Congress, Criminal law, Free Speech, Justice, Politics, Society

The Smell of Corporatist Fear, Smells Just Like . . . a Lobbyist Memo

Submitted by Gene Howington, Guest Blogger

UPDATED: Newton’s Third Law of Motion is commonly expressed by the phrase “for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction”.  The action in question is the Occupy Wall Street Movement.  The reaction in question is fear.

Huffington Post obtained a copy of a memo being sent by high-powered Washington lobbying firm Clark, Lytle, Geduldig, Cranford to one of its major Wall Street clients over Thanksgiving.  Previously unnamed, it has been revealed that the major Wall Street client in question is the American Bankers Association.   The four page memo was first revealed by MSNBC’s Chris Hayes, host of the show “Up with Chris Hayes“.  The first two paragraphs of the memo are indicative of the mood and probably sets the tone for what many in the lobbying industry are having to admit as an inconvenient truth.   Namely the truth that the OWS Movement is gaining traction for their cause and doing so in such a way that politicians are eventually going to be forced to put on the appearance of action in bringing the criminals on Wall Street to justice if not actually bring them to justice.  The fear on behalf of the lobbyists and their Wall Street clients is palpable.

The first two paragraphs of the Thanksgiving Memo read as follows:

Leading Democratic party strategists have begun to openly discuss the benefits of embracing the growing and increasingly organized Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement to prevent Republican gains in Congress and the White House next year. We have seen this process of adopting extreme positions and movements to increase base voter turnout, including in the 2005-2006 immigration debate. This would mean more than just short-term discomfort for Wall Street firms. If vilifying the leading companies of this sector is allowed to become an unchallenged centerpiece of a coordinated Democratic campaign, it has the potential to have very long-lasting political, policy and financial impacts on the companies in the center of the bullseye.

It shouldn’t be surprising that the Democratic party or even President Obama’s re-election team would campaign against Wall Street in this cycle. However the bigger concern should be that Republicans will no longer defend Wall Street companies — and might start running against them too.

While phrased in partisan terms, the memo is possibly indicative of not just fear on behalf of Wall Street and their K Street cohorts, but rather recognizes that the problems created by not bringing to justice those who wrecked our domestic economy and nearly wrecked the global economy with their unfettered greed and massive systemic fraud is growing to ultra-partisan proportions.  Consider the words of Joshua Stephens, a participant in OWS New York City, who said “The danger is not whether or not politicians will defend these institutions. My fear wouldn’t be that.  My fear would be that the politicians that come to their aid will be increasingly irrelevant…That’s the real threat and that’s where things are going.”  OWS is serving as a wake-up call for both Wall Street and Washington.  A wake-up call that this memo acknowledges presents a real and serious problem for both the corporate bankers and the politicians that have been protecting them from prosecution and doing their political bidding in helping dismantle the regulations around the banking industry.  A call for justice that transcends party affiliation and loyalty to the point that the bankers responsible may actually have to face trial with the possibility of prison sentences.  A call for justice that may force politicians to take steps to break up the big banks to prevent the myth and the lie of “too big to fail” from being used in the future as an excuse by corporatists  to raid our nation’s tax coffers thus making society pay for the risks of their private failures all while the banks reaping massive record private profits in the process.  A call for justice that might mean the return of regulation to the banking industry and a return of regulation with teeth.

Perhaps even more telling that the 1% are starting to feel and fear the political pressure is the context of the memo as a sales pitch.  What is it that CLGC is offering to sell the ABA? $850,000 worth of spin.  In the new MSNBC article by Jonathan Larsen and Ken Olshansky, the deliverable of such a spin project is summarized as ” ‘opposition research’ on Occupy Wall Street in order to construct ‘negative narratives’ about the protests and allied politicians.”  If you’d like to read the memo in its entirety, it can be found here in .pdf form.  You may feel a bit queasy after reading it.

