Cain Got 30 Million Dollar Loan to Buy GodFathers Pizza Then...

Mad Scientist

Feels Good!
Sep 15, 2008
24,196
5,431
270
3 months later gets appointed to the Kansas City Federal Reserve? :confused:
Herman Cain’s Appointment to The Federal Reserve: Unethical or Criminal? « Notes to Aphrodite
In September, 1988, Cain became mortgaged to Citibank for everything he owned. In December, 1988, The Federal Reserve Bank in Kansas City appointed Cain to be a director and to set monetary policy for banks, including the bank that his entire net worth was mortgaged to. How unethical is that? Is it legal?
This is how you know Herman Cain is a Federal Reserve stooge.
More:
When the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City appointed Herman Cain to its Board of Directors it must have known that Cain was in debt for every penny he owned, including his golf clubs, to Citibank. How could someone in debt to a bank for everything he owned be objective in setting monetary policy for banks, including the bank that had just given him a $30,000,000 loan?
Cain admits that the loan was unusual in that he did not put up the usual 20-25% needed for the loan.
Is it possible that Citibank got something in exchange for the loan more important than this down payment? Is it possible that Citibank got someone on the Federal Board who was totally unqualified, but seriously in debt to them, and would advocate whatever policies they wished?
So a guy with a background in Mathematics and Computers and experience in running Hamburger Joints gets appointed to a Federal Reserve position 3 just months after getting a loan from CitiBank for 30 Million?

Why would that be? :confused:
 
IGNORING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST are standard operating procedure for the 1% and their tools, folks.

This is but another example of that.

We can see the same kind of thing with most prominent Dems.

How any of you who aren't trolls, but who are true believing partisans of either party, can MISS these kinds of conflicts simply astounds me.
 
IGNORING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST are standard operating procedure for the 1% and their tools, folks.

This is but another example of that.

We can see the same kind of thing with most prominent Dems.

How any of you who aren't trolls, but who are true believing partisans of either party, can MISS these kinds of conflicts simply astounds me.

You mean like all the tax evaders that Obama tried to appoint to high office? Or other criminals?
 
3 months later gets appointed to the Kansas City Federal Reserve? :confused:
Herman Cain’s Appointment to The Federal Reserve: Unethical or Criminal? « Notes to Aphrodite
In September, 1988, Cain became mortgaged to Citibank for everything he owned. In December, 1988, The Federal Reserve Bank in Kansas City appointed Cain to be a director and to set monetary policy for banks, including the bank that his entire net worth was mortgaged to. How unethical is that? Is it legal?
This is how you know Herman Cain is a Federal Reserve stooge.
More:
When the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City appointed Herman Cain to its Board of Directors it must have known that Cain was in debt for every penny he owned, including his golf clubs, to Citibank. How could someone in debt to a bank for everything he owned be objective in setting monetary policy for banks, including the bank that had just given him a $30,000,000 loan?
Cain admits that the loan was unusual in that he did not put up the usual 20-25% needed for the loan.
Is it possible that Citibank got something in exchange for the loan more important than this down payment? Is it possible that Citibank got someone on the Federal Board who was totally unqualified, but seriously in debt to them, and would advocate whatever policies they wished?
So a guy with a background in Mathematics and Computers and experience in running Hamburger Joints gets appointed to a Federal Reserve position 3 just months after getting a loan from CitiBank for 30 Million?

Why would that be? :confused:

Ron Paul is not getting the nomination, no matter how hard you try to slam the other candidates with silly shit like this.
Libertarianism is gay, s0n.
 
IGNORING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST are standard operating procedure for the 1% and their tools, folks.

This is but another example of that.

We can see the same kind of thing with most prominent Dems.

How any of you who aren't trolls, but who are true believing partisans of either party, can MISS these kinds of conflicts simply astounds me.

You mean like all the tax evaders that Obama tried to appoint to high office? Or other criminals?

PRECISELY.

The partisan Ds overlook the corription on their team the Rs partisans overlook the same kind of corruption by their team
 
IGNORING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST are standard operating procedure for the 1% and their tools, folks.

This is but another example of that.

We can see the same kind of thing with most prominent Dems.

How any of you who aren't trolls, but who are true believing partisans of either party, can MISS these kinds of conflicts simply astounds me.

You mean like all the tax evaders that Obama tried to appoint to high office? Or other criminals?
I agree with you RGS, Obama is corrupt, but electing a person is just as compromised and/or corrupt like Herman Cain won't change anything.
 
Ron Paul is not getting the nomination, no matter how hard you try to slam the other candidates with silly shit like this.
Libertarianism is gay, s0n.
Being a blind partisan hack is so much better right? :lol:

Rick Perry: "Americans are NOT fat, dumb or... or...uh. Let's see what was I told to say? Fat. Dumb. Dr Paul what was the third one? Oh yeah, lazy!"
 
Ron Paul is not getting the nomination, no matter how hard you try to slam the other candidates with silly shit like this.
Libertarianism is gay, s0n.
Being a blind partisan hack is so much better right? :lol:

Rick Perry: "Americans are NOT fat, dumb or... or...uh. Let's see what was I told to say? Fat. Dumb. Dr Paul what was the third one? Oh yeah, lazy!"

You're confusing Perry with Obama. When someone is a narco-libertarian hack any distinction gets blurred. Fortunately this election will spell the death knell of narco libertarians as Ron Paul will get thrahsed, as he does every election, and then has promised to retire from politics. Maybe you should look at Ralph Nader as your next standard bearer.
 

Forum List

Back
Top