Tag Archives: Tim Geithner

Geithner: US May Close Down Freddie, Fannie

http://www.moneynews.com/StreetTalk/Freddie-Fannie-us-close/2012/02/03/id/428444?s=al&promo_code=E1BB-1#

Posted from WordPress for Android

The unraveling of Barry Soetoro, a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama II

The unraveling of Barry Soetoro, a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama II

via The unraveling of Barry Soetoro, a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama II.

 – Doug Hagmann & Joseph Hagmann   Friday, April 8, 2011

imageTo those who are now speaking out about the Obama eligibility matter, I can think of no better statement than the one uttered by a very frustrated Officer John McClane, played by Bruce Willis in the movie“Die Hard.” In order to get the attention of a police officer oblivious to the carnage taking place inside of the Nakatomi Plaza building after making a very cursory inspection and finding nothing amiss,McClane tosses the body of a terrorist from an office window window onto the windshield of the police cruiser and fires at the police car, yelling “welcome to the party, pal.”

I suspect that this statement accurately reflects the sentiment of numerous individuals and groups who have been fighting in the real world trenches for full disclosure of all of Barack Hussein Obama’s records, including his birth certificate, for the last three years. People such as Commander Charles Kerchner (retired) and Attorney Mario Apuzzo, Pennsylvania Attorney Philip BergReverend David Manning of Atlah Ministries,  and numerous others who have spoken out and taken their valiant fight for full disclosure of Obama’s records to the nation’s courts, only to be struck down for lack of standing or other arbitrary judicial opinions.

Due to the recent public statements by billionaire businessman turned reality television star about the birth certificate issue, the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama has gained equal amounts of renewed interest and contempt by the American media and a vocal segment of the American public. The latter display of contempt is nicely displayed by some recent interview clips, including the priceless Meredith Viera interview of Donald Trump where she can hardly hold back her disdain of Mr. Trump and the entire eligibility matter, and Donald Trump’s appearance on “The View” last month.

On “The View,” Mr. Trump wreaked havoc among the cadre of women co-hosts when he merely mentioned the lack of a legitimate birth certificate provided by Obama. Lacking any coherent or intellectual rebuttals to Trump’s claims, a not-so veiled accusation of racism was leveled against Trump by “The View” co-host Whoppi Goldberg, while Barbara Walters expressed discomfort with the matter by simply wanting to change the topic.

“Welcome to the party, pal”

During the last three years, there have been numerous individuals, authors, investigative journalists, and others (and I consider myself among them) who have been mocked, ridiculed, belittled or ignored by Obama supporters, the liberal media, and the political left for even suggesting that this issue has any merit whatsoever.

Perhaps even worse, conservatives on the right, including some high profile media personalities, have joined with the left in the same vitriolic ridicule of us so-called “Birthers,” a pejorative term ascribed to those who are merely asking for yet-unfurnished proof that Barack Hussein Obama is constitutionally eligible to occupy the office of the President of the United States.

It has been only after Donald Trump began to ask the same questions others have been asking for the last three years that the matter appears to have morphed from a fringe topic into legitimacy. For example, Rush Limbaugh, who has kept this topic at arm’s length, has taken delight of the Viera interview, although it’s difficult to discern whether Mr. Limbaugh is more delighted at Mr. Trump’s steam roller approach and Viera’s reaction, or that the issue is being finally exposed in such an unlikely venue. Because Mr. Limbaugh has the ear of millions every day, I tend to gravitate to the former.

To those who are now beginning to pick up the topic because of the exposure by Donald Trump, I can only say “welcome to the party, pal.”

With all due respect to Donald Trump, he has not “legitimized” the eligibility issue, as the matter far exceeds the existence of the birth certificate and has adversely affected the lives of many patriotic Americans who have long fought for full disclosure of all of Obama’s records. Promising to be the “most transparent” president in history,  Barack Hussein Obama is the most deliberately opaque president who has withheld many more records than his birth certificate. Not only has he withheld his records, he has fought to keep them hidden from public view, amassing legal fees that some claim to exceed a million dollars of his own money, and perhaps twice that amount if pro-bono and other legal work is counted.

