking sector is the closest connected to the government and difficult to separate, almost the same thing. If the banks want to do something it has to be approved by government.

Typical libertarian nonsense from Sowell.
After the Glass Steagall Act was repealed in the 90s, there was no longer a barrier between commercial and investment banks. Wall Street moved to package and sell riskier securities to investors even though they were well aware of the risk. Know this: no one "makes" the banks do anything. Do you honestly believe that an industry as powerful as finance, with all of their lobbyists in DC, who can prevent the derivatives market from being regulated or subject to any real oversight, would simply allow the government to force them to give fraudulent loans to potential homeowners? Does it really make sense to you that this would be the full story?

 

[Herbie]

Typical libertarian nonsense from Sowell.
After the Glass Steagall Act was repealed in the 90s, there was no longer a barrier between commercial and investment banks. Wall Street moved to package and sell riskier securities to investors even though they were well aware of the risk. Know this: no one "makes" the banks do anything. Do you honestly believe that an industry as powerful as finance, with all of their lobbyists in DC, who can prevent the derivatives market from being regulated or subject to any real oversight, would simply allow the government to force them to give fraudulent loans to potential homeowners? Does it really make sense to you that this would be the full story?

He’s not a liberal, he is conservative, says Obama was the worst president in history.
I don’t know, but why would banks lend to risky people which destroys themselves. im not American or Thomas Sowell but here is a summary to what he means:

He links the Community Reinvestment Act to decreased lending standards that resulted in an increase of subprime mortgages, as the law forced banks to set up quotas of lending to minorities. As a result, "lenders had to resort to 'innovative or flexible' standards."[1]He also contrasts housing prices for modest middle-class homes in California and Texas and theorizes that California, with open spaceand various other zoning laws, had homes that were more expensive than those of similar size in Texas, which lacks such laws. Politically, Sowell targets the George W. Bush administration and Congress members of both major political parties for obstructing audits of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and enabling banks to make highly risky housing loans

 

[Drareg]

Further down in the article they list some of the banks that borrowed first. Looking at that list, one immediately sees that this is a global crisis, not just a US one. Hence, only a global "pandemic" could have provided (temporary) cover for the massive bailout going on worldwide. My bet is that IF we get the full release on Friday it will paint a picture that the entire "developed" world is insolvent. At least every major financial institution from "developed" countries is, and my bet is that the list includes Chinese (by proxy) and possibly Russian banks as well. If we survive this week, it would be interesting to see how the stock markets will react to this release. It would be both hilarious and scary if on Monday Jan 3, 2022 the stock market goes up again. Then again, it would not be too strange - i.e. if most of "civilization" is financially (and morally) insolvent, the stock "market" is by definition a charade, and whether it goes up or down means nothing.

If the GameStop theory is correct on top of this it’s even more scandalous, they reckon they used ETF’s offshore to hide naked shorting to lower short interest as ETF’s offshore won’t be counted in America, they claim the short interest is over 130%, this is bad.

 

[Nfinkelstein]

This is the reason for covid lockdowns and hysteria in general

Interesting theory but the WEF et al were planning the pandemic well in advance of the bailouts, the spars report was written in 2017. It seems like overkill to use covid as "look over there" cover for bailouts, doesn't it? Ever since 2008, people are pretty much used to big banking corruption and bailouts. I just don't see this theory making sense.

 

[Drareg]

Interesting theory but the WEF et al were planning the pandemic well in advance of the bailouts, the spars report was written in 2017. It seems like overkill to use covid as "look over there" cover for bailouts, doesn't it? Ever since 2008, people are pretty much used to big banking corruption and bailouts. I just don't see this theory making sense.

People would hit the roof if they were made aware of this in the media with the same hysteria and energy as covid is amplified, many people are struggling, bailouts in the trillions would trigger them, if it wasn’t such a big deal then why not amplify it more, quick vague reports at best is all we get.

 

[Drareg]

And here we have it, it was difficult to load the page because traffic may be heavy. They claim there is a news blackout with journalists under gag orders, now you see how serious this is, if you don’t think they would use covid to cover this up I don’t know what to tell you.

