Obama sides with banks (corrupt loans, foreclosures); pressures NY Atty. General for settlement.

[woo me with science]

Another outrageous betrayal. :nuke: :grr: :puke:



http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2011/08/22/us_pressures_new_yorks_ag_to_back_bank_deal/

US pressures New York’s AG to back bank deal
New York Times / August 22, 2011

NEW YORK - Eric T. Schneiderman, New York’s attorney general, is under pressure from the Obama administration to drop his opposition to a wide-ranging state settlement with banks over dubious foreclosure practices, say people briefed on discussions about the deal.

Shaun Donovan, secretary of Housing and Urban Development, and Justice Department officials have been campaigning to persuade the attorney general to support the settlement, the people said. Schneiderman and top prosecutors in other states have said the proposed settlement would restrict their ability to prosecute wrongdoing in a variety of areas, including the bundling of loans in mortgage securities.

The administration has been contacting not only Schneiderman but his allies, including consumer groups and housing advocates, seeking help to secure the attorney general’s participation, the people said.

The large banks, eager to settle, are frustrated with Schneiderman’s stance. Bank officials recently discussed asking Donovan for help, said a person briefed on those talks.
....
The possible settlement centers on foreclosure improprieties like so-called robo-signing and submitting apparently forged documents to speed evictions.

(more at link)

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[roguevalley]

30. he's a bastard. no other word fits

[Necronomiconomics]

104. "Republican" fits

[SusanaMontana41]

117. "Corporatist" fits, too. nt

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TheWraith]

47. Forgive some of us for promoting accurate information instead of smear campaigns.

The reason the feds want the states to sign on, is because they've cut a deal to PREVENT PEOPLE FROM BEING FORECLOSED ON. And yet some people prefer to spin it as "Evil bastard Obama supports thieves, murders kittens!" Even though some of those same people have been complaining for months that the admin hasn't been doing enough to stop foreclosures. More proof that some people are simply never going to be happy with Obama unless he's ordering everyone on Wall Street dragged out and shot in the street. And then they'll complain he didn't do it sooner.

[loudsue]

59. You shouldn't cut deals with terrorists OR criminals. I don't give a rat's ass what "deal" is cut

It's time the banksters went to JAIL. PRISON. They are guilty as hell of destroying American lives, and they get a "deal"????? Wrong is wrong.

[OnyxCollie]

60. "Forgive some of us for promoting accurate information..."

Your recent OP that used a quote falsely attributed to Russ Feingold betrays your claim of promoting accurate information.

But you knew that.

[City Lights]

96. !

:fistbump: :yourock:

[robinlynne]

106. YEP.

[Jakes Progress]

70. Ahh. The banking industry is heard from.

[sabrina 1]

75. You don;'t cut deals with criminals that let them off the hook.

There should have been a moratorium on foreclosures long ago. This is getting old. Everytime we get close to exposing the treason that has brought this country to its knees, some genius comes up with the idea that if they can somehow make it look lik they are helping the people, the people will fall for it!

NO! We are not falling for it. Prosecute the criminals or they will be back in business, doing more damage as soon as they get their free pass.

I can't believe this garbage.

[BetsysGhost]

108. You don't cut deals with criminals that let them off the hook.

You're damn right you don't.

[blank space]

100. Warning - extreme logic failure -

Just because you cut a deal does not make you immune from prosecution.

If Obama cut a deal on foreclosures, and part of that deal was no prosecution then obama should be in jail.

Your defence of this Republican thug is depressing - you will do and say and see anything - no matter how twisted - to reinforce your delusions.

Tear down that wall Mr Wraith.

[xiamiam]

102. would you please elaborate on that 'cut a deal to prevent people from being foreclosed on" statement

do you have accurate info re that

[EFerrari]

2. That's obscene. n/t

[bhikkhu]

74. What is obscene is rejecting 20 billion for homeowners, in favor of more for investment banks

...as the deal Obama is supporting takes 20 billion from the banks to help homeowners in trouble to refinance or renegotiate their loans.

The case Schneiderman is working is pursuing the banks to recoup losses for the benefit of a few large investment banks.

Amazing what you find out when you actually read the source articles!

[sabrina 1]

90. What garbage. Did you know that Billions have already been

set aside to help Homeowners and that Timmy Geithner has refused to release most of it? Did you not watch Elizabeth Warren go after him as to why that was?

