Obama's New Antitrust Rules Have Big, Powerful Companies Sweating

Reader Comments
Back to article

This is a start,but we need real men who are not affraid to prosecute
People at Wall St. and politicians need to wake up.The world puppeteers have given you just enough rope to hang your self and destory American way of life.
Americans citizens and business need justice and compensation for what they have done to the US and other countries.
We can get started at http://citizensproclamation2012.com

Armond of IL 11:10AM December 12, 2011

Maybe George Norcross will adhere to this and realize that Big Brother is watching him.

watchdog of NJ 12:11AM July 10, 2009

These legal documents show Barack Obama suing Citibank under the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), filed 7/6/1994, terminated 12/4/97, and settled 2/14/98. In this one example, Obama and the other lawyers got $950,000 from Citibank in legal fees without finding any evidence of discrimination.
(University of Saint Louis digital achieves):
http://clearinghouse.wustl.edu/chDocs/public/FH-IL-0011-9000.pdf
http://clearinghouse.wustl.edu/chDocs/public/FH-IL-0011-0007.pdf
This was part of a legalized protection racket preying on our nations banks, and part of a widespread systematic shakedown, described in great detail in this article from the year 2000: "The Trillion-Dollar Bank Shakedown That Bodes Ill for Cities":
http://www.city-journal.org/html/10_1_the_trillion_dollar.html
Obama, other members of ACORN, Bill Clinton, members of the Clinton Administration, and members of congress from both parties explain what happened in their own words in these videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivmL-lXNy64&feature=channel_page
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vJcVgJhNaU&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs&feature=related
This video connects all the dots, citing sources you may Google for yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw3no2A4&feature=iv&annotation_id=event_597487
The New York times explained the problem this created for banks as early as 2003, and explained what additional regulatory action the Bush administration tried to initiate to protect the banks, to cope with this, "New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae":
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/11/business/new-agency-proposed-to-oversee-freddie-mac-and-fannie-mae.html?sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1
Thomas Sowell summarized this in his column, "Do Facts Matter?":
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NGRjODM1MTJlOGZiZDk2ODI4NTUzMWMxYjgwMjliMGQ
Washington Post ("Where Was Sen. Dodd? Playing the Blame Game On Fannie and Freddie"):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/11/AR2008091102841.html
The Wall Street Journal ("Blame Fannie Mae and Congress For the Credit Mess "):
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122212948811465427.html
Most members of the media are still drinking the Obama Kool-Aid, and giving the president standing ovations at White House press conferences. Most have no background in finance to understand of the gravity of this situation. Less enthusiastic members of the press don't get invited to these celebrations, but they don't want to be seen spoiling the party either. This pattern of behavior must be stopped to protect the economic future of our country. Don’t take my word for it; take a look at the evidence I've assembled here to see for yourself.

Barry of CA 9:39PM May 26, 2009

The new rules are much needed for one reason only--big business has, by ignoring the common good, made them necessary. What is good for business is good for America ONLY as long as the bottom line for business does not overwhelm all other considerations and as long as greed is not a driving factor.
I found interesting the comments added by those in the anti-unions camp. Unions, it should be remembered, have no potency whatsoever when total remuneration packages for workers are adequate. They become a nuisance for business when they aren't.
It's really up to business to keep workers happy, for when they're unhappy, unions come in through an open door not a closed one.
I also found interesting the comments on biased media. This has been a problem ever since newspapers (especially) began running opinion in supposedly news articles. That's a situation easily remedied with regulation and oversight. Delivery of news should be uncontaminated by opinion, whether print version or on-air. Period. Separate news from opinion and cure the problem. (Folks like Sean Hannity won't like this because they rely on seducing readers and listeners through an almost inseparable mix of news, information, opinion, propaganda and humor. In Hannity's case, he says his program is "the best source of news and information on your radio dial" when it's also a prime source of outright right-wing propaganda and opinion. Regulated, like all "news" and information media, Hannity will have to clean up his act. So will ALL "news" media.)

Ron W. Smith of UT 12:52PM May 24, 2009

I'd love to see these Antitrust laws applied to Labor Unions. Surely something is not right when the Obama admin gives the UAW control of GM and Chysler. How about the undo influence a Union can have when its "members" work for more than one company.
And there shold be analogious Antitrust/Price Fixing laws for Media and Journalists.
It should be illegal for Rahm and George S at ABC and the forehead at CNN to collude in their product (information) at any price (our security)
The Government-Media Complex is the biggest threat to our Liberty.

VinceP1974 of IL 2:27PM May 23, 2009

Ever watch any MSNBC network or read any of their owned newspapers? Of course you do.
Who stands to gain from Obama's "shove it down your throat although you can't afford it" policies on energy? GE.
Who ownes these "news" agencies?....GE.
There is "opinion news" and "real news". Fox is definately right leaning on opinion but annoyingly "balanced" on real news.
MSNBC and CNN, you can't tell the difference. HARD LEFT...
INTO THE WALL!
Damn electronic steering on your new electric car.
Try watching Fox "real news" or better yet check out the BBC to see how hard the Europeans are laughing.

Chris Petty of GA 2:05AM May 22, 2009

For 8 years I have litigated Sherman I & II, made complaints with the FBI and The Courts in
addition to writing letters to Senate and House members of the Judiciary.
I have enough evidence and public notice on the following web site
http://www.medicalsupplychain.com/news.htm to clean up healthcare and recover billions in fraud and antitrust violations; not to mention the horrendous conduct of public officials including the judicial misconduct I have suffered. Why will no one assist or help enforce our laws?
Sincerely, SL

Samuel of MO 5:05PM May 21, 2009

We are in this horrible financial crisis because the Bush Administration made it easy for Big Business to thrive and swallow up competition and kill off capitalism with their greedy, unethical system. We need to go back to regulating Big Business again or Big Business will end up like ENRON, and the other Wall Street fiascos--down the drain, and the taxpayer will get stuck shoring up the multi-millionaires while Main Street American suffers. It is VERY obvious that Capitalism does not work without regulations. The greedy, unethical educated asses only think of how to make money for themselves without considering the consequences---even if it means taking the nation down with them. Since Wall Street and Corporate American cannot or will not police themselves we need to do anti-trust policies. No more Corporate Welfare. We complain about a mother receiving welfare, well, I have a real problem dishing out welfare to someone who lives in a $30 million dollar mansion. We need to set our priorities straight and take care of Main Street--not Wall Street.

ataxpayer2 of IA 4:01PM May 21, 2009

When most of the market was US, monopoly laws were clearer. Now do you look at US monopoly or world monopoly? I am anti-monopoly but want to do the right thing. If we say no to combining only to have them swallowed by a foreign competitor or go bankrupt, we have not gained much.

Eriemaster of OH 1:48PM May 21, 2009

The Media giants live on the advertising and public relations people who have a lot of money to spread around their friends in the communication business which is little more than a spokesman for corporate and international business....sure the subscriber buys the periodical.....but the advertisers pay the bills and a bit more.....plus our representatives in congress get intouch with the voters when they need money and the all important vote....instead of doing what we pay them to do...PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE....not just selfish and greedy cartels and monopolies.....Cordially,

Steve S. Roisman of CA 8:34PM May 20, 2009