There’s a News Blackout on the Fed’s Naming of the Banks that Got Its Emergency Repo Loans; Some Journalists Appear to Be Under Gag Orders

By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: January 3, 2022 ~ Four days ago, the Federal Reserve released the names of the banks that had received $4.5 trillion in

wallstreetonparade.com

Could this critically important story have simply slipped by all of the dozens of investigative reporters and Fed watchers at these news outlets? Absolutely not. The Fed was required to release its repo loan data and names of the banks for the span of September 17 through September 30, 2019 at the end of the third quarter of this year. We reported on what that information revealed on October 13. Because we were similarly stunned by the news blackout on that Fed release, out of courtesy we sent our story to the reporters covering the Fed for the major news outlets. Our article alerted each of these reporters that a much larger data release from the Fed, for the full fourth quarter of 2019, would be released on or about December 31. The data was posted at the New York Fed sometime before 1:23 p.m. ET last Thursday.

The most puzzling part of this news blackout is that the majority of the reporters who covered this Fed story at the time it was happening in 2019, are still employed at the same news outlets. We emailed a number of them and asked why they were not covering this important story. Silence prevailed. We then emailed the media relations contacts for the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the Financial Times and the Washington Post, inquiring as to why there was a news blackout on this story. Again, silence.

Next, we emailed a number of reporters who had covered this story in 2019 but were no longer employed at a major news outlet. We asked their opinion on what could explain this bizarre news blackout on such a major financial story. We received emails praising our reporting but advising that they “can’t comment.”

The phrase “can’t comment” as opposed to “don’t wish to comment” raised a major alarm bell. Wall Street megabanks are notorious for demanding that their staff sign non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement agreements in order to get severance pay and other benefits when they are terminated. Are the newsrooms covering Wall Street megabanks now demanding similar gag orders from journalists? If they are, we’re looking at a form of corporate tyranny previously unseen in America.

The history of Bloomberg News came to mind. That news outlet had previously come under fire for spiking stories that may have been counter to the business interests of its billionaire owner Michael Bloomberg, who derives his billions of wealth from leasing the Bloomberg data terminal to Wall Street’s trading floors around the world.

On March 11, 2016, Matt Winkler, Editor-in-Chief-Emeritus at Bloomberg, wrote a sycophantic piece titled “Stop Bashing Wall Street. Times Have Changed.” Winkler wrote a fantasy view of where things stood at the time:

Obviously, the banks that were borrowing the largest sums on a perpetual basis from the Fed were the “chronically illiquid.” JPMorgan Chase and Citigroup’s Citibank are among the largest deposit-taking, federally-insured banks in the U.S. Americans have an urgent need to know why they needed to borrow from the Fed on an emergency basis in the fall of 2019.

We’ve never before seen a total news blackout of a financial news story of this magnitude in our 35 years of monitoring Wall Street and the Fed. (We have, however, documented a pattern of corporate media censoring news about the crimes of Wall Street’s megabanks.)

Theories abound as to why this current story is off limits to the media. One theory goes like this: the Fed has made headlines around the world in recent months over its own trading scandal – the worst in its history. Granular details of just how deep this Fed trading scandal goes have also been withheld from the public as well as members of Congress. If the media were now to focus on yet another scandal at the Fed – such as it bailing out the banks in 2019 because of their own hubris once again – there might be legislation introduced in Congress to strip the Fed of its supervisory role over the megabanks and a restoration of the Glass-Steagall Act to separate the federally-insured commercial banks from the trading casinos on Wall Street.

Why might such an outcome be a problem for media outlets in New York City? Three of the serially charged banks (JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs and Citigroup) are actually owners of the New York Fed – the regional Fed bank that played the major role in doling out the bailout money in 2008, and again in 2019. The New York Fed and its unlimited ability to electronically print money, are a boon to the New York City economy, which is a boon to advertising revenue at the big New York City-based media outlets.

@haidut

 

[Nfinkelstein]

People would hit the roof if they were made aware of this in the media with the same hysteria and energy as covid is amplified, many people are struggling, bailouts in the trillions would trigger them, if it wasn’t such a big deal then why not amplify it more, quick vague reports at best is all we get.

