dogs are going to washington d.c. and here's what's coming up tonight on the big picture well the feds finally hold walls critic accountable for the mess america is in a whirl of billionaire banks toure's escaped punishment yet again we'll pose that question and more tonight's bigger picture panel also when paul ryan introduced his republican budget it had i and rand written all over it is ryan just the beginning of rand's influence on the radical right and slavery jim crow laws and opposing women's suffrage are just a few things conservatives supported in the early years of this nation and not much has changed today so how can anyone be proud to call themselves are conservative.

we begin tonight it's bigger picture discussion with the ever growing lie bore scandal on saturday the new york times reported that the department of justice is building several criminal cases against major wall street banks related to the ongoing libre rate rigging scandal charges are expected to be brought against at least one bank employee and one bank and its employees by the end of this year it's alleged that hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars are make manipulated in the global economy by a handful of banks conspiring to boost their own profits while screwing over working people small businesses and entire cities during the two thousand and seven and two thousand and eight financial crisis meanwhile across the pond in london british financial regulators who turned a blind eye to these crimes are testifying in front of parliament trying to determine their role in the scandal that comes on the heels of news the treasury secretary tim geitner caught wind of the rate rigging scandal as far back as two

thousand and eight and notified the bank of england recommending changes to how the libel rate should be fixed yet nothing was done either by the fed or by british regulators on top of all this is another problem for those of us who are hoping to put an end to wall street's crimes according to federal law there's a five year statute of limitations within which the securities and exchange commission can file charges against the banks for their crimes leading up to the financial crisis at least officials of the s.c.c. scrambling to file lawsuits before their time when a runs out so this is a critical moment in history will we the people finally hold wall street accountable or will they were or will these citizens united fuelled corruption of our government and our legal system give the bankers another free pass we'll explore all of this from tonight's bigger picture panel but first want to turn things over to congressman dennis kucinich record representing ohio's tenth congressional district congressman welcome back thanks tom could do so from the point of view of a member of congress and very well informed one what's libel or all about what what

should we know about this so you know how are interest rates determined i mean it's a question everybody has so with libel or they they have what's called the risk free rate. plus a risk premium and you have this panel of banks literally get together every day and they determine what they think the highest rate they might have to pay to be able to borrow money from each other what the lowest rate is and then they throw at the top the top rates and low rates and come up with a mean mean rate well what's happened is that the the rates have been manipulated so that the banks would. in a sense try to create a more favorable picture of their economic health by having the lowest possible rate and now it appears that you have but you know barclays was certainly part of it they have basically pleaded they've got a foreigner fifty million dollars fine but now the latest news is that. the barclay employees may have been ordered. and the orders could be coming could have come

from the bank of england and it could also involve the government itself there which means then what about the fed one of the fed no one didn't know it and how deep it was doing the same thing and how deep was the involvement i mean this is this proves the inadequacy of the federal reserve in this country as well as questions that have to be reflected in a bank of america and in great britain one of the one of the. excuses is the wrong word reasons shall we say for this happening that has been offered is that it wasn't a criminal conspiracy was an effort to screw anybody that instead it was basically bank vanity it was the banks trying to make it look like they were healthier than they actually were during a financial crisis so they could leverage it in there with their derivatives and be able to basically make more money in other markets so i mean the banks were if you can if you have greater health you have easier access to money you have to pay a high rate for then what happens is that you start to put your investments in other places so the banks were expanding their investment look you could have

potentially a quadrillion dollars worth of derivatives in a worldwide market that could be based on fictional interest rates you have all of these loans all you know spread of the spread globally that that could have that could be pegged at a wrong rate and so you have minister palettes now filing lawsuits to see if they were overcharged on interest consumers still don't know the impact the question is is this whole financial system legit or not right. there's. tell me if this model works one side you've got the commercial banks what we used to have as passbook savings banks and checking account banks and they're the ones that are supposed to be setting these interest rates and beef when glass steagall and that wall was in place between them in the gambling banks they could do whatever they did with interest rates and it didn't much matter other than they'd make a few points on passbook savings but once the and then there's this giant gambling casino out here that's the as you say through a. quarter of a tree on the wall between commercial investment apps you know what i had seen all

those things you can see the hole and so now this little thing here can manipulate this giant and you remember the lousy if the federal reserve in this country is supposed to play a role in basically monitoring markets not monitoring markets monitoring the financial system and they've done a rotten job and actually it's all holding hands banks holding hands with banks and so they put the banks make out always banks the big banks always make out you know that we're still in with banks too big to fail the banks will get a slap on the hand and consumers are going to get screwed what should congress do you know look this thing is so big that the first thing congress should do is change the role the federal reserve the federal reserve is a menace it has been for almost one hundred years it actually privatized the money function once you have the money function privatized and all of the actions attendant there to then money policy is determined by a few at the expense of the many and that's exactly what's happening to your