Also as a result of his refusal to disclose his records, a respected military physician is presently serving time in Leavenworth for refusing to obey deployment orders until he was satisfied that the orders he was given were constitutionally legal. LTC. Terry Lakin, an honored veteran with 18 unblemished and distinguished years of service, lost his legal battle and remains behind bars as Obama’s first political prisoner in the war for truth. While many may question the methods and venue in which LTC Lakin chose to take up his battle, no one can question his motives.

“The biggest scam ever”

Both Messrs Trump and Limbaugh have stated that if Obama is determined to be ineligible to hold office, it is the “biggest scam ever” perpetrated. Indeed, and that statement itself might be an understatement.

I urge those reading this and those who are pursuing the truth to avoid “battlefield myopia” and not merely cling to the existence or lack thereof of the long form, authenticated birth certificate. The issue is much greater than the birth certificate or where Obama was physically born, as he could have been born in the Lincoln bedroom during the Kennedy administration and still be ineligible to hold the office of president under Article II, Section I, Clause 5 of the United States Constitution. Our founders determined that future presidents must be born to two parents who are both U.S. citizens. Clearly then, the place of Obama’s birth is merely one concern, while the citizen aspect of his parents remains another.

But the scam goes much deeper. Reviewing only the admissions of Barack Obama, we are told that Obama was born to U.S. citizen Stanley Ann Dunham, legally adopted by a foreign national named Lolo Soetoro, had taken the name Barry SOETORO, and was given Indonesian citizenship. He was raised as a Muslim in Indonesia, and attended a school there that accepted all faiths. At one point, Barry SOETORO moved to Hawaii to reside with his grandparents after Lolo SOETORO and Stanley Ann DUNHAM divorced. Obama completed high school as Barry SOETORO Much is missing from his early years, including a legal name change from Barry SOETORO to Barack Hussein Obama II. Absent of any document to show the legal process of a name change within the U.S., it is likely that the man sitting in the Oval Office is, in fact, Barry SOETORO.

The above would also serve to explain the discrepancies with his social security number and region of issuance, a matter we are very familiar with in our capacity as licensed investigators. The reasons we have seen published concerning the allegations of the association of multiple social security numbers with Barry SOETORO and Barack Hussein OBAMA has always bothered us, but not necessarily for the reasons often published. After careful and extensive analysis, it appears that many of the numbers and name variations associated with Obama are what we would describe as “database chaff.” It is not uncommon for database repositories to erroneously associate different numbers, addresses and sometimes names to an individual. The reasons for this are many and beyond the scope of this article, but it happens.

Accordingly, an investigator is well advised not to take the information obtained from a proprietary database at face value without first analyzing the information, tossing out the chaff and concentrating on the rest, which we have done. Additionally, we have found and concur with others on this matter that the social security number associated with Obama that was issued from the SSA region in Connecticut is troublesome, but again, not necessarily for the reasons as publicly stated by others.

As we have been investigating this matter for some time (see our investigative report 1 and report 2 in PDF format for important background information), it has become apparent that at some point, the individual known as Barry SOETORO began using the name Barack Hussein Obama II. Based on our investigative findings, it was at about this same time period that the Connecticut issuance of the social security number appeared and became “attached” to the name Barack Hussein Obama. It can then be reasonably reconciled that Barry SOETORO became Barack Hussein Obama while he was a young man in New York following his mysterious trip to Pakistan on a passport that was likely not issued by the U.S.

Trump’s curious statements

As long-time investigators dealing with large corporations, we have the distinct advantage of knowing other professionals in the industry. Although we have had no contact with Mr. Trump’s investigators nor are we connected in any manner to Mr. Trump’s organization, team or efforts, we are aware of the identity of at least one who is actively working on the Obama birth certificate mystery. We are also familiar with that investigator’s associates and their areas of inquiry, so we have a fairly good understanding of what is taking place behind the scenes – and there is plenty taking place behind the scenes.

NOTE: We will be talking about this in depth on the upcoming episode of CFP Radio’s “The Hagmann & Hagmann Report” on 8-10pm EST, Saturday, 9 April 2011. Program details follow this report.

In advance of that show, however, we should address two rather curious statements made by Mr. Trump during one recent interview. When talking about his investigators in Hawaii who are looking into Obama’s birth certificate issue, he stated that “you wouldn’t believe what they’re finding.” Mr. Trump also stated that in his experience on Wall Street, he is familiar with frauds of all types, and has seen some very sophisticated frauds over the years. Well, we do have a very good idea of what is being found or verified as having been scrubbed from the records.