I don't see this. The Fed is active in repo operations in order to adjust the supply of reserves in the system and keep the funds rate in its target range, the reason the problem occurred is because of a confluence of corporate tax payment and treasury auction settlements temporarily draining cash from the system and combined with increased reserve requirements, a temporary liquidity crisis. Unless you think that narrative is BS, then I am not seeing anything more than that. The article you linked to is an opinion website and they inject conjecture into their opinion pieces, using phrases like 'news blackout' when actually no such thing happened, there are plenty of industry articles and discussion on the liquidity event which happened at the time. Just because they failed to recruit any Wall Street journalists to amplify their narrative they accused them of being under a gag order. The people behind the article are trying to sell books. If there really was a news blackout then presumably it would have to apply to international news agencies as well, meaning FT, the Economist, ad infinitum. But yeah they are all under strict orders to not talk about something that has already been talked about. I can't believe I am shilling for the Fed and Wall Street in this post but I don't think your theory is remotely valid.

 

[Drareg]

I don't see this. The Fed is active in repo operations in order to adjust the supply of reserves in the system and keep the funds rate in its target range, the reason the problem occurred is because of a confluence of corporate tax payment and treasury auction settlements temporarily draining cash from the system and combined with increased reserve requirements, a temporary liquidity crisis. Unless you think that narrative is BS, then I am not seeing anything more than that. The article you linked to is an opinion website and they inject conjecture into their opinion pieces, using phrases like 'news blackout' when actually no such thing happened, there are plenty of industry articles and discussion on the liquidity event which happened at the time. Just because they failed to recruit any Wall Street journalists to amplify their narrative they accused them of being under a gag order. The people behind the article are trying to sell books. If there really was a news blackout then presumably it would have to apply to international news agencies as well, meaning FT, the Economist, ad infinitum. But yeah they are all under strict orders to not talk about something that has already been talked about. I can't believe I am shilling for the Fed and Wall Street in this post but I don't think your theory is remotely valid.

It’s clear abuse of the system.

 

[Nfinkelstein]

It’s clear abuse of the system.

I totally agree with you on that.

 

[Drareg]

Well what do we have here, 2.7 billion dollars of credit default swaps blew up in September 2019, remember the CDS from the 2008 financial crisis?

This should be huge news yet nothing, this right here is an example of the amplification of information from the ruling class, if it’s not amplified it’s just not attractive to a resource seeking populace.
The feedback loops of social media have rendered the human brain an amplified narrative addict, TV had this effect, the internet however has rendered folks parrots seeking treats.

$2.7 Billion in Credit Default Swaps Blew Up One Day Before the Fed Launched Its Repo Loan Bailouts in 2019

By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: January 13, 2022 ~ On September 16, 2019, exactly one day before the Federal Reserve would embark on its first emergency

wallstreetonparade.com

On September 16, 2019, exactly one day before the Federal Reserve would embark on its first emergency repo loan operations since the financial crisis of 2008, $2.7 billion in credit default swaps (CDS) on a single name blew up. The dealers in those credit default swaps were the very same trading houses on Wall Street that sought, and received, tens of billions of dollars in repo loans from the Fed in an operation that grew to a cumulative $11.23 trillion before its conclusion on July 2, 2020. (In just the last quarter of 2019, the Fed pumped a cumulative $4.5 trillion in repo loans into Wall Street’s trading houses, according to the transaction data it released on December 30 of last year. That was before even one case of COVID-19 had been reported in the U.S.)

On September 16, 2019 the U.K. tour operator, Thomas Cook, filed for Chapter 15 bankruptcy protection in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York – Wall Street’s stomping ground. We know that because the Credit Default Swaps Determinations Committee, that would render the ultimate decision on who got paid on the Credit Default Swaps and who didn’t, places that fact in the first paragraph of its final determination decision.

Eight days after that bankruptcy filing, on September 24, Reuters reported that the Determinations Committee had ruled that “some investors in Thomas Cook’s credit derivatives worth as much as $2.7 billion are eligible for a payout.” The same article revealed the source of that information was that the “weekly gross notional value for Thomas Cook’s CDS was $2.69 billion, according to the Depositary Trust & Clearing Corp (DTCC).”

What the DTCC was aware of in Credit Default Swaps on Thomas Cook is not the final word on the total amount that was at risk and eventually paid out. Wall Street firms continue to be able to write bespoke (custom) bilateral contracts on derivatives with only the two parties to the trade having knowledge of its terms.

