Fed Distances Itself From Banks, Says Will Not Seek Review Of "Pittman" Even Though It Is Lawsuit Defendant

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/fed-distances-itself-banks-says-will-not-seek-review-pittman-even-though-it-lawsuit-defendan

"Whether justified or not"
How much of a tell is that?
Remember the stipulation Hank Paulson insisted on?
The one that said: He could not be held personally responsible or prosecuted for any of the misactions of the bank bailout, that might come out later.
The Senate agreed to that crap to, without nary a question.
I'm telling you, it's because of that "no child left behind" rule.
And they made sure not to leave Hank behind, now didn't they.

Amusingly, following up on earlier reports that the Clearing House Association (aka the banking oligarchy) will petition the SCOTUS to hide their oh so very secret insolvency which by now everyone knows about, the Fed has decided to amusingly distance itself from the kleptocratic crowd and will not seek court review. In other words, the public's anger when the SCOTUS sides with the bankers will fall squarely upon Lloyd Blankfein et al, and not Ben Bernanke, even though it is the Fed who is the defendant in the Pittman lawsuit. This is just plain ridiculous. And the reason provided by the banks: why more mutual assured destruction of course: "disclosure of the information threatens to harm the borrowing banks by allowing the public to observe their borrowing patterns during the recent financial crisis and draw inferences--whether justified or not--about their current financial conditions." Here is an inference about their current financial conditions: they are all insolvent. Does that matter? No. Because the only holders of bank stocks now are other banks. It is called a ponzi for a reason after all.

More from Dow Jones:

Clearinghouse Appeals Fed Record Order (FOIA)

http://market-ticker.org/

Well, Karl has just broached the 64 thousand dollar question.
Do we still have a Constitutional Republic, or was it disolved in 1933, when the corporation of America went bankrupt?
And do the Federal Reserve, the World Bank, and the IMF hold the legal rights to direct and control this country?

QE2 will destroy what's left of the dollar and cause massive hardship for a majority of the United States citizens, and yet our government, elected by us, to represent us, stays mute and allows the FED total control.
It's time to demand to know the reason WHY?

It's also time to ask what does the FED have to hide!
Because what ever it is they don't want it to see the light of day.

The Federal Reserve must not be allowed to subvert The Constitution, and if we still have a Constitutional Republic, the US Supreme Court will so rule.

Fed Shouldn’t Reveal Crisis Loans, Banks Vow to Tell High Court

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ax8ulGXswn4E

Now I ask myself, what is it that the FED and friends have hidden that will still cause a run on the banks 3 years later, for them to be going to all of this trouble to keep it hidden.
With the outing of repo 105 and the fraudulent accounting methods of Washington Mutual and Lehman, I can't help but thinking what's hidden under the FED's bed is very distasteful and definitely not a socially acceptable practice, and as taxpayers who bailed them all out I believe we have a right to know, exactly what that practice was.

April 14 (Bloomberg) -- The biggest U.S. commercial banks will take their fight against disclosure of Federal Reserve lending in 2008 to the Supreme Court if necessary, the top lawyer for an industry-owned group said.

Continued legal appeals will delay or block the first public look at details of the central bank’s $2 trillion in emergency lending during the 2008 financial crisis. The Clearing House Association LLC, a group that includes Bank of America Corp. and JPMorgan Chase & Co., joined the Fed in defense of a lawsuit brought by Bloomberg LP, the parent company of Bloomberg News, seeking release of records related to four Fed lending programs.

The U.S. Court of Appeals in Manhattan ruled March 19 that the central bank must release the documents. A three-judge panel of the appellate court rejected the Fed’s argument that disclosure would stigmatize borrowers and discourage banks from seeking emergency help.

“Our member banks are very concerned about real-time disclosure of information that could cause a run on the banks,” said Paul Saltzman, the group’s general counsel, in an interview yesterday. “We’re not going to let the Second Circuit opinion stand without seeking a review.”

Regardless of whether the Fed appeals, the Clearing House will take the next legal step by asking for a review by the full appellate court, Saltzman, 49, said at his office in New York. If the ruling is unfavorable, the bank group will petition the Supreme Court, he said.