OWS could be, should be and might be even bigger than this one set of issues though.  It should be a notice to Washington and the graft merchants of K Street that the United States Constitution says in plain language where the true political power rests in this country and who is really the boss of Washington when push comes to shove: “We the People of the United States”.  Not “We the Corporations” or “We the Biggest Campaign Contributors” or “We the K Street Lobbying  and Revolving Capital Hill Door Conflict of Interest Machine”, but “We the People”.  Washington would be wise to take heed to call to substantively start addressing the needs and demands for justice of the 99% instead of catering to the greedy desires of the 1% and their own over-inflated egos.  Our nation was founded in reaction to the tyranny of oppression and non-responsive government of King George.  Just so, it can be reshaped  in reaction to the tyranny of oppression and non-responsive government of as exemplified by the incestuous nexus of today’s Wall Street and Washington.  We didn’t throw off the yoke of a mad, capricious and economically exploitative king in the 18th Century just to have it replaced by the yoke of venal and corrupt plutocrats and their political lackeys in the 21st.

Are Wall Street and their lobbyists starting to fear Main Street?  Is the government?  Is this a sign of the beginning of the end of OWS?  Or is this a sign of the beginning of the beginning of OWS and the effort to reclaim the government for “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity”?

What do you think?

Source: Huffington Post, MSNBC, CLGC Memo

~Submitted by Gene Howington, Guest Blogger

467 thoughts on “The Smell of Corporatist Fear, Smells Just Like . . . a Lobbyist Memo”

  1. Otteray,

    It’s time we citizens started calling out not only the banksters–but the politicians who have broken their promises and those who appear more beholden to the 1% than the 99%.

    I think it’s time now, too, that we go after little Grover the megalomaniac.

  2. Jill:

    why do you think we cant grow anymore? Isnt growth good? Doesnt technological improvement lead to better lives for all people?

  3. Bron,

    “Government does not create jobs, it only transfers capital to inefficient producers.”

    The first half of your sentence is just not true. Whether you agree that the jobs created at the DoD, DoE, EPA, judges, federal courts, libraries, customs, Coast Guard, etc. are “efficient” is another question.

    Additionally, the first half of your sentence also implies that government policy does not create jobs as you did not delineate in your use of the term “government.”

    You are more correct in the last half of your sentence than you know, and given your posts in this thread, for all the wrong reasons.

    The transfer of wealth in the boondoggle known as TARP, and the $12 trillion bandied out by the Federal Reserve in 2008-2009 (approx. $3 trillion in currency and $9 trillion in bond and securities guarantees — only brought to light through legislation authored by Bernie Saunders) to financial institutions and multinationals, both foreign and domestic, does indeed prove that current world governments, “transfer capital to inefficient producers.”

    This is why people are so pissed off. You should maybe look at the larger picture, in which your statements amazing hold true, yet the target of your scorn would be different.

  4. AY & Elaine:
    Regarding pepper spray as a food product. Here are some reviews from Amazon.

    This is my favorite:

    I casually used this product to try to disperse a small band of non-violent campers who had locked their arms together. Although initially it seemed to be effective, it took two applications! The worst part is that the next day they multiplied exponentially! Now what?

    One positive outcome, I did receive a paid vacation for my efforts.

    http://www.amazon.com/Defense-Technology-56895-Stream-Pepper/product-reviews/B0058EOAUE/ref=cm_cr_pr_hist_1?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=0&filterBy=addOneStar

  5. President Obama was mic checked at Manchester High School in New Hampshire. It was the high school students who used the “people’s microphone” to put their message before him. He acknowledged them briefly, but his response was not exactly responsive.

    I think the mic check phenomenon is a perfect way to make the collective voice heard in a coherent way. One of the ways those in authority have used to shut off debate is to not allow constituents or workers access to the microphone. How many times have we seen the sound crew turn off a microphone when someone wants to confront an authoritarian businessman or politician.

    Let;\’s see how the MSM covers the story. I am confident it will be spun many ways, depending on the political agenda of the particular media outlet. One thing we can expect is that the students will be depicted as “unruly” and “disrespectful.” I doubt they will be presented as thoughtful and frustrated with the way the 1% are running–and ruining–the country.

  6. Bron,

    I don’t know about that. We have never seen a pure capitalist system in place. We have seen the brutal force of corporate/govt. capitalism.