The idea that the majority of derivatives are now being centrally-cleared is a complete falsehood that is well-documented quarterly when the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency releases its report on derivatives held at individual banks. The OCC’s report for the third quarter of 2019 shows that Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley were centrally-clearing zero percent of their credit derivatives, the bulk of which are credit default swaps. The maximum percentage other firms were centrally clearing in non-investment grade credit derivatives ranged from 2 percent to 38 percent. (See Graph 15 here.)

The most recent derivatives report from the OCC for the third quarter of 2021 reports the following on the central clearing of derivatives on page 13:

“In the third quarter of 2021 39.0 percent of banks’ derivative holdings were centrally cleared…From a market factor perspective, 50.5 percent of interest rate derivative contracts’ notional amounts outstanding were centrally cleared, while very little of the FX [Foreign Exchange] derivative market was centrally cleared. The bank-held credit derivative market remained largely uncleared, as 35.3 percent of credit derivative transactions were centrally cleared during the third quarter of 2021.”

In addition, Wall Street banks have moved some of their derivatives activity to their foreign units, beyond the radar of their U.S. regulators and the reporting scope of the OCC report.

Every major trading house and bank on Wall Street is aware of the black hole that exists around derivatives and this is why they ran for cover in 2008 and again on September 17, 2019. No one knew how much exposure any one derivatives counterparty had to Thomas Cook and whether it would set off a daisy chain set of defaults by the counterparties who couldn’t make good on paying out what was owed on their credit default swaps.

In Wall Street lingo, the big players in the repo market simply “backed away” from lending, spiking the overnight lending rate from 2 percent to 10 percent and forcing the hand of the Fed to step in and become repo lender of last resort to the trading houses on Wall Street – its so-called Primary Dealers.

When the final results of the Credit Default Swap auction of October 30, 2019 were revealed, to allow the close out of Credit Default Swap exposure to Thomas Cook, the same names that were getting the largest amounts of repo loans from the Fed’s emergency facility were on the list.

Beginning in May of 2019, hedge funds saw an easy prey in Thomas Cook. On May 22, Fitch downgraded the debt of Thomas Cook to CCC+ and placed it on negative credit watch. On July 17, Fitch downgraded the debt further into junk territory with a CC rating. On September 5, just 11 days before its bankruptcy filing, Fitch downgraded the Thomas Cook debt even further into junk territory with a single C rating.

Not only were hedge funds buying Credit Default Swaps on Thomas Cook, they were also assisting in its demise by shorting the stock. In the six months prior to its collapse, its share price had lost 85 percent. The Guardian newspaper in the U.K. reported that “Two hedge funds – London-based TT International and Whitebox Advisers, from Minneapolis – made up the bulk of the shorts, together holding around 7%, according to ShortTracker data.”

While Thomas Cook may have been the spark that ignited the inferno in the repo market, there were plenty of other problems contributing to a general distrust of each other among global trading houses.

According to a chart published by Bloomberg News on September 24, 2019, job cuts planned by global banks at that point tallied up to 58,200. Shortly thereafter, the Financial Times reported another 10,000 job cuts at HSBC.

On July 31, 2019 Fortune Magazine reported that “Trading revenue at the five biggest U.S. banks on Wall Street dropped 8% in the second quarter, following a 14% slide in the first three months of the year — setting up global banks for their worst first half in more than a decade.”

Two of the large borrowers under the Fed’s emergency repo program that were units of foreign banks were Nomura Securities International (part of a large Japanese bank holding company) and Deutsche Bank Securities (part of the giant German lender, Deutsche Bank). Deutsche Bank’s stock had been setting historic new lows throughout 2019 and in July of 2019 Deutsche Bank had confirmed plans to cut 18,000 jobs.

The share price of the parent of Nomura Securities International, Nomura Holdings, had also been slumping in the first three-quarters of 2019, reaching $3.25 at the end of August. Then, on November 8, 2019 Nomura and Deutsche Bank, along with numerous employees, were convicted in a trial in Italy involving helping the Tuscan bank, Monte dei Paschi di Siena, commit fraud in derivatives deals to help it hide losses.

