As we found in the case of Ponzi schemer Bernie Madoff, we’re now discovering that numerous government agencies had heads-ups or even started investigations (that were later shut down) into Sir Allen Stanford’s Antigua-based banking empire. Of particular interest is an investigation the SEC began back in 2006, only to be asked by another unnamed government agency to “stand down”. Zack Roth reviews the timeline and key events.

TPM Reader JA adds this on scary nationalization …

First, we already nationalize banks, although smaller ones than Citi or BoA. Second, you miss an important point. The shareholders in big banks likely to be nationalized aren’t our major concern (yes, I do have some sympathy for them, as I do for anyone whose investments go south). It isn’t the threat of nationalization that has harmed the shareholders, but the irresponsible actions of the banks themselves. We must do something to “rescue” the banks because their failure threatens us all, not just the shareholders. Strive to overcome your fear of a word, “nationalization”. If you want real words to fear, consider “The World’s Most Horrendous Economy Depression Ever And We’re Worried About Shareholders?”

I think JA misses my point about whether I find ‘nationalization’ scary. I think every potential action in the current situation is fraught with danger because we’re in such a bad situation and it is in many respects unprecedented. So there’s no way to have certainty about the outcomes. But nationalization is much less scary than the alternatives. And JA makes the key point that the country as a whole, the economy as a whole, needs a functioning banking sector. So we don’t necessarily have the luxury to wait years to let the big incumbent banks get their house in order, even if we didn’t mind footing the whole bill.

Well, okay maybe that’s an overstatement. But this article in Wharton’s online business journal tentatively supports a temporary period of nationalization / receivership for the shitibanks.

Rove a no-show for latest US Attorneys scandal testimony.

We’re trying to dig in to find out just what accused securities crook Allen Stanford was getting for all that money he was pouring into Washington. But just looking on the surface, what’s

remarkable is how many of the members of Congress who went on his various junkets ended up getting in legal trouble or going to the slammer for entirely different scandals. Here’s a photogallery of an event he held at the Longworth House Office Building. And here’s another photo gallery of a junket to Antigua.

Now there are a number of members of Congress in good standing. It’s not that everyone on the trip was a crook. Far from it. But if you were a crook, not much question that Sir Allen sought you out. You’ve got Rep. Bob Ney, Rep. John Sweeney, Rep. Katherine Harris, Rep. Tom Feeney.

Say whatever else you want about him, he knew his mark. Check out the galleries to see more.

Most people who do rotten

things have redeeming qualities if you look hard enough. Then there are the really low and vile characters like Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY). After tastelessly predicting Justice Ginsburg’s death in 9 months over the weekend, he’s now followed up with a sneering non-apology apology in which he pins the whole dust-up on her apparently being oversensitive. Truly a rotten person. No wonder his own party is trying to find someone to run against him.

“I apologize if my comments offended Justice Ginsberg,” Bunning said. “That certainly was not my intent. It is great to see her back at the Supreme Court today and I hope she recovers quickly. My thoughts and prayers are with her and her family.”

We already own 80% of AIG. Now they’re coming back for more.

And more to the point, who are the counter-parties that the money is going to go to once we give it to this company that has no value at all?

I was just watching Chris Matthews explaining how the Dow is President Obama’s “scoreboard” and how people are going to start getting angry at him soon if he’s not able to get the Dow to stabilized and start going up soon:

It is of course an entirely separate matter whether that is actually true — as to public response — and whether it makes any logical sense at all.

There does seem to be a certain lack of comprehension of the fact that there are economic realities, actual losses, underlying the steep stock market decline.

The Post and the Times both have new polls out tonight showing continued, strong support for President Obama. Post (68%); Times (63%).

Beneath that topline, the numbers show very negative reactions to how Republicans have managed their opposition.

Remember too that in the Gallup poll released yesterday, the internals showed that Obama’s slight drop in support came entirely from a Republican drop-off. He’d actually gotten slightly more popular among Democrats and Independents.