In our investigation, we found that the scrubbing and altering of records pertaining to Obama began well before he became an Illinois state senator in the 1996 election cycle. The “scrubbing” or alteration of records did not begin or end with Obama, but also extended to his mother and other associates as well. In fact, a very large and extremely relevant part of the investigation of Barry SOETORO, or Barack Hussein Obama II as he is known, revolves around his parents, step father, and grandparents. and extends from the U.S. mainland to Hawaii and other points across the globe.

Meteoric rise to power was well planned

To understand how a virtually unknown politician from Illinois could rise to occupy the most powerful position in the free world in less than a decade after he became a state senator, one must take a few steps backward to understand the complete picture, and that Obama was selected long before he was elected to become president. Problems with his background were numerous, however, including but not limited to his parental lineage and place of birth. These problems became apparent through a private vetting process by his own handlers, or those who are known as the “power elite” in the latter half of the last century. His handlers were and are globalists of the highest order, extending from George Soros to those above him on the proverbial pyramid capstone of globalists.

The globalists had direct and indirect ties to the Dunham family and in particular, Obama’s mother. Consider, for example, that Peter F. Geithner (father of Obama’s Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner), worked for the Ford Foundation and oversaw the work of Obama‚Äôs mother, Ann Dunham, while she was developing “microfinance programs” in Indonesia. In brief, Obama’s mother set up a large loan system in Indonesia akin to the savings and loan structure of the 1970s and 1980s. To gain a better understanding of her activities in finance, despite her background in anthropology, recall the BCCI scandal of the late 1970s. In fact, some of the same “players” who existed then continue to exist in Obama’s circles.

Our investigation into her activities and those close to Obama are continuing and will be the subject of a separate article, including how Obama as president fits into the communist China agenda in terms of global finance. Meanwhile, it’s important to take a few more steps backward in history to understand that the scrubbing of inconvenient records is not new.

Fast Rewind: Senator Joe McCarthy & the relevance to today

The majority of Americans alive today do not recall the WW II postwar era beyond the revised history contained in textbooks that rarely reflect the truth of that time. Today’s well-coiffed but intellectually deficient anchors who deliver the news to ordinary Americans know little to nothing of the gritty reality of the origins of the “cold war” between the U.S. and the former Soviet Union, and the infiltration of communist agents into American government. It is that very infiltration that has paved the way for Obama.

Mention, however, the name of former Senator Joe McCarthy and watch as they recoil in disgust, having been taught that the inquiries of Senator Joe McCarthy is a black chapter in the history books of America. Since the 9/11 attacks, some of these news anchors and pundits have actually described the vetting of Muslims for sensitive positions in the U.S. as a throwback to “McCarthyism,” while few actually using that term know the true history of communist infiltration in key government positions in the postwar era.

The truth is that communist infiltration of and through the U.S. government, particularly the State Department, was and remains a legitimate threat to America. A 106-page confidential memo dated 3 August 1946, written by State Department official Samuel Klaus, detailed the alarming levels of communist infiltration into American government. It was that memo that served as the basis of Senator Joe McCarthy launching an investigation into the threat to America from within. It was through the efforts of McCarthy that a Senate subcommittee chaired by Senator Millard Tydings requested and eventually received a copy of that memo.

As noted by M. Stanton Evans, author of Blacklisted by History, that memo would mysteriously vanish from our nation’s records. Mr. Evans notes that this historic memo is not in the legislative panel file of the Tydings panel, located in the National Archives of the U.S., and was also removed from the files of Samuel Klaus, the author of the memo, from the National Archives in March of 1993, nearly a half century after it was issued.

As painstakingly revealed by M. Stanton Evans in his extensive work Blacklisted by History, important documentation well beyond the Klaus memo relevant to exposing the level of communist infiltration into the U.S. government is not limited to government sources such as the National Archive, but also to private data sources and repositories. He lists a number of instances where records were scrubbed and consequently, created a much different and much less accurate picture of that era of U.S. history.