That made the Wall Street firms that were derivative counterparties to the two firms ever more anxious and fearful of extending loans to them in the repo market. And since no one on Wall Street had granular details on which other firms were major counterparties to Nomura and Deutsche, everyone backed further away from each other.

 

[haidut]

Well what do we have here, 2.7 billion dollars of credit default swaps blew up in September 2019, remember the CDS from the 2008 financial crisis?

This should be huge news yet nothing, this right here is an example of the amplification of information from the ruling class, if it’s not amplified it’s just not attractive to a resource seeking populace.
The feedback loops of social media have rendered the human brain an amplified narrative addict, TV had this effect, the internet however has rendered folks parrots seeking treats.

$2.7 Billion in Credit Default Swaps Blew Up One Day Before the Fed Launched Its Repo Loan Bailouts in 2019

By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: January 13, 2022 ~ On September 16, 2019, exactly one day before the Federal Reserve would embark on its first emergency

wallstreetonparade.com

On September 16, 2019, exactly one day before the Federal Reserve would embark on its first emergency repo loan operations since the financial crisis of 2008, $2.7 billion in credit default swaps (CDS) on a single name blew up. The dealers in those credit default swaps were the very same trading houses on Wall Street that sought, and received, tens of billions of dollars in repo loans from the Fed in an operation that grew to a cumulative $11.23 trillion before its conclusion on July 2, 2020. (In just the last quarter of 2019, the Fed pumped a cumulative $4.5 trillion in repo loans into Wall Street’s trading houses, according to the transaction data it released on December 30 of last year. That was before even one case of COVID-19 had been reported in the U.S.)

On September 16, 2019 the U.K. tour operator, Thomas Cook, filed for Chapter 15 bankruptcy protection in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York – Wall Street’s stomping ground. We know that because the Credit Default Swaps Determinations Committee, that would render the ultimate decision on who got paid on the Credit Default Swaps and who didn’t, places that fact in the first paragraph of its final determination decision.

Eight days after that bankruptcy filing, on September 24, Reuters reported that the Determinations Committee had ruled that “some investors in Thomas Cook’s credit derivatives worth as much as $2.7 billion are eligible for a payout.” The same article revealed the source of that information was that the “weekly gross notional value for Thomas Cook’s CDS was $2.69 billion, according to the Depositary Trust & Clearing Corp (DTCC).”

What the DTCC was aware of in Credit Default Swaps on Thomas Cook is not the final word on the total amount that was at risk and eventually paid out. Wall Street firms continue to be able to write bespoke (custom) bilateral contracts on derivatives with only the two parties to the trade having knowledge of its terms.

The idea that the majority of derivatives are now being centrally-cleared is a complete falsehood that is well-documented quarterly when the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency releases its report on derivatives held at individual banks. The OCC’s report for the third quarter of 2019 shows that Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley were centrally-clearing zero percent of their credit derivatives, the bulk of which are credit default swaps. The maximum percentage other firms were centrally clearing in non-investment grade credit derivatives ranged from 2 percent to 38 percent. (See Graph 15 here.)

The most recent derivatives report from the OCC for the third quarter of 2021 reports the following on the central clearing of derivatives on page 13:

“In the third quarter of 2021 39.0 percent of banks’ derivative holdings were centrally cleared…From a market factor perspective, 50.5 percent of interest rate derivative contracts’ notional amounts outstanding were centrally cleared, while very little of the FX [Foreign Exchange] derivative market was centrally cleared. The bank-held credit derivative market remained largely uncleared, as 35.3 percent of credit derivative transactions were centrally cleared during the third quarter of 2021.”

In addition, Wall Street banks have moved some of their derivatives activity to their foreign units, beyond the radar of their U.S. regulators and the reporting scope of the OCC report.

Every major trading house and bank on Wall Street is aware of the black hole that exists around derivatives and this is why they ran for cover in 2008 and again on September 17, 2019. No one knew how much exposure any one derivatives counterparty had to Thomas Cook and whether it would set off a daisy chain set of defaults by the counterparties who couldn’t make good on paying out what was owed on their credit default swaps.

In Wall Street lingo, the big players in the repo market simply “backed away” from lending, spiking the overnight lending rate from 2 percent to 10 percent and forcing the hand of the Fed to step in and become repo lender of last resort to the trading houses on Wall Street – its so-called Primary Dealers.