business is honest businesses don't have a chance in this economy the economy is rigged against honest business men and it's being manipulated by crooks who are global right now it's a could see no economy and now they could see you know is run out of. out of the london. out of live war and action dot com what are you doing this well i you know i'm not i'm not going to be returning to congress after january second so what i'm doing is making a natural transition to. an organization that will help candidates get elected and also promote important issues and consented to action dot com will help candidates who are interested in monetary policy reform and peace in health care and the environment and all those things that we care about so if you check it out it can send it to action dot com you'll see that we're talking about a continuation not just of mine but of all those who really care about these basic issues that we feel you know we can still make a difference it's great congressman thanks so much for thanks

a lot thank you have you with us. now let's open things up to the bigger picture panel joining me tonight brian darling contributor to the daily mail and director of government studies of the heritage foundation andy croll investigative journalist with mother jones magazine and associate editor of time dispatch and horace cooper a conservative commentator and senior fellow at the national center for public policy research gentlemen great to have you all with you just heard my conversation with congressman kasich what role brian what role do you think wall street should play in arcata. an important role but i agree with congressman kucinich that the thread needs to be it needs to have transparency the fed is trying to do too much when you have the federal reserve being the regulator the chief regulator of wall street in trying to look into these issues there's a problem with the fed there's a problem of the fed i think conservatives liberals agree that the fed is not serving a very good function for our society right now so i think there is bipartisan

agreement before the fed and we had banks blowing up we never went more than fifteen years without a banking panic in history the united states until the mid thirty's and there are some who argue that the fed help soften that maybe not endear your thoughts but i think the fed the transparency problem for the fed that we discuss are obviously central to the problem for the fed now and this is something that is a bipartisan. proposal and that's. saying the same thing that it is because senator in terms of knowing about what happens at the fed i mean the fact that we try to parse their minutes these these very vague minutes they put out and there's so much tea leaf reading into this that it really leaves not only the people who make policy but just ordinary americans in the dark chorus as the fed become and this whole you know the british banking association actually that establishes library which is a private trade group it's not even a government agency have they become the tail is wagging the dog of finance and if so does that work to the detriment i think we were just reading this is a live war situation is serious i think we need to do

a thorough investigation. part of that is finding out what parties within the federal reserve what parties within the banking community what they knew when they knew it what role they played in the past when they have that information and what role they are playing at present one name that comes to mind for me is the name turbo tax timothy guy he was sitting there at the new york federal reserve when the conversation as you just explained was brought to his attention he didn't appear to read act as if it was his job to be alarmed and concerned well he actually did pass pass along and i was not and i thought only an enabler you're going to be pleased with what i have to say i'm not defending tim geithner he did pass along to the bank of england that he had some concerns but then he went to the big new york banks and said what should be done they gave him a laundry list of things that should be done the big new york banks and he passed that list along to london so i mean this is this is.

a business relationship it seems to me and it's in keeping with this oh i g a report that prostitutes of people are going out with free golf games and dinners and the like are being provided on the one hand on the other hand banks to the regulate on the other hand there's almost not an industry in which where you can you can find that that which is not to say it's a good thing argument is not to emasculate the regulator is my point i do think we need more to transparency but we ought to empower the regulator to have the kind of teeth necessary there ought to be bryan here is a heard more government regulation i don't think so i think regulators knew about this all the information indicates that regulators were aware so why are we going to pass new laws we've asked has no regulation we ought to hold accountable the individuals holding the positions you shouldn't get to be the treasury secretary if on your watch as president of the federal reserve bank you able clearly guys are

not the only. villain here i mean i don't want to go harder than is a little a villain but he is not if you want to look at a larger picture and they have it i met like that what do they know and when did they know it and i mean you've got to keep in mind i mean the the wall street journal described this as the mother of all scandals i mean library influence is eight hundred trillion dollars in securities i mean this this is far more is far larger far bigger of a problem far more far reaching that these other scandals that we've had it touches me to suppose to just consumer the touch a student to touch a small business is pervasive it it's probably not the time to point fingers at who fell asleep at the wheel several years ago but to as quickly as possible as thoroughly as possible to get to the bottom of how this thing happened there's going to be a lot of we're going to pick this up here i.e. are absolutely perfect last word for us after the break the n.r.a. doesn't want any transparency in american politics so it's threatening senators who are supporting the disclose act are these kinds of political threats and secret

attacks really the best thing for our democracy and more into the bigger picture discussion after the break. he. down the official. from the.

video. now in the palm of your. to emulate. the air. but. it. was.