This topic is as relevant today as it was during the time of Senator Joe McCarty, if not even more relevant. One only has to look at the reported communist, Marxist and socialist ties in Obama’s lineage and inner circle to understand the impact of missing records.

One would do well to use the voluminous work of M. Stanton Evans as a template to understand how Americans have been deliberately misled by the media and some members of our own government into believing that the communist and socialist objectives, launched in the postwar era, have led to where we find ourselves today.

The removal of the Klaus memo from his file in March of 1993 was as deliberate as the refusal of government officials, complicit with the media moguls of today to address the lack of bona fides of Barack Hussein Obama. In fact, one could consider them an extension of the same.

What it all means

Based on investigative findings that are not discussed in the media, it would appear that the selection and election of Barack Hussein Obama was indeed the greatest scam ever pulled off against the American people. The above provides just a small portion of the critical issues surrounding Obama’s eligibility, identity and his place in U.S. and world history. The story is much larger than a single piece of paper, but that paper, if properly authenticated, will serve as the thread that will unravel the larger tangled web of the Obama legend.

To those who have just awakened to the constitutional crisis we are facing at the hands of this president, we’d like to say once again, “welcome to the party, pal.”

Douglas J. Hagmann & his son, Joseph Hagmann, both investigators, researchers and contributors to Canada Free Press, host a weekly radio program on CFP Radio called The Hagmann & Hagmann Report, broadcast live every Saturday from 8:00-10:00 p.m. ET. In it’s fifth week, the program has gained in popularity, and has become one of the ten most popular radio shows on the BlogTalk Radio platform. This week’s program will be providing additional details about the problems with Obama’s eligibility to occupy the White House.


At Geithner’s Treasury, Key Decisions on Hold – washingtonpost.com

This seems to be a case of the White House micro-managing the Treasury department.

Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, May 18, 2009

Seven weeks after the Treasury Department announced that it was ousting General Motors chief G. Richard Wagoner Jr. in the federal bailout of the company, he is still technically on GM’s payroll.

Wagoner’s removal has been held up because senior Treasury officials have yet to decide whether he should get the $20 million severance package that the company had promised him.

The delay is one of many hitches that have slowed a host of important policy actions in the four months since Timothy F. Geithner became Treasury secretary. While Geithner has taken dramatic steps to address flashpoints in the economy, the work of carrying out those policies has bogged down because critical decisions about how to do so aren’t being made, interviews with a broad range of federal officials show.

Government officials, inside the Treasury and out, say the unresolved issues are piling up in part because of vacancies in the department’s top ranks. But some of the officials also cite the Treasury’s ad-hoc management, which is dominated by a small band of Geithner’s counselors who coordinate rescue initiatives but lack formal authority to make decisions. Heavy involvement by the White House in Treasury affairs has further muddied the picture of who is responsible for key issues, the officials add.

One of the department’s signature initiatives, considered vital for getting at the root of the financial crisis, aims at relieving banks of their toxic assets. But to those familiar with the program, it remains unclear who will decide some of the practical details, such as whether foreign firms will be allowed to participate in the funds that buy the assets. This uncertainty is slowing the rollout of the program, which in any case has proven daunting to design. Announced in early February, it may not launch until July, officials say.

In March, Treasury officials clashed over a $15 billion initiative to use money from the federal bailout package to free up credit for small businesses. Geithner’s counselors pressed to announce the program quickly, despite protests from the career staff members who said it would not work. Unable to raise the issue with Geithner himself, the staff members appealed directly to the White House but were rebuffed, according to sources familiar with the episode.

President Obama announced the program two months ago, and it is still struggling to get off the ground. Officials are looking to overhaul the proposal.

And in the wake of the public firestorm over bonuses paid by American International Group, senior Treasury officials have been meeting several times a week all spring to review, one by one, the payments to the company’s executives. But the time-consuming discussions have never resolved whether any of the executives should get paid.

Geithner said in interviews that some of the department’s internal difficulties result from the intense pressure on officials to develop a raft of rescue initiatives in a very short time.

“We were just putting enormous pressure on these people to put in place and execute this comprehensive set of programs,” Geithner said. “In a crisis, the most important thing is to show the capacity for credible initiative that is actually going to fix the problem. That’s why we are trying to do so much so early.” He added, “It could get tough at times . . . but I think they are doing a great job in that context, and they are working 24 hours a day to put out A-plus policy.”