When the final results of the Credit Default Swap auction of October 30, 2019 were revealed, to allow the close out of Credit Default Swap exposure to Thomas Cook, the same names that were getting the largest amounts of repo loans from the Fed’s emergency facility were on the list.

Beginning in May of 2019, hedge funds saw an easy prey in Thomas Cook. On May 22, Fitch downgraded the debt of Thomas Cook to CCC+ and placed it on negative credit watch. On July 17, Fitch downgraded the debt further into junk territory with a CC rating. On September 5, just 11 days before its bankruptcy filing, Fitch downgraded the Thomas Cook debt even further into junk territory with a single C rating.

Not only were hedge funds buying Credit Default Swaps on Thomas Cook, they were also assisting in its demise by shorting the stock. In the six months prior to its collapse, its share price had lost 85 percent. The Guardian newspaper in the U.K. reported that “Two hedge funds – London-based TT International and Whitebox Advisers, from Minneapolis – made up the bulk of the shorts, together holding around 7%, according to ShortTracker data.”

While Thomas Cook may have been the spark that ignited the inferno in the repo market, there were plenty of other problems contributing to a general distrust of each other among global trading houses.

According to a chart published by Bloomberg News on September 24, 2019, job cuts planned by global banks at that point tallied up to 58,200. Shortly thereafter, the Financial Times reported another 10,000 job cuts at HSBC.

On July 31, 2019 Fortune Magazine reported that “Trading revenue at the five biggest U.S. banks on Wall Street dropped 8% in the second quarter, following a 14% slide in the first three months of the year — setting up global banks for their worst first half in more than a decade.”

Two of the large borrowers under the Fed’s emergency repo program that were units of foreign banks were Nomura Securities International (part of a large Japanese bank holding company) and Deutsche Bank Securities (part of the giant German lender, Deutsche Bank). Deutsche Bank’s stock had been setting historic new lows throughout 2019 and in July of 2019 Deutsche Bank had confirmed plans to cut 18,000 jobs.

The share price of the parent of Nomura Securities International, Nomura Holdings, had also been slumping in the first three-quarters of 2019, reaching $3.25 at the end of August. Then, on November 8, 2019 Nomura and Deutsche Bank, along with numerous employees, were convicted in a trial in Italy involving helping the Tuscan bank, Monte dei Paschi di Siena, commit fraud in derivatives deals to help it hide losses.

That made the Wall Street firms that were derivative counterparties to the two firms ever more anxious and fearful of extending loans to them in the repo market. And since no one on Wall Street had granular details on which other firms were major counterparties to Nomura and Deutsche, everyone backed further away from each other.

Again, with the risk of sounding like a broken record - while this story may explain the banks and other lending/borrowing orgs needing bailouts, why would non-lending / non-borrowing entities (and thus not exposed to counterparty risk) like passive fund investment vehicles and money market funds need repeated bailouts, continuing to this day??

 

[Drareg]

There is a news blackout on this, the fed repo loans released today, democracy dying, our politicians are destroying our countries with great intent, its sad when we ask why, the desire for power or more a desire for desire? they can have it all, they have the money for it, with this comes apathy and lack of desire, the only thing that stimulates desire is the goal of total domination and control.

This is what your culture wars and covid are for, distraction from the thieves in the financial system, it also assists in a move toward are more dominant system led by ruling class controlled banks.

@haidut

The Fed’s Secret Repo Loans, another News Blackout, and a French Bank Scandal

By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: March 31, 2022 ~ As thousands of businesses were forced to close in the U.S. as a result of the coronavirus outbreak in

wallstreetonparade.com

Mainstream media has heretofore instituted a news blackout on the names of the banks that received the repo loan bailouts and the Fed’s data releases. (See our report on January 3 of this year: There’s a News Blackout on the Fed’s Naming of the Banks that Got Its Emergency Repo Loans; Some Journalists Appear to Be Under Gag Orders.) As of 4:00 p.m. today, we see no other news reports on this critical information that the American people need to see.

The Fed data released this morning shows that the trading units of six global banks received $17.66 trillion of the $28.06 trillion in term adjusted cumulative loans, or 63 percent of the total for all 25 trading houses (primary dealers) that borrowed through the Fed’s repo loan program in the first quarter of 2020.

