welcome to the lone show where we get the real headlines with none of the mersey can live in washington d.c. now tonight we can take a look at a few financial bombshells that are being reported by bloomberg former treasury secretary hank paulson warned hedge fund managers about the takeover of fannie and freddie and a seven point seven trillion in secret loans by the fed the largest banks in the country earned them thirteen billion dollars now that all happened in the past but if any of those practices really change the prince will join us for that one then the senate is expected to vote tomorrow on the provision that would mandate

military detention for terrorist suspects american citizens included and president obama's threatened to veto this bill but is that only because it takes away some of his unchecked powers marcy wheeler is going to help us hash it out and new research shows that young voters they care big time about their civil liberties and they reject america's militarist approach to foreign policy so why are these figures ignore and candidates who uphold those views like ron paul treated like they're fringe we have all that and more feet and i couldn't because of happy hour but first take a look at the mainstream media has decided to miss. it so yesterday we decided to goof around for a second show you quick clip herman cain this time trying to preempt yet another allegation against him knowing that the mainstream media would just go nuts over this story and what do you know i must be magic i must be able to see the future because my vision they came true. herman cain's presidential campaign the latest

crisis that threatens to derail common again is fighting for his political survival this morning allegations of a long time extramarital affair threatening to be the end of the line perhaps for the came trained a woman says she and cain were involved in an extramarital affair for more than thirteen years well he's not denying that they have a past friendship but his denials of an affair have been very forceful the campaign issued a statement detractors are trying once again to derail the cain train with more accusations of past events that never happened but does everybody know herman cain's campaign is pretty much over except the herman cain campaign and mr cain would certainly argue that his personal life has been dragged through the mud here and it's all by his detractors he says he is not going to drop out of the race or be pressured in any way by the. do you know how many times we've heard the question asked as to whether or not this is the end for the cain train i don't think people

get tired of trying to predict what's political doom every single day and usually being wrong clearly they don't have my skills but realistically here it almost seems like they want to build it up keep talking about it blowing it up so that just one time just one time out of the maybe they can be right let's face it eventually all of the campaigns will be over except for one once the g.o.p. nominee is chosen and i'm sure that they're all going to want to take credit for being the ones that saw the downfall coming first you know what the truth of the matter is that i don't care and i don't really think that many people out there care either so this time maybe cain had an affair for thirteen years is that going to be so much different than the non reaction from viewers and voters we may have a sexually assaulted somebody of k. really does end his campaign after this which he announced today will be reassessing that it'll be because he let the bullies in the media do it to it not because he honestly thinks that it hinders his chances at winning a he doesn't have a chance at winning because charming as he might be with his little sayings and everything the man is not qualified to be the president of the united states and

enough foreign policy jabs has shown that more than the sexual allegations and b. if newt gingrich is still somehow looking good to voters after his marital past then clearly this affair story isn't going to make a glitch. but here's what the really sad thing about all of this is is the mainstream media has just become so damn lazy that it hurts these the stories that they pursue tirelessly because they're easy to pursue and then they get to feel like they accomplished something you know what i wish they would focus on instead we obviously have about a million suggestions but today let me focus on just one specific example wired's danger room had a great piece today detailing how media access to drones and drone pilots at creech air force base has essentially been shut down blacked out it is no more a stark difference in two thousand and eight and two thousand and nine when they were showing the men and the machines off letting sixty minutes come in for an in-depth report and of course this major media blackout happens to be occurring at a time when the drone campaign that our country the military and the cia are waging

is the most hated that it's ever been but the cia's drone program is a secret so we're not supposed to talk about that one remember the military on the other hand what's their excuse and the truth is of the lines are all blurred and the to work together but i wonder why they don't want to tell reporters why they don't want reporters to know about the shadow wars that are waging in pakistan yemen and somalia why don't they want to porters to know more about the statistics when it comes to civilian deaths and specifically in this case while they were reporters to have access to drone pilots so they can look them in the eyes and ask him how they feel about killing from thousands of feet away with the push of a button when all makes sense on their part because of course they'd rather keep it all the dark under cover away from the eyes of americans but the sad thing is that they're completely getting away with it because our mainstream media chooses not to make a fuss over it not to go on and on on twenty four hours a day about this scandal and hope that that might lead to some results you know like i said they'd rather take the easy route talk about the cain train's next