Still, some lawmakers and government officials said Geithner needs to be a stronger manager.

“No one knows how to get decisions made,” said a senior government official familiar with the Treasury’s inner workings. “Major decisions can happen very fast at the top, and then after that there are tons of detail and nuances that have to get worked out without clear chains of command. Either the seats are unfilled . . . or you have to answer to a half a dozen counselors running around.”

So far, nearly four months after the Obama administration took power, the Treasury Department is still without a deputy secretary. Two undersecretary positions — including the vital post overseeing domestic finance — have not been filled and many other division heads have not been named. The White House vetting of potential candidates has proven arduous, and nearly all of those individuals nominated have yet to win Senate confirmation and fill out Geithner’s team.

“I’ve seen the effect of this, and I wish he would move quicker to put in his own people,” said Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.

Help could soon be on the way. Confirmation hearings for Neal Wolin, the administration’s pick for deputy Treasury secretary, began a week ago. Treasury staff members have been impressed by the management skills of former Fannie Mae chief executive Herbert M. Allison Jr., who awaits confirmation as Geithner’s pick to lead the bailout operations. The White House is also seeking to bolster the Treasury’s ranks by adding former Clinton press secretary Jake Siewert as counselor to Geithner.

Aside from getting officials into place, Geithner still needs to define the roles of his senior counselors and delegate some decisions to lower-ranking officials, several government officials said.

“Tim’s nature is to be very inclusive,” said an official who frequently interacts with the Treasury. “But there are too many decisions to make with 20 guys around his table.”

While federal departments often experience a degree of upheaval when administrations change, the difference between the Treasury of former secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. and Geithner’s has been stark. Under Paulson, the department nearly always made its own decisions. The Bush White House, nearing the end of its tenure, hardly intervened.

But now, even minor matters, such as Web site design or news releases, are reviewed by the White House. Staff members detailed from the National Economic Council, reporting directly to Obama senior economist Lawrence H. Summers, roam the Treasury building. Treasury staff members working on restructuring the nation’s automakers took much of their direction from the NEC, sources said.

Geithner said he welcomes the input from senior White House officials because they provide intelligent feedback and because he has been short-staffed. After studying the last dozen Treasury secretaries, Geithner said he became convinced that the Treasury needed to closely collaborate with the White House.

But the time spent meeting with White House colleagues on high-priority issues — from the federal budget and tax policy to health-care reform and a proposed overhaul of financial regulation — has left him little chance to manage his staff.

“People think he’s very, very smart, but he has not exerted a management presence yet,” added a source familiar with the Treasury’s inner workings. “He’s being stretched in a thousand directions . . . but I don’t know if that absolves him of responsibility for management.”

Geithner insists he has been tending to his staff, reaching out across the department in a way his predecessor never did. He said he encourages anyone with problems to come to him directly and regularly speaks with the rank-and-file.

“I know everyone would like a little more clarity about who’s going to be working for whom, which we are trying to give them,” he said. “But in the interim we are just trying to get stuff done the best we can.”

Political Punch: Obama Administration: We Didn't Find Out About AIG Bonuses Until This Month

Political Punch: Obama Administration: We Didn’t Find Out About AIG Bonuses Until This Month.

March 17, 2009 7:18 PM

<!–

Tahman Bradley

–>Sources in the Obama administration Tuesday said that despite previous media reports administration officials did not know until a couple weeks ago that the officials of the controversial AIG Financial Product Division were set to receive $165 million in bonuses on March 13.

It wasn’t until Thursday, March 5, 2009, administration sources told ABC News, that officials of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York informed officials of the Treasury Department of the full extent of the $165 million in bonuses pending for the controversial Financial Products Subsidiary.

This was three days after the Obama administration had already announced a new commitment of an additional $30 billion for AIG.

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner was alerted last Tuesday, March 10; he phoned AIG CEO Edward Liddy on Wednesday evening, March 11, to protest the bonuses, sources told ABC News.

On Thursday, March 12, Secretary Geithner informed a senior White House official about the controversy, aides passed the information on to President Obama later in the day.