The normal repo loan market is typically an overnight (one-day) loan market. The Fed started out with one-day overnight loans but then periodically also added 14-day, 28-day, 42-day and other term loans. We had to adjust our cumulative tallies to account for these term loans in order to get an accurate picture as to who was grabbing the bulk of these cheap loans from the Fed. For example, let’s say a trading firm took a $10 billion loan for one-day but on the same day took another $10 billion loan for a term of 14 days. The 14-day loan for $10 billion represented the equivalent of 14-days of borrowing $10 billion or a cumulative tally of $140 billion.

 

[Demyze]

There is a news blackout on this, the fed repo loans released today, democracy dying, our politicians are destroying our countries with great intent, its sad when we ask why, the desire for power or more a desire for desire? they can have it all, they have the money for it, with this comes apathy and lack of desire, the only thing that stimulates desire is the goal of total domination and control.

This is what your culture wars and covid are for, distraction from the thieves in the financial system, it also assists in a move toward are more dominant system led by ruling class controlled banks.

@haidut

The Fed’s Secret Repo Loans, another News Blackout, and a French Bank Scandal

By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: March 31, 2022 ~ As thousands of businesses were forced to close in the U.S. as a result of the coronavirus outbreak in

wallstreetonparade.com

View attachment 35240

Mainstream media has heretofore instituted a news blackout on the names of the banks that received the repo loan bailouts and the Fed’s data releases. (See our report on January 3 of this year: There’s a News Blackout on the Fed’s Naming of the Banks that Got Its Emergency Repo Loans; Some Journalists Appear to Be Under Gag Orders.) As of 4:00 p.m. today, we see no other news reports on this critical information that the American people need to see.

The Fed data released this morning shows that the trading units of six global banks received $17.66 trillion of the $28.06 trillion in term adjusted cumulative loans, or 63 percent of the total for all 25 trading houses (primary dealers) that borrowed through the Fed’s repo loan program in the first quarter of 2020.

The normal repo loan market is typically an overnight (one-day) loan market. The Fed started out with one-day overnight loans but then periodically also added 14-day, 28-day, 42-day and other term loans. We had to adjust our cumulative tallies to account for these term loans in order to get an accurate picture as to who was grabbing the bulk of these cheap loans from the Fed. For example, let’s say a trading firm took a $10 billion loan for one-day but on the same day took another $10 billion loan for a term of 14 days. The 14-day loan for $10 billion represented the equivalent of 14-days of borrowing $10 billion or a cumulative tally of $140 billion.

I was just watching a interview about the recent inflation and they actually bring this 2019 repo issue up as foundational to a lot of the problems we're experiencing now.

Breaks things down in a way a lot of people might find helpful and insightful

Transcript for those who prefer to read :) -
Economist Michael Hudson explains inflation crisis and Fed's secretive $4.5 trillion bank bailout

 

[haidut]

I was just watching a interview about the recent inflation and they actually bring this 2019 repo issue up as foundational to a lot of the problems we're experiencing now.

Breaks things down in a way a lot of people might find helpful and insightful

Transcript for those who prefer to read :) -
Economist Michael Hudson explains inflation crisis and Fed's secretive $4.5 trillion bank bailout

I suspect Michael Hudson is a disinfo agent. Here is what he said (from your link) about the first release of documents covered by WallStreenonParade for the time period September 2019 - December 2019.
"...MICHAEL HUDSON: There was actually no liquidity crisis whatsoever. And Pam Martens is very clear about that. She points out the reason that the regular newspapers don't report it is the loans violated every element of the Dodd-Frank laws that were supposed to prevent the Fed from making loans to particular banks that were not part of a liquidity crisis."

That''s either a remarkably ignorant statement or a deliberate lie. An economist of his stature, who write books about Western imperialism, and how the plebs are getting screwed, cannot be that ignorant. The fact that there was a liquidity crisis is proven beyond any reasonable doubt by this latest post/article and Fed data release. I don't know how Hudson can look at the trillions those banks, the same banks that received the biggest bailouts back in 2009, received and tell me if there was no liquidity crisis! It is even more obvious if you look at the data, which I posted about a few months ago, since money was given even to money market funds, and those institutions never, ever need bailout money unless there is a liquidity crisis, so they need the money to pay people who want to withdraw their money and use/spend it. You can see more in the link below.