destination but drone warfare is next up that's what they choose to miss. there's been a lot of rage inducing financial news of late today bloomberg reported that former treasury secretary hank paulson had tipped off hedge fund managers and some of his friends over goldman sachs about the government's takeover of fannie and freddie everyone else i guess they just weren't so lucky yesterday bloomberg reported that the federal reserve had given out seven point seven trillion dollars in loans to the nation's largest banks in secret through march of two thousand and nine banks at the time were publicly talking about their strength and their solvency and who ended up profiting off of these loans to the tune of thirteen billion dollars now some argue this shows that the fed was just doing it was supposed to do saving the financial system from imploding and its former u.s. congressman alan grayson noted on countdown with keith olbermann last night is the

fed supposed to pick winners and losers for the first time in history and i'm talking about in the one hundred year history of the reserve they played favorites they said we'll give one hundred trillion to this institution one hundred two hundred billion to this institution another hundred billion to this institution and so on down the line when you and i couldn't even come close to accessing though it's that kind of money on those terms. so who wants to argue with the one percent don't live in a different world than the rest of us now joining me from our studio in los angeles is now the prince senior fellow at demos and author of it takes a pillage and her latest book black tuesday now i want to thank you so much for joining us today and i guess we have a lot to discuss but let's start with this news today about hank paulson letting his buddies had five managers goldman sachs guys know about fannie and freddie before anyone else got to find out because we're just a lowly people. i guess that that was legal when he did it. yeah

unfortunately we still legal now basically he came from that world you know as c.e.o. of goldman sachs as someone who would through his entire career been been friends with these people hung out with these people and going to washington didn't really change his allegiance the people he felt comfortable sharing you know what should have been non disclosable information but legally isn't and that's what he did he basically decided that in his capacity as treasury secretary noting that there were problems with fannie and freddie as the rest of us did i mean these these these agencies were in the news all the time but wasn't in the news was what was going to actually a car from the standpoint of the treasury department who ultimately took the risk and took the investment and sort of took over these agencies and he chose to share that information that he was thinking about and was in the position of being able to do something about with his old friends and perhaps some new friends but people of the same ilk and no that wasn't shared not just with the public it also wasn't

shared at the time with with congress so yes that could still happen today and it was very much par for his course of what happened back then yeah you make a good point that it could still happen today because it's not just hank paulson who is an insider knew these guys forever by our current treasury secretary tim geithner also comes from wall street and is also friends of all these guys so i guess that much hasn't really changed let's get into this other report about this seven point seven trillion dollars in secret fed loans also that congress did not know about until now so we found out earlier that total the fed had given sixteen trillion dollars in loans not included a lot of other foreign institutions and so here we just have seven point seven trillion through march of two thousand and nine how does this differ do you think from that bigger sixteen trillion dollar number that we found out before what does this tell us. some of that sixteen trillion number and this is a little math the in terms of how things get reported when they when they come out

that the seven point seven trillion the number that bloomberg today that's actually on my website and has been for several years since i wrote it takes a pillage will to a little over two years because the credits crafty and they created these these lending facilities on different different names some of them were for currency swaps with foreign central banks some more for a short term somewhere for long term some took more junky collateral in return for loans some took less but basically and i have all the dates they were they were sizeable emergency loan facilities that were created and they told a seven point six seven point seven trillion dollars what was new to that was because of what bloomberg was doing with their freedom of information act pushing and also some of things were going on with bernie sanders senator bernie sanders and ron paul and such in congress there was a fed audit and they basically also showed where this money went who got the loans now the difference between the seven point seven trillion the sixteen trillion is