WE DON'T NEED THIS BARGAIN! Stop falling for the scam. You are part of the problem if you do and the reason why these criminals keep getting let off the hook only to return to their crimes as soon as the deal is made.

Prosecute them! Get the money they are hoarding offshore back into this country and return to those they stole it from.

[bhikkhu]

92. So siding with the banks is declining to fine them 20 billion for robo-signing

...so that investment funds can go after them instead?

I don't see the scam. The only reason this settlement is opposed, other than that Obama is involved, is that the NY AG wants to bundle robo-signing in with other issues for a larger settlement - which will benefit investment funds who lost money in the subprime meltdown. How does that help anyone who really needs help?

I may be wrong, but all I see are some serious mental gymnastics, for the sake of disagreeing with an administration priority of helping homeowners.

[sabrina 1]

98. 20 billion is pocket change compared to the crimes that

were committed against the American people, and the money that was stollen by criminal and corrupt means. Trillions of dollars. Where did it go? And how do we find out if there are no trials and/or investigations? And as I said, why doesn't Geithner allow the money already allotted to help home-owners be released to them? Elizabeth Warren, try as she did, could not get a straight answer from him on that.

You are asking that these major criminals be let off the hook to go back and do it all over again.

Sen. Levin doesn't agree with you at all. His two-year by-partisan Committee looking into the causes of the meltdown, concluded that there was serious corruption and criminal activity and they referrred their findings to the DOJ.

We are sick and tired of these major criminals in this country being rescued by our politicians. And all that does is make it worse. If the Iran Contra traitors had been held accountable we would most likely never have been in Iraq or Afghanistan. But these criminals do not change their ways, do they?

We need to restore the rule of law and stop making bargains with criminals.

We don't bargain with the average Bank Robber do we? We don't accept some of the money he stole to pay off a few of his victims and then consider the matter closed. This is not only no different, it is, as described by many law experts, a crime of massive proportions and it was because we expected accountability that we elected Democrats. The Dems in the Senate did their job, along with their Republican counterparts who could not ignore the massive evidence of crime. Why is this administration blocking their attempts to do what the people want?

No one is against Obama. This is paranoid thinking. Being in favor of the rule of the law does not mean 'anti-Obama'. Or at least it should not.

[bhikkhu]

105. Would 20 billion still be pocket change is the situation was reversed?

What if Obama were opposing the levying of a $20 billion fine against the banks to benefit homeowners, and instead advocating pursuing the banks on behalf of some big Wall Street investment funds, to recoup their losses?

Do you suppose he would be congratulated here?

[sabrina 1]

109. He will be congratulated when he follows the advice of Sen. Levin's

Committee to turn over the findings of that Committee regarding the Mortgage crisis which led to the Financial Meltdown, to the DOJ for investigations and prosecutions. This is not only about money, it is about the LAW. That committee after two years found evidence of corruption and fraud and criminality. Are you happy to ignore these things? As we have ignored all the other major crimes committed by the elite that have set this country up to run the way THEY want it, where they never pay for the crimes they committed?

I thought we elected Democrats to restore the Rule of Law, and all I see now are worse violations of what was left of our laws after Bush got finished tearing apart the fabric that made this a civilized country.

As for the money, there IS a fund to help homeowners. Geithner will not release those funds. Elizabeth Warren tried hard to make him explain why. He was angry at her for daring to question him. This is what is running this country now. This is what WE supported. Well not anymore!

[bhikkhu]

110. Was reading about Levin's committee recently

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/04/18/finding-goldman-at-fault-in-the-financial-crisis/

though I haven't heard what has gone on recently. Nor do I have any idea about the funds Geithner hasn't released...its hard to keep up with everything - definitely more reading to do another day.

[sabrina 1]

112. Thank you, and sorry if I was impatient. The Levin committee

findings were on the news right before the killing of OBL. Then they were forgotten. Mait Taibbi covered them and he and Levin were both interviewed to discuss the findings. Levin is one of few people in DC I still believe has integrity. He wanted investigations because of what they discovered.

The fund that was meant to help homeowners was administered by the Treasury Dept. but only a small amount of it was ever released to help the President's program to 'keep Americans in their homes'. Warren questioned Geithner about why so little had been used and why so few homeowners had been able to avail of the president's program. He was very angry, arrogant and dismissive of her questions. There is video of their exchanges available on Utube.