The global financial system is likely insolvent

Vigilant user @Drareg recently posted a few threads of interest to those who want to know just how deep the rabbit hole goes when it comes to the elite's financial shenanigans. One of the threads was an interesting analysis by a Reddit user, which shows that most publicly traded company around...

raypeatforum.com

Now, I have been reading Hudson's writings on various other blogs and on some of them he actually engages the commenters and responds to their comments. I tried to engage him at least 5 times on different blogs and he refused to respond to my questions despite the questions getting a lot of upvotes from other readers. The questions were how he can explain the claim of "no liquidity crisis", when passive investing vehicles (Fidelity, Vanguard, etc) as well as money market funds got bailout money. And that was based on the data released for the 3-month period in 2019. With the new data @Drareg posted, there is no doubt there was (is?) a liquidity crisis, and at this point money is basically being indiscriminately thrown at the big banks and pretty much whoever else wants it and is a "member of the club". These are "loans" only on paper. They are zero interest and have been continuously rolled over since they were given back in 2019. I don't think any sane person believes that BNP Paribas or JPMorgan paid back $4tillion each in a span of just 2 years.
So, in summary, there is no economy any more, not in any Western country at least. It's just the Fed/ECB/BOE printing fake money, giving it to the elite, and the elite using that paper to buy up whatever they want. No justification needed, and blatantly illegal, but the very concept of a law is laughable at this point so it does not really matter. Inflation does not matter to the elite as they can always "outprint" it, but it will destroy the plebs, and since the elite thinks there is basically no more economy that actually needs people to do things, the only course of action is to kill as many of the plebs as possible.

 

[haidut]

There is a news blackout on this, the fed repo loans released today, democracy dying, our politicians are destroying our countries with great intent, its sad when we ask why, the desire for power or more a desire for desire? they can have it all, they have the money for it, with this comes apathy and lack of desire, the only thing that stimulates desire is the goal of total domination and control.

This is what your culture wars and covid are for, distraction from the thieves in the financial system, it also assists in a move toward are more dominant system led by ruling class controlled banks.

@haidut

The Fed’s Secret Repo Loans, another News Blackout, and a French Bank Scandal

By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: March 31, 2022 ~ As thousands of businesses were forced to close in the U.S. as a result of the coronavirus outbreak in

wallstreetonparade.com

View attachment 35240

Mainstream media has heretofore instituted a news blackout on the names of the banks that received the repo loan bailouts and the Fed’s data releases. (See our report on January 3 of this year: There’s a News Blackout on the Fed’s Naming of the Banks that Got Its Emergency Repo Loans; Some Journalists Appear to Be Under Gag Orders.) As of 4:00 p.m. today, we see no other news reports on this critical information that the American people need to see.

The Fed data released this morning shows that the trading units of six global banks received $17.66 trillion of the $28.06 trillion in term adjusted cumulative loans, or 63 percent of the total for all 25 trading houses (primary dealers) that borrowed through the Fed’s repo loan program in the first quarter of 2020.

The normal repo loan market is typically an overnight (one-day) loan market. The Fed started out with one-day overnight loans but then periodically also added 14-day, 28-day, 42-day and other term loans. We had to adjust our cumulative tallies to account for these term loans in order to get an accurate picture as to who was grabbing the bulk of these cheap loans from the Fed. For example, let’s say a trading firm took a $10 billion loan for one-day but on the same day took another $10 billion loan for a term of 14 days. The 14-day loan for $10 billion represented the equivalent of 14-days of borrowing $10 billion or a cumulative tally of $140 billion.

So, it's basically over - any talk about "economy" going forward is either ignorance or deliberate disinformation. All that remains of the "economy" is money printing (MMT), but only for the elite. Since the plebs are now obsolete and will be culled one way or another, the "militarization" of not only the UK (as that Scott writes about in his blog) but any country relying on fiat currency and IMF/WB financing, is all but guaranteed in order to control the massive social unrest coming. And if that fails....well, as the Scott says - WW3 coming to a theatre near you...no matter where you live.