did it change whe, and why did bankamerica consider pulling out of the deal?about leveraging the merrill lynch losses to renegotiate the purchase price? >> you have to separate from an operating perspective the logic that led us to acquire merrill lynch was about the brokerage firm capabilities it gave us. those are the same facts that there today, that we are are in those businesses in the country, and those around the world. what we face late in 2008, from an earnings and capital perspective, the situation changed dramatically in the market. when the losses became clear, there was a different set of decisions. that gave rise to the assertion of the claim for the mac. >> let me go back to the fact that you focus so much on bank of america's response to consumer needs. the real purpose of this hearing is about the circumstances in which your bank received an additional $20 billion in hard- earned taxpayer dollars. can you give specifics on how this additional $20 billion has been disseminated and utilize? is any of this money going to this year's executive bon

four years ago this year i joined bankamerica, very different scenario than the days when we thought we were responsible for people's deposits as well as everything else. moving on with the goldman sachs story and tying it, and aig, the decision the government supporting aig give enough money to make whole all the counterparties and one of the cul-de-sacs play in. >> absolutely and that was something that i spent a lot of time on. moi so here is the sad part. i will make you cry. the decision to put to the first deal together, the first $85 billion deal together was made on tuesday morning in the course of what had to be frankly three or four hours. the conversations, the most pivotal discussions about whether to do this, why to do this, how to structure it or frankly shorter than the conversation we're having now. and that's not an excuse but an explanation for how we got where we did in. again there is an optical issue and i am not -- the last thing i wanted is considered an apologist for goldman sachs because i'm not. boyda shows about the meaning. the first meeting on monday and

. >> host: was that the consumer director to washington mutual and bankamerica going down, countrywide in now citibank have file bankruptcy? >> guest: it was a lot of those cases because the cra commitments from some of the banks are literally hundreds of billions of dollars. >> host: now we are way out of kansas now, dorothy. now we have gone to a holdrun level. and so we have the big government forcing the banks to make loans to people who lack credit worthiness, counting food stamps and welfare as income, wireless acceptable. it's just off the charts, we know we're going to have trouble so from there the banks sell the loans to freddie and fannie. diggs have so loans because they say if they go south of san will take care and the banks sell them to wall street. wall street picks up the commercial paper, there are trading back commercial paper but in order to ensure against risk, the morgan stanley and the goldman, investment houses out there that are taking a risk in pricing risk in the equation, usually there is insurance that comes for those mortgage-backed insurance. morris back