It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


$100 billion of the bailout is set aside for the presidents discretion?

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 05:01 AM
So, am I reading this wrong or did the president just get $100 billion to spend as he pleases?

The bailout plan's new provisions made $250 billion immediately available to purchase bank assets, leaving $100 billion at the president's discretion and $350 billion subject to congressional review.

It can't really mean that right? Surely it is financial lingo for something else. Kind of like the "Martial Law" that congress mentioned wasn't the same "Martial Law" that the people are so afraid of.

Curious if anyone can set me straight here.

posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 05:12 AM
Why would Bush get 100 Bil to use at his discretion?Is he suddenly a financial and business genius?He didn't do too well with his prior business and financial dealings ,I don't see what help he can do. Does this discretion mean we don't get to know what he did with it?

Sorry Karl, but I can't set you straight because it looks like it to me also.

S&F btw.

[edit on 7-10-2008 by Simon_Boudreaux]

posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 05:50 AM
100 BILLION to the Presidents discretion?
I nearly spit out my coffee when I saw that. Who on earth thought that was a good idea? Did anyone who voted on the package even read it? I am deeply concerned as to what that means. Gotta go find the actual language of the bill now.

posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 05:51 AM
You are not interpreting either of your concerns incorrectly. This is a very scary piece of legislation!

Oh ind this is just a rare gem!

Moving Forward

She said Congress will shine a new "light of scrutiny and accountability" on the nation's financial system to try to prevent a replay of the problems that plunged the nation into an financial crisis.

Reps. Barney Frank, D-Massachusetts, and Henry Waxman, D-California, plan to hold hearings to increase scrutiny of the financial system, Pelosi added.

"We want to take our country in a new direction for the middle class," Pelosi said.

Frank told reporters Friday that starting in January, Congress will "have a major role."

"We have to rewrite housing in America. ... It would be highly irresponsible if we were to stop here," he said. "Now we have to perform more serious reform."

Like they didn't have the power to do this in the first place and prevent this whole mess? Who do they think they are kidding? Now they pass this Bill, and now they do need even more oversight, because of all the powers they just gave away in it.

Should have done their jobs in the first place.

posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 05:54 AM
reply to post by Relentless

Yeah, when I read

"We want to take our country in a new direction for the middle class," Pelosi said.

I wanted to vomit. I believe that new direction would be South. Pelosi makes me...........

posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 06:00 AM
I think a lot of congressmen and women didn't read the bill because they were told they didn't need to. Last week Alex Jones had a congressman on his show (I can't remember his name) who said they were basically threatened that if this bill didn't pass, Martial Law ( he specifically didn't refer to the congressional Martial Law) would be declared and all hell would break loose. When you scare people like that, you can probably get away with anything you want.

[edit on 7-10-2008 by Bullhorn]

[edit on 7-10-2008 by Bullhorn]

new topics

top topics

log in