How the Obama administration was caught flat-footed by this controversy dates back to last Fall, when the New York Federal Reserve Bank — then run by Geithner — stepped in to give AIG a high-interest loan for $85 billion to help prevent the company from going under — which Lehman Brothers was doing at the time. As part of the deal, AIG CEO Robert Willumstad was replaced by the new CEO, Liddy.

In late October, the $700 billion Troubled Assets Relief Program passed Congress, which includes rules about executive compensation but nothing about retention bonuses.

In November, the Fed and Treasury Department soon began pumping more money into AIG — $40 billion, to take down the $85 billion credit facility set up by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

At this point, an Obama administration official says, Treasury officials generally became aware that AIG had put retention programs in place, but whom they were for and the extent of them were unknown. The New York Fed began studying the compensation policies on the books — while also making efforts to save banks and rescue the economy. But by then Geithner’s nomination was pending and he had recused himself from dealings with AIG.

AIG provided information about the company’s myriad compensation packages to the New York Fed, but officials described the information as extremely complex and not easily understood. AIG had more than 100 compensation policies for more than 116,000 employees throughout the world.

In January and February, officials of the Federal Reserve Board, and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York began working on an additional $30 billion support package to prevent an AIG downgrade. On February 23 and 24, government officials were finalizing the details of the USG support package for AIG; on February 25 and 26, officials of AIG presented the package to the rating agencies, along with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. On February 27, the agencies affirmed AIG’s A- rating.

It was only after that process, on February 28, officials said, when officials of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York email their counterparts at the Treasury Department to inform them of several outstanding issues related to compensation for AIG executives, and to give them a heads up that details of the retention program for the Financial Products subsidiary were forthcoming.       

On March 2, AIG officials announced record losses for their company, along with the restructuring plans and additional $30 billion in government aid. 

Three days later, on March 5, New York Fed officials forwarded to the Treasury Department a summary of AIG’s bonus and retention payment issues, including details of the retention program for officials of the Financial Products. This information included that $165 million in payments were expected that very month, as well as the fact that the contracts were in place in the first quarter of 2008, and so not covered by the limitations in the stimulus bill as articulated by an amendment to the stimulus bill offered by Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn.

As ABC News’ Capitol Hill Correspondent Jonathan Karl reported, in February, the Senate unanimously approved an amendment restricting bonuses over $100,000 at any company receiving federal bailout funds, but during the closed-door House and Senate negotiations the provision was stripped out and replaced with a measure by Dodd exempting bonuses agreed to prior to the passage of the stimulus bill on February 11, 2009.
 
On March 9, 2009, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York sent full details and supporting documentation to the Treasury Department about the Financial Products retention program.

One day later, Geithner was told about the $165 million in bonuses. 

“Everyone knew that there were retention bonuses on the books,” an Obama administration source said, “but no one (in the Obama administration) knew about the $165 million for the Financial Products division” until March 5.

Geithner called Liddy on Wednesday, March 11, Liddy — appointed to run AIG September 2008 — told the Treasury Secretary that he knew about the bonuses and had already talked to company lawyers to try to end them.

But, Liddy said, he’d been told that going after the bonuses — for work from 2008 — would actually cost the government more money because of resulting lawsuits.

The Treasury Secretary expressed concern, pointed out that AIG also had 2009 retention bonuses set up, not to mention $121.5 million in executive bonuses that Geithner wanted trimmed.

On Thursday and Friday, administration sources said, Geithner urged Treasury Department lawyers to try to figure out a way to block the bonuses. But the lawyers ultimately came to agree with AIG’s lawyers; that their hands were tied.

Liddy and Geithner talked again on Friday, the day the $165 million in retention bonuses were being cut, and the Treasury Secretary Geithner acknowledged he did didn’t think he could block the payments going out the door.

But he told Liddy he was going to make efforts to, at a minimum, recoup that money as part of the agreement for the pending $30 billion the government announced in aid for AIG on March 2. Liddy agreed to trim or reduce executive compensation for the top 47 officers of the company, to reduce and renegotiate 2009 bonuses — tying them to performance, specifically to what officers are doing to unwind the company.

Geithner asked Liddy to codify their agreement in a letter, which Liddy sent the Treasury Secretary on Saturday. Throughout the weekend, Treasury Department and White House lawyers explored various options to see if they could block the bonuses, as they continue to do so today, aides said.

— jpt

*This post has been updated.