welcome back to monday's bigger picture discussion we now turn to the issue of campaign finance disclosure in our elections today the senate failed to get enough votes to break a republican filibuster of the disclose act a bill that would force organizations that are spending more than ten thousand dollars in our elections to disclose exactly where their money is coming from democrats hoped a slightly watered down version of the disclose act but attract more republican support than a didn't twenty ten when the bill was killed by a riff but then the bill was killed by republican filibuster that you're too so even those super pacs which are getting most of the attention this election season do have to disclose their donors other organizations like tax exempt public charity groups known as five a one c. fours don't and so far ninety one percent of all the outside t.v. advertising in this election cycle is coming from those very same five a one c four organizations mostly from republican operatives like karl rove and the koch brothers who have set up these charity groups names like crossroads g.p.s.

americans for prosperity giving them free rein to collect unlimited donations from secret donors and most of that money is of course favoring republican candidates so the disclose act would have had far reaching effects on campaign spending moving forward and running one reason may have died is because the national rifle association in a letter to senators last week the n.r.a. threatened those who support the disclose act by writing due to the importance of the fundamental speech and association all rights of the national rifle association is four million members and considering the blatant attacks on those rights that has thirty three sixty nine represents we strongly oppose the disclose act and will consider votes on this legislation in future candidate evaluations as in if you support it we'll use our secret donors to destroy you so is this the way our democracy should operate completely in secret before we get to the panel let's first bring in adam skeggs he is the senior counsel for the brennan's center's democracy program and head of the center's money in politics team adam welcome.

thanks for having me thanks for joining us from our new york studios first of all what exactly would this legislation have done and would it have applied to the five a one c. fours who are spending most of the money so far this election season well it would have applied to those nonprofit groups that as you said are responsible for the vast majority of the t.v. advertising that we're seeing coming into this election cycle and what it would do is simple it would provide voters with the information about what individuals groups corporations are spending millions of dollars to try and influence their votes come election day what that would mean in particular terms is that any contributor any donor who gave over ten thousand dollars to one of these outside nonprofit groups but really any group that was running electioneering ads anybody who gave more than ten thousand dollars would have to be disclosed and that way the public would know who it is again that's funding the ads designed to purchase their vote right what do you make of the n.r.a.

keep voting this bill isn't that. by and large a symptom of the problem of money in politics they're basically threatening. well i think i think that is what we have right now the supreme court has been very hostile towards regulation of money in politics and it is struck down piece by piece virtually the entire system for fighting corruption that was adopted after the scandals of the watergate era and so what we have now is a situation in which wealthy interest groups individuals corporations and so forth can spend without any limits at all can donate millions tens of millions of dollars to these shadowy outside groups that then turn around and spend it often on hard hitting attack ads and other political advertising the danger of this of course is that on the one hand it's bad enough i think many voters think to be overwhelmed with these this barrage of negative ads but i think the real damage to the system comes after election day in which in which elected representatives in congress on

the hill know very clearly what kind of votes they can cast that would be sure to bring millions of dollars in support from these outside groups and by contrast what votes that are dangerous if i could if i vote this way on this legislation i'm sure to see a million dollar campaign or a ten million dollar campaign against me so by opening the door to this unlimited spending in elections it really makes the folks we elect and send to washington cast a wary gaze over their shoulder and that's going to affect what they do in congress you know arguably i mean the first major piece of campaign clean up legislation was in one thousand seven the tillman act and that was pushed by republican teddy roosevelt and there was a large faction of religion party that was gong ho for this kind of thing that's you know what was largely or in part struck down by citizens united so when the republicans become the party against disclosure what happened to the john mccain of

mccain feingold and the republican party that supported him in that. well you'll have to ask senator mccain who just a an hour or two ago today voted against transparent elections you're absolutely right you know going back to the progressive era at the turn of the century one thousand seven with theodore roosevelt and stretching for a hundred years after that disclosure has been the one piece of campaign regulation that everybody agreed on republicans traditionally in the last couple of decades resisted strict limits they resisted more onerous burdens on political activity but they always agreed that disclosure was good that voters should have information that allowed them to make informed choices at the ballot box and it's only recently it's really the past couple of years since citizens united that there's been this sea change in which republicans who previously spoke out in strong support of disclosure are now coming out against it you know in two thousand there was

disclosure loopholes in federal law were closed and it had overwhelming support from the republican party today in the senate are fourteen republican senators who just about a decade ago all voted for disclosure today they've all changed their minds and not a single one of them today when given the opportunity to choose transparent accountable actions over secret dark money fueled elections not one of those fourteen republican senators chose to stand up for disclosure and whether they're you know the it really is you know adam skaggs thank you so much for being with us tonight. thanks for having me tom let's bring back our panel joining me again are brian darling contributor the daily mail and director of government studies at the heritage foundation and kroll investigative journalist and mother jones magazine and associate editor of tom dispatch and horace cooper conservative commentator and senior fellow at the national center for public policy research so first of all

