Tonight is my turn to talk about TV. I'll be watching the BSG finale tonight. Anybody else watching?

Bernie Madoff will stay in jail pending sentencing. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals today refused to reverse the trial court's order denying bond. The ruling is here (pdf.)

It appears Madoff, facing a probable sentence that will exceed his life span, will leave prison only when he's dead.

Since the Government can continue the investigation into his relatives and friends, it's hard to figure why his lawyers didn't draw out the process, insisting on an Indictment. He would have had the protection of the 5th amendment until his appeals of any conviction were done and been able to sleep at his Park Ave. penthouse rather than MCC or an FCI for at least two more years. [More...]

While CNBC continues to protest that it does too cover Wall Street critically, CNBC host Mark Haines is still selling the "Indispensable Men" theory. Via TPM:

CNBC, the Fox News for Wall Street's "Masters of the Universe." Kudos to Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) for pushing back.

Speaking for me only

I'm off to a roaring start in the tourney, hitting on most of my upset picks with my brackets intact (Mich. State, Villanova, Syracuse, Memphis.)

How are you doing in your March Madness pools?

Kevin Drum quoting DeGaulle - "The cemeteries of the world are full of indispensable men." The point is getting through:

A substantial swathe of policy elites, starting with Hank Paulson and Ben Bernanke and George Bush and now evidently including Timothy Geithner and Larry Summers and Barack Obama really do seem to think that saving the firms is the key. That the world as it existed in the years 1996 to 2006 represents some kind of ideal of economic activity, and that the[ir] job is to put humpty-dumpty back together again. . . . [T]hat’s not what we ought to be trying to do . . .

Brian Buetler finds support from Paul Krugman:

But not over the bonuses. NYTimes:

While the American International Group comes under fire from Congress over executive bonuses, it is quietly fighting the federal government for the return of $306 million in tax payments, some related to deals that were conducted through offshore tax havens. A.I.G. sued the government last month in a bid to force it to return the payments, which stemmed in large part from its use of aggressive tax deals, some involving entities controlled by the company’s financial products unit in the Cayman Islands, Ireland, the Dutch Antilles and other offshore havens.

[AIG is suing, in part, over] deals involv[ing] A.I.G. offshore entities whose function centers on executive compensation and include C. V. Starr & Company, a closely held concern controlled by Maurice R. Greenberg, A.I.G.’s former chairman, and the Starr International Company, a privately held enterprise incorporated in Panama, and commonly known as SICO.

What a world.

Six years ago today:

The biggest American strategic blunder of the last century.

Speaking for me only

Your turn.

This is an Open Thread.

At daily kos, Lawrence Lessig writes:

As we all know by now, insurance giant AIG sparked national outrage by paying more than $165 million in executive bonuses after receiving a $170 billion taxpayer bailout. What fewer people know is that AIG gave more than $9 million in campaign contributions to Congress . . . The Number 1 lifetime recipient of AIG money? Senate Banking Chairman Chris Dodd, who received $281,000 (just edging out George W. Bush).

Lessig promulgates a false implication - that Senator Chris Dodd acted as he did because of AIG contributions. It is clear now that in fact Dodd acted as he did at the behest of the Obama administration. In fact, in last week's issue of The Economist (p. 29) (before the AIG bonus scandal broke), the following was written:

Chris Dodd, who faces a battle to retain his Connecticut seat in 2010, inserted tough new restrictions on bankers' pay into the fiscal stimulus package despite the administration's objections.

Lessig's implied narrative is simply false. Whether Lessig's agenda is good or not, using falsehoods to support it is clearly wrong.

Speaking for me only

At RCP, Mort Kondracke touts Republican House member Paul Ryan's (R-WI) "Sweden" plan for addressing the financial crisis:

In the case of the bank crisis -- and other areas of economic policy, too -- Obama and his top advisers ought to mix it up regularly with conservative Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), who, they would discover, has some constructive ideas that Obama might adopt. Such as: Instead of injecting vast new cash into the banks, institute a system of government insurance guarantees to protect asset-holders against losses. Also, triage the banks and commence a Resolution Trust Corporation-style liquidation of those that can't be saved.

(Emphasis supplied.) This is in essence, the Sweden plan. There is a hitch however. Ryan proposes:

Last night I tried to make the point that folks who are trying to pooh pooh the AIG bonus issue are missing the mindset behind them that effects economic and financial policy on a wider scale. I wrote:

What's interesting about the new DC J-List insiders' (just kidding) take on the AIG bonus mess is how they do not make the obvious connection to the bigger problem of Treasury's timidity regarding the financial crisis. Of course in the scheme of things, the AIG bonuses are a drop in the bucket -- but the problem here is, to coin a phrase, "systemic." Too much energy and political capital has been wasted by the Obama Administration in propping up the old Wall Street order and not enough in trying to figure out what exactly would be best for the country.

Via Digby, Atrios puts it more succinctly (and less charitably):

Bump and Update: I just finished watching Leno. I thought President Obama was terrific. I understood what he was trying to say about the economy and AIG -- he seemed to enjoy himself which made me enjoy him-- and it was great to see him in a non-formal, non-political setting. It's obvious he's on top of what's going on and I felt reassured that if it can be fixed, he'll see that it gets fixed. (The "if", however, remains a pretty big question.)

The best part was when Leno said we need to jail lots of folks over the financial mess, and he didn't join the call and say his Department of Justice would do just that. Instead, he pointed out much of what the financial companies did was legal and we'd be better off changing the laws. How refreshing to have a President who understands that using the criminal justice system to jail more people is not a cure or a fix to the country's problems.

Update: Heeeere's Barack (the transcript.)[More...]