    In some periods of our history, when the govt. was responsive to the people, restraints against things like child labor, unsafe working conditions, pollution of our common environment, etc. were put in place and have ameliorated our living conditions.

    The founders set up our govt. to prevent tyranny of one group by another. They were limited in their thinking about this because they only protected wealthy, land owning white men from tyranny, while allowing themselves to have tyranny over slaves, women, indentured servants, the lower classes, etc. But my point is, even our founding fathers understood that people tend to get tyrannical and there needs to be a force that will restrain that.

    I don’t think there will be an economy that won’t create tyranny under the current version of capitalism. I don’t think capitalism is sustainable because it relies on continued growth, something our planet can no longer support.

    Until we create a very different set of social values we will need some kind of countervailing power to tyranny. Normally that would be the govt. However, not this one. It is clearly in collusion with tyranny at every point.

  7. Jill:

    Free up the economy and stop trying to control that which cannot be controlled. The rest will take care of itself.

    Government does not create jobs, it only transfers capital to inefficient producers. Which is exactly what OWS is protesting although they probably dont know it.

  8. Elaine, after reading over Jill’s comments in response to you, I see a whole lot of projection going on.

  10. Jill,

    That’s fine with me. I guess you haven’t been able to find proof of my name-calling. Otherwise, you would have responded to my request. You often criticize others for their comments–but it seems you feel that no one should criticize what you say. It’s a two-way street, my dear.

  11. Elaine,

    I am going to ignore your comments from now on. I don’t believe there is a way for us to communicate without you degenerating into personal attacks. I’m sorry about that because we share many concerns in common.

  15. Elaine M.,

    LOL….. Winning Friends 202…. I have observed this…. The ones that are the staunchest defenders of FREE SPEECH are the ones quickest to be offended by your free speech….

  16. Jill,

    What name have I ever called you on this or any other thread? I’d like some specifics, if you please.

    If I take offense, it’s because you seem to think that no one else who comments here is as wise to the media as you are–or as unbiased and open-minded.

    You wrote: “I no longer consider myself a liberal because liberals are people who support torture and murder when Democrats order them.”

    You also wrote: “I do notice that many people on this blog are consistently obsessed with saying how stupid and manipulated people on the right are. That amount of obsession should be a tip off that something is very wrong.”

    You ought to practice what you preach. I guess you are the only one who is allowed to make generalizations about people.

    I’m a liberal. I do not condone torture or murder–no matter who orders it. Many other liberals who comment on this blog have criticized President Obama for a number of his actions. Some of these liberals have even said that they plan not to vote for him in 2012. I think you have selective memory. (BTW, I don’t consider our president to be a true liberal.)

    Is Jeremy Scahill a liberal or a conservative? How about Glenn Greenwald?

    I guess I was right to ask Bron about your being a liberal.

  17. Elaine and OS,

    It is ironic that I consider peppers a delicacy…I am in search of the most perfect pepper…and if pepper spray is added to the pizza alls you need is just a little cheese to make my day….

  18. Elaine,

    I am very tired of your name calling. Would you be able to simply not respond or to respond to what I am saying without adding on snide remarks such as, “who says Jill is a liberal”?

    I no longer consider myself a liberal because liberals are people who support torture and murder when Democrats order them. So, yes, I’m not a liberal but I would have been called that in the past when that term had a real meaning.

    You keep taking offense to what I am saying because you keep thinking that I am attacking you instead of asking us to all consider something together. You somehow miss that I agreed with you, even capitalizing it, that we should look at right wing media. I didn’t accuse you of the things you attribute to me so I cannot respond to something I didn’t do.

    I do notice that many people on this blog are consistently obsessed with saying how stupid and manipulated people on the right are. That amount of obsession should be a tip off that something is very wrong. Why would it be true that only people on the right wing are stupid and open to manipulation? That doesn’t really make sense. I wish we could put our heads together and understand what is going on.

    Glenn Greenwald tries very hard to dissect what is going on in the MSM and the “left” wing media as well as the right wing media. I agree with him that this is the way to go.

Comments are closed.