that some of that sixteen included loans that were coming in and now in other words you you lend money to me i pay you back the next day you lend me again i pay you back you lend me again i pay you back and to some extent you could look at that as a sum of all those loans or you could look at is the same loan rolling over and regardless of how you look at it there are still ridiculous numbers and unprecedented means of putting emergency money into the banking system and not into the public which was under the got which was the guys under which the fed open these facilities to begin with and it is on their website just none of the media was picking it up at the time now i want to go back to the clip that i played of alan grayson earlier he made two points one is that none of us would ever get a deal like that which is obvious but he also said that for the first time in the history of the federal reserve that they were picking winners and losers do you agree do you think that this is really the first time we've seen the fed act this way. you know the fed in its hundred years and its inception was was created

by its major member banks by by the banks that were the most powerful that were the most at the time interconnected then they were interconnected because they owned stocks and shares depending on how private the bank institution was in each other's company they so that they sat on each other's boards today it's a little different today they have derivatives contracts that they have to tie themselves amongst each other but the fed back then was also created to specifically help these institutions they were scared from the one nine hundred seven bank panic they had spent years sort of in the wilderness we're looking at a potential new world war there was a lot of economic degradation already happening and they all got together thought that was a really good time to create an institution that would save them in the event they needed saving and that's kind of how the fed was born so the manner in which the fed did it most recently is extremely huge and the sort of craftiness of creating

these facilities was much more mature but the notion of saving its biggest institutions its biggest partners its biggest and most include interconnected members it's pretty much what the fed's been doing since its inception but would you then you know in that case maybe they were more crafty about it this time around a lot of people were arguing that this shows that the fed was doing exactly what they were supposed to do which is keeping us from this massive financial meltdown and perhaps there you know showing up the european central bank right now what do you think about argument. well i don't agree that the fed has really saved our general economy and i have and what the fed did was use the notion of we need to protect unemployment we need to protect inflation all these sort of things that the fed maintains it's supposed to do as a way to really create these emergency lending institutions and not have a whole lot of flak which they had none of when they were doing so so so basically all they were doing was saving the financial institutions and rather than allowing

the ones that were too risky to fail rather than dissecting and breaking up the banks and segmenting their risk and letting it fail and keeping the parts that dealt with consumers intact or perhaps even subsidized on through the f.d.i.c and maybe if it needed emergency facilities at the time just for that component which was far far smaller than all of the risk that the federal timidly lent into the banking system at that time and still does we still have right now you talk about europe the fed right now is pushing the e.c.b. to do the same thing to basically print money to lend to banking institutions it does not go through to the economies that didn't go through our economy our employment is double what it was before the fed started these facilities to allow the banks to continue to take risks and to have their losses covered so what they definitely did not do is help the main economy they're exporting that notion of not helping into your p.c. be is basically adopting in the fed is continuing to also funnel more money into europe through the i.m.f. through the e.c.b. through their ties with international banks that have partnerships with the major

u.s. banks so all of the explore this way of subsidizing risk this never ending cycle i guess you could say now lastly to i just want to switch gears for one second we found out that a federal judge decided that a settlement reached between citi group and as you see wasn't good enough because basically they didn't have to deny or necessarily admit the accusations here that they've been cheating their investors and so i think that we can see that as a good step but in general if you look at it as you see these as opposed to the federal regulators are supposed to be going after the banks. you know what that relationship has become to that citi group at this point just thinks the hey that's easy making these type of small time settlements that don't actually hurt us is just part of business. well exactly the f.c.c. has become a tremendous enabler which was not why it was created in one nine hundred thirty four and there was a study recently had like just one hundred random settlements with the f.c.c. none of them had disclosures of wrongdoing none of them had sort of guilty notions

and that's what judge wake up was basically saying in the city group settlement by saying look you know what it doesn't matter the amount of money doesn't matter what matters is there is no admission of any guilt it's as if these charges are brought up and the banks just shook them off and pay a little settlement which is nothing nothing to them in terms of the amounts relative to what they actually profit by doing the very frauds that they're being charged with and then the matter is closed as happened with a five hundred fifty million dollars goldman settlement one hundred fifty three million dollars j.p. morgan settlement one hundred fifty million dollars bank of america settlement which judge. did approve after he rejected a smaller thirty three million dollars settlement i think this was the time where he said you know what i don't even like approving that last time i'm not going to prove at this time we need a system we need to see is accountable that will actually go through and discover whether or not the charges they have put on these institutions hold water and actually get guilty verdicts out of them or or their version of guilty verdicts out

of them if it's not going to be put in the courts and not just get a settlement that means absolutely nothing is just the cost of doing business yeah i definitely think it's nice to see that he finally said enough is enough but you know in general it all doesn't paint a very good picture in terms of the confidence that we should have in our regulators that all know we thank you so much for joining us tonight thank you. right still ahead of the show and details emerge about bradley manning's defense strategy for his december military hearing and revisit the details of the defense authorization bill provisions grounding military detention has the president reading threatening a veto but not for the reasons that you might think so i think the topic which. one. on three that the police corruption on. what

a protest nobody seems to know. but never a pepper spray to face but part of the argument that they're being overly dramatic . you know sometimes you see a story and it seems so you think you understand it and then you glimpse something else you hear or see some other part of it and realize that everything you. are welcome to the big picture.

mr. well the pretrial hearing for bradley manning is just seventeen days away and civilian defense lawyers working very hard to build mannix case david thomas made

a court filing details of which he released yesterday calling on three federal reviews the conclude that manning's leaks did not harm national security and caused little if any damage to america's reputation and interests abroad now these reports come from the white house the state department and the defense department all of which comes alleges declare the leaks benign in nature representative of low level opinions or things that were already understood because of previous public disclosures now according to wired comes hopes to use the defense department report to prevent witnesses from labeling the leaks as potentially damaging as that claim lays in stark contrast to what those reports actually say and they're also hints the mannings defense attorney will question the actions of adrian lamo the man who turned manning into the authorities comes also attempting to get his hands on a videotape that shows p.f.c. manning being forced to strip naked while he was detained at quantico in hopes of proving that the army private was unlawfully punished before a trial something that has been publicly protested and something that we hear on the show have argued for months and these are just

a few hints at what manning's lawyer will try to argue on december sixteenth during the article thirty two investigation which is the military's version of a pretrial hearing it for me to maryland now these details come just as over fifty members of the european parliament signed an open letter to the u.s. government expressing their concern with the conditions of mannix detention they say the internal investigations into the army privates treatment which included being forced to strip naked being held in solitary confinement for twenty three hours a day and inspections by officers every five minutes were clear conflicts of interest they also noted that the un special rapporteur on torture one mendez has been denied access to check on medical conditions something that could violate the rights guaranteed to him under u.s. and international law now one segment reads p.f.c. manning has a right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment people accused of crimes must not be subjected to any form of punishment before being brought to trial a letter also warned that is true treatment pretrial. could harm the un's work elsewhere so as just fifty more names of the laundry list of public officials both

foreign and domestic have expressed their concern about the treatment of bradley manning that one has to wonder if this latest letter is only going to fall on deaf ears because the sad truth is that manning and his attorney already have the cards heavily stacked against them as kevin zeese points out this trial will have a military judge and a military jury two factors which could give a pretty good indication of how the hearing is going to and manning's attorney can successfully get his hands on all of these reviews and the tapes there could be some light at the end of this long dark tunnel. now this this week or this week at the senate began deliberations on the national defense authorization act which would authorize six hundred eighty two billion dollars for military personnel weapons systems the wars in iraq and afghanistan and national security programs in the energy department but it's not to have the price tag that's causing the biggest stir now is that provision which we've spoken about before on the show that would put the detention of terrorist suspects in the military's hands including allowing for the indefinite detention of american citizens and mandating it for non-citizens

and civil liberties advocates are rightly up in arms over what they see as the militarization of our country and turning your backyard into a battlefield and the obama administration has already threatened to veto this bill if it includes those provisions that are the president's objections really over the concerns of the rest of us share or because this provision would limit the executive branch's authority to do whatever they want whenever they want without having to let congress know all the details joining me to discuss it marcy wheeler blogger at firedoglake marcy thanks so much for joining me tonight before we get into exactly what you think the president or the administration's intentions are here are you with me at this seems like a really horrible scary piece of legislation you know that. both sides are terrible on this but i agree that putting the military in charge of the use of the words is absolutely wrong and. now i'm also interested in what you think about the president and he's saying that he's going to veto this bill it's supposed to be about this idea that we should trust in our civilian courts also

f.b.i. director robert mueller has stepped in and said that this might hurt some of their investigations going on here at home but is it more about just wanting to have unchecked powers. not sure marcy can hear me right now marcy can you hear me. all right so we lost her for a minute but we're going to try to get her back in just a second and as i said this is something that we discussed with colonel morris davis here on the show the other day who is the former chief prosecutor at guantanamo bay and there has been in my opinion not enough discussion about this if you look at the mainstream media i mean the idea that the military would now be in charge of all detentions oh i think that we've got marci back there marcy can you hear me actually now i can hear now you can hear me now i can hear you. all right so let's get back into it we're running out of time unfortunate little

bit here but tell me what it is that you think the obama administration really means when they issue this veto threat. well one of the things that's been going on since about two thousand and four is the both administrations bush and obama have been using the two thousand and one a your math to justify everything and they point to that and then they point to condi which of course was about detaining an american citizen and they say because the priem court has said we can do these things that means our authorities are in the zenith ours ours authorities are expanded to do any kind of warmaking activity that we want and they use that argument for example to justify their illegal wiretapping program they surely use that argument to justify killing anwar aki and so what i'm concerned about in addition to the military having precedence here is the fact that the government has really been able to define what that a u m f means for a decade now and one of the things that i think is beneficial about the levin mccain

package is that they define it they say it's al qaeda it's not it doesn't include other terrorists which a bunch of the opinions tried to do it doesn't include. which the administration used this authority to arrest me this summer and so in other words they're trying to say here's what it covers and i think that's part of the reason the administration is panicking because they have spent ten years expanding what the a math actually covers and they don't want anybody telling them what it means because they've been able to define the. yeah that's something we've covered here on the show too and they try to change the language of the authorization of military force to the point where it was not only people related to nine eleven but basically everybody so we can wage war on anyone anywhere in the world whenever we want but the thing about this is you know i mean it's so nuanced because as senator john mccain and senator levin right there are also certain loopholes in this

provision here that would still allow the president ultimately to decide right so it's not necessarily in the military's hands all the way. and i actually i think one of the things they're forcing the administration to do is to leave a paper trail so in other words and again i mentioned war sammy who's the somalian guy they think floated around on a boat for two months interrogating him they hate basically that the administration basically disappeared this guy for two months to do that in the future they'd have to go to congress and say we want to waiver to this immediate military detention we want to put this guy through the civilian process but we're going to tell you we have him and i think that's one of the things that the senate armed services language is designed to do is make a paper trail and make it a lot harder for the administration to make these decisions without at least telling congress about them so do you think they're going to succeed and i want to have there was also a you doll amendment today which would have placed a little more which would have forced the president to outline what he thinks he

should be able to do and that failed so do you think of this you know this provision is actually going to succeed. well the vote on the udall amendment was if i'm remembering correctly thirty seven to sixty one so if the if the people who voted basically who are allowing the administration to define this today if they stayed with the president after he vetoed he would be able to override who he would be able to would not be overwritten so i think it puts a lot more pressure on whether he's serious about this veto and i think you might see some ongoing discussion about what it means but the other thing to keep mine a lot is that this is going to go into conference with the house and the house provisions on this front i mean you think the senate side is terrible the house provisions are far worse so this this bill is going to get worse in conference almost certainly and then when it comes back i think we're going to see a lot more people with some discomfort about what it lastly the obama

administration has made a lot of promises in the past they try to fight for you know the right to mirandize terror suspects for the right to transfer detainees from guantanamo bay onto u.s. soil and they've kind of backed down on all of it so what they even stand by their veto threat well see that's the thing is this veto threat and the one veto threat they've issued before which was on the house language on this from may. veto threats that come with the a language and with the mandatory military detention language so i don't think it has anything to do with the limitations on transferring get mo i mean they've already signed language into law that makes that the status quo it has to really do with the language that is the a you math and that it that that that makes military detention the standard the assumption here and so we'll see what happens most people i think don't believe the administration is really going to veto it i think i'm a little i think i'm a little more.