It would be a disaster, imo, if there is any agreement that deprives the public of the investigations necessary so that we learn who is responsible for what happened to this country, and where they money went. Millions of americans lost their livlihoods, investors were cheated, people were illegally thrown out of their homes and I see that as part of this agreement, those illegal activities will not be prosecuted, the scheme they had going with the false notarization of documents.

Lawyers have been pursuing some of these cases and this agreement could possibly end them. One in NY eg, where a Law Firm working for Wells Fargo, threw over 50,000 people out of their homes, (one of them a friend of mine), many unlawfully, has finally been sued in a huge RICO lawsuit, and then investigated under the RICO act, criminally, this case, and there are others where people were finally beginning to see some justice, could be jeopardized.

Sorry but I find it stunning to even think of depriving the millions of people they defrauded of some form of justice. Helping a few people facing foreclosure NOW does not help those they unlawfully foreclosed on already. And as I said, there is a fund to help those people.

[girl gone mad]

115. Thanks for bringing this up, Sabrina.

This settlement is not needed in order to bring aid to homeowners. The government has better and more effective tools to help people, right now, if they choose. There is no emergency. A rushed deal only benefits those who have profited from the securitization and foreclosure related crimes.

In addition, this will likely end the moratorium, which means many more will soon be thrown out of their homes.

[Poll_Blind]

3. Obama throws in on the side of corrupt corporations, film at eleven.

I could say I'm not entirely surprised...but I am. I am surprised. The Obama administration still has the capacity to dismay me with their choices more than I thought possible. Which both sucks and is kinda scary, given their years-long chain of politically egregious choices.

PB

[tblue]

4. If a President McCain did this, ALL OF US would freak.

But this administration?

[Poll_Blind]

5. Look, if we complain then maybe someone worse will become President. Could we afford that?

At least they don't come into our homes at night to rifle through our stuff, personally, to steal.

So there's still that, right?

Right...?

:shrug:

PB

[griffi94]

6. right

i've been seeing a lot of those "don't say anything bad about the dems or you must want palin" comments.

i really don't see how it can get much worse...i mean it can last longer, and it can fuck up more people, but the ones that are already screwed won't notice the difference.

[saras]

7. They don't? Maybe not at your house. Get involved in some protests, that'll take care of that.

This is, indeed, one of those pointless inexcusable ones. There's no political reason for Obama to be involved on the side of the banks, it doesn't serve any OVERT agenda of his or of the Democratic party, it's not a necessary, or even convenient, part of any deal he needs to make.

It appears to be a case of "those criminals are NOT to be investigated" in return for absolutely nothing.

[indurancevile]

13. +1. do not touch the big crooks, throw the book at the small ones, & surveil everyone.

[Divernan]

36. Oh, there will be lots of return - to Obama's campaign coffers.

[indurancevile]

11. dea seizures. eminent domain.

[a simple pattern]

34. They can, though.

I guess you really wouldn't know if they had, since they don't have to tell you.

[defendandprotect]

48. So you're saying you prefer the LOCAL train to Auschwitz ....??

GOP is the Express train to Auschwitz ... !!


What's that saying about standing up or dying on your knees?


It's similar to people not wanting to face Global Warming --

it's too big -- it may be too late -- ??

[truebrit71]

31. We would EXPECT this from President McCain....

...the guy we thought we elected? Not so much...

[Bluebear]

57. That is the distinction.

[LooseWilly]

8. Accountability? What's that?... Let's just settle as quickly as possible....

... “The disagreement,’’ Donovan said, “is around whether we should wait to settle and resolve the issues around the servicing practices for him - and potentially other AGs and other federal agencies - to complete investigations on the securitization side. ...

Investi-what now? :+

[bhikkhu]

69. This is Schneiderman's line of investigation -

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/13/business/bank-of-americas-mortgage-deal-questioned.html?_r=1

...which if you google it has more of the same type of thing. He's being a competent AG, and pursuing the banks on behalf of the investment firms who lost loney in the "subprime meltdown", and he is against the current settlement because he would like to be able to include the robo-signing issue in with his case. If the adminstration prevails, he won't be able to include it, as it will have been settled separately.

MOST IMPORTANT - however: Schneiderman's action is to recoup losses for big Wall Street firms. The settlement Obama would like to see completed would fine the banks $20 billion, which would be used to help homeowners in danger of losing their houses refinance or renegotiate their loans.

If the settlement is cancelled, as Schneiderman wants and Obama does not, then homeowners get nothing?