i'm curious horace we already know that there is foreign money in this. election need two of the twenty largest donors to paul ryan's five million dollars super fund right now were for foreign banks u.b.s. and credit suisse isn't isn't the possibility that mahmoud ahmadinejad or or somebody else you know saudi princes i mean saudi princes are big have been historically big funders of and they were you know one of them in particular was a big donor to george w. bush isn't there a problem with money corrupting our politics particularly international money well first of all you say that is if their laws have been changed and it's ok for terrorists or other kinds of illegals to participate in our legal system and our political says what it is that's not true but that those restrictions have been lifted they still exist the only question you're raising is what further steps ought to be made to make sure that what we say is the law is actually happening but there's no as i just want to know and as. giving the money to karl rove cajuns it's

a legal it's perfectly legal that's why if it's a five a one c. for the he is one of them and i think made it terrorist list and he's not allow tell him him explicitly well you know it is so so let's say that somebody was on the terrorist list on or the broader point and this is the point i've said to you in several occasions it's this retaliation and reprisal technique that progressives have been using against people who participate in the political process if you were to accept so it's all me it's all the nasty if you were to accept. that allow holes allow companies and individuals who are targeted either by the government or by progressives engaging in reprisals were delegation to go into court and get injunctions then you might see a change in that but it's like i said to you it's precisely because of your refusal that this development is occurring and you don't get this. political intimidation of donors as was a common complaint that we heard today from minority leader mitch mcconnell in the

senate senator orrin hatch from others you know they say that this is just a way to scare away republican donors it was an argument by the way that in one thousand nine hundred seven was made by unions taft hartley was passed and the union said please don't force us to disclose and since one thousand nine hundred seven to this day unions had to disclose everything and i haven't seen the human intimidate in the no less than supreme court justice antonin scalia has said that disclosure of political participation foster civic courage that the justice anthony kennedy who penned the majority opinion in this is united said that disclosure is important for shareholders it's important for american democracy you know he may have he may have said independent expenditures don't corrupt or create a new pair of the n.w.c. who went to the supreme court and succeeded on an argument by saying this very point if our donors names have to be listed who they are they are going to be

subjected to intimidation of reprisal and the very so that right there for the very civil rights they were advocating for would in fact not be found well that's different than our political with dollars in the context for them to. do exactly you talking about you're it's very unfair and disingenuous to make that comparison to how political don't at all and then they probably c.p.s. that time at that point in time back in the sixty's was not involving itself in political supporting political candidates and that's kind of the only role that they were they were they were all about registering people giving people the have the opportunities to participate in the political process they were in fact employed let me let me bring brian in the brain your thoughts well i think that it's great that the senate did not pass this legislation because it would have set up an enemy's. for president obama yeah basically it is it allows the government to

put whether republicans or democrats are running the government to find out who has turned down chris who are raising money this way to write but some day they'll you know be a republican president maybe and they'll be looking at a list of democrats who are giving to these types of groups and they'll be able to put together their enemies list since it's a way for individuals that want to band together and fight against big government or fight against government policy is a disagree with i don't think you know i mean that's a lot of that this is your this is your messaging you know both of you that seems like this is the weakest possible argument i would be glad that all in fact i said if you would agree to allow for people to be able to get injunctions for people to be able to bring in the civil court those engaged in the retaliation and reprisal instead they are applauded their law there's celebrated in the new york times and among other progressives why do you think people would want to participate if they think they're going to get calls late at night they're going to get their flower shop boycotted this saturday as an actor you could happen to be is go on t.v.

this is the reason you and andy we have thirty seconds left you have an coddling of people who want to actively participate in local elections to sort of surprising to me you're making the choice to speak giving money the supreme court said is speech you're actively speaking in elections but this you know coddling of donors it surprises me again it comes back to when there does require a certain amount of quote civic courage to participate in our market i would i would just you know it seems to me you know republicans definitely want to know the identity of voters why don't they want to know the identity of donors of a but coming up ninety percent of americans think keeping jobs in the u.s. is one of the best ways to stimulate our broken economy but over two million jobs have been lost overseas in the last ten years is going to bring those jobs back to america democrats or republicans say tuned for more bigger picture discussion coming up after the break.

admission free accreditation free zones for charges free. range humans free is free. to tide free. download free broadcast quality video for your media projects and free media oh don to our teeth on tom in. wealthy british style the sign. is not on the typewriter. market why not come to. find out what's really happening to the global economy with max cons or for a no holds barred look at the global financial headlines tune into cars

a report. on . more news today violence is once again fled up the film these are the images the world has been seeing from the streets of canada. china corporations are today. and we're back for the final segment tonight's bigger picture panel on our panel brian darling contributor to the daily mail and director of government studies at the heritage found.