[LooseWilly]

114. Sorry, didn't think I needed to include the :sarcasm: tag....

You are absolutely right... and the idea of settling these cases before the AGs have the information they need in order to include the derivatives (as best they can) in the suits against the banks... is reprehensible—& makes perfect sense since it is rather complicated and Obama's most trusted advisors on the subject all come from Goldman Sachs and perhaps some few other Wall St. interests...

Sorry if you thought I disagreed... ;)

[JDPriestly]

9. How stupid can Obama get? Yes. He's got a massive crush on the bankers and just

can't help himself. But to be so obvious about it.

[eilen]

10. I thought that Obama and his admin were not

supposed to get involved with states issues. Like the stuff that is going on in Fl, OH, WI, MI-- but they can insert themselves into this?

[Divernan]

37. Guess he found those comfortable shoes!

[indurancevile]

12. unbelievable.

[woo me with science]

14. Our corrupt banking establishment, and its defense by bought politicians

is at the root of this crisis.

[Inuca]

15. From the same article

Donovan said his discussions with the attorney general were motivated by a desire to speed up help for troubled homeowners. He said he had not spoken to bank officials about trying to persuade Schneiderman.

“The disagreement,’’ Donovan said, “is around whether we should wait to settle and resolve the issues around the servicing practices for him - and potentially other AGs and other federal agencies - to complete investigations on the securitization side. He might argue that he has more leverage that way, but our view is we have the immediate opportunity to help a huge number of borrowers to stay in their homes, to help their neighborhoods and the housing market.’’

I do not know who is right and who is wrong here, but things are not as black & white as the OP suggests.

[Ikonoklast]

16. No one read it, or actually understands the ramifications if they did.

It interferes with the Daily Obama Hate.

What Obama is doing ACTUALLY WOULD HELP HOMEOWNERS.

DU, the home of the Hate Democrats Society.

[Fumesucker]

17. Perhaps you could share your vast wisdom?

Since the rest of us are too stupid/ignorant to figure out how this is going to help homeowners...

[Ikonoklast]

18. This has already been posted here, and critiqued.

This is the third day, I believe, for this same issue to be discussed here on DU.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x752576

See posts #5, #9.

There is more to this issue than meets the eye.

It can be construed that Schneiderman is protecting a constituency in NY state (large banks) over the securtization issue, at the expense of homeowners, who may lose out if he proceeds.

[Enthusiast]

29. I will not read those posts.........nt

[bhikkhu]

62. Happy to chime in:

If I understand it right, the settlement is for $20 billion in damages, solely related to the robo-signing issue. The money would be paid by the banks involved, and be applied to help people facing foreclosure, or who need their home loans adjustments to allow them to keep their houses. I haven't read any details, but that is the intent.

Donovan's position - and presumably it is in agreement with the administration - is that this is a good settlement, which will help people immediately and should be accepted. The NY AG position is that settling the robo-signing issue will prevent him from bundling it in with other issues as he would like, where he feels he can gain a larger settlement later.

Who knows. Maybe he can do better than 20 billion, though maybe it will get appealed and obstructed through the courts for years, and it might go nowhere at all. Maybe $20 billion today will do a great deal of good, and the AG will still be able to prosecute other issues separately just fine.

I suppose its more of a roll of the dice than a "good vs evil" decision, and I don't blame the administration for weighing toward the $20 billion now, as there is a great deal of current need.

[girl gone mad]

72. You do not understand it right.

The deal is not "solely related to the robo-signing issue". Robosigning is only one facet of the immunity the banks would receive, and not even a significant one, at that. This deal would also protect them from prosecutions and civil suits over fraudulent securitizations, illegal foreclosures, submitting falsified documents, etc.

If the administration's concern is in getting aid to homeowners quickly, they have the capacity to step in and help homeowners RIGHT NOW. They do not need to pressure AGs to ram through a bad deal. That defense is totally ridiculous and impossible to accept.

[bhikkhu]

83. That's not what the NYT says

Donovan, the secretary of Housing and Urban Development, however, says that a settlement on the narrow issue of robo-signing would not preclude other investigations by individual attorneys general. But, clearly, once the robo-signing issue is off the table, investigators would lose leverage to pursue remedies for other possible illegalities in the packaging, marketing and transferring of mortgage securities.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/23/opinion/its-a-flawed-settlement.html?ref=erictschneiderman

----------------------------------------

no other immunities or protections are mentioned anywhere that I can find, only the inconvenience of not being able to bundle robo signing in with the rest.

[girl gone mad]

91. The deal the White House is pushing for would give broad immunity.

Here is Gretchen Morgenson:

"Mr. Schneiderman and top prosecutors in some other states have objected to the proposed settlement with major banks, saying it would restrict their ability to investigate and prosecute wrongdoing in a variety of areas, including the bundling of loans in mortgage securities."

Yves Smith accurately surmises:

"Robosigning isn’t worth a lot liability-wise nor does it give much (any) leverage into other theories of action. The real issue is much simpler. The banks are not going to agree to a deal that includes only robosigning. The only reason for them to come to the table and pay any kind of damages is to get a broader release. We’ve said so from the get-go. And the Administration has spent so many cycles on the settlement that it perceives that it has its credibility at stake on getting a deal, no matter how bank friendly it is. (Actually, bank friendly is the point, it just can’t be blatantly bank friendly)."

[bhikkhu]

95. Opposing a "broader release" is a valid point

...and if that's what Schneiderman is opposing, then I agree with him.

[Enthusiast]

118. I agree with you.

I do not want the criminals protected from prosecutions and civil suits over fraudulent securitizations, illegal foreclosures and submitting falsified documents. These criminals should be punished. If there was ever a group of criminals that deserved prosecution these people are the ones.

How can the Administration absolve these acts while simultaneously leading austerity advocacy? See, it's positions like this that destroy the Administration's credibility.

[girl gone mad]

68. No, no and no.

"It can be construed that Schneiderman is protecting a constituency in NY state (large banks) over the securtization issue, at the expense of homeowners, who may lose out if he proceeds."

This cannot be construed in any way, shape or form from the facts on hand. Schneiderman is attempting to investigate the banks over sescuritization, robosigning, foreclosure fraud and other wrongdoing. The White House is trying to get Schneiderman to sign off on a deal which would grant the banks blanket immunity in exchange for a laughably small fine.

Homeowners will lose out big time if this deal goes through.

[bhikkhu]

79. He is pursuing them on behalf of some large investment firms

...who hope to recoup losses.

There is no guarantee or even indication (that I have been able to find) that homeowners are any part of any settlement that Schneider might gain.

On the other hand, the settlement Schneiderman would like to see killed exclusively benefits homeowners.

[girl gone mad]

82. These are CRIMINAL investigations he's pursuing.

If he can't go after the banks on behalf of homeowners, how is it that he's being asked to sign off on a settlement on behalf of homeowners?

Bit of a contradiction in logic there, no?

[bhikkhu]

86. Which he is welcome to - there's plenty worse than robo-signing

...and anyway that didn't have much to do with the subprime fiasco.

So we can have the settlement and help homeowners immediately, and Schneiderman can pursue the banks and recoup losses for the investment banks without that small issue.

[girl gone mad]

88. Like I said before..

This deal would give the banks broad immunity and shut down his investigation, as well as ongoing investigations in Colorado, Deleware, and a few other states.

[bhikkhu]

93. According to the Times, it only settles robo-signing - nothing else

and settling an issue with a $20 billion fine isn't exactly being granted "immunity".

[Ken Burch]

42. The help homeowners would get would be trivially small

and it would be meaningless if they were helped if the banks weren't prosecuted, since no prosecution would guarantee that the banks would keep doing this.

ONLY actual punishment, and only massive actual punishment, ever stops the rich from doing bad things. Cutting a few tiny checks never phases that class.

[bhikkhu]

66. Schneiderman may only pursue damages for insurance companies and investors

so it is very possible that this is the only settlement that will benefit homeowners directly. Which kind of makes you wonder why the Obama-bashing, when the administration is siding with homeowners against the banks...

[Ken Burch]

67. The only legitimate settlement would be to let the homeownere KEEP their homes

period. And without having to pay anymore on the land-shark deals they were tricked into.

It's morally wrong that we're becoming a nation of homes without people AND people without homes.

[bhikkhu]

71. Yet in the OP here, it is suggested that we should follow a path where they get nothing

- reject the settlement and the help of 20 billion for homeowners, so the AG of NY can pursue the banks to the benefit of some big investment firms.

Ironic what you find when you actually read the articles. I do agree with your perspective, of course. I just wish arguments here looked at the information before building up a big head of ODS-type steam.

[girl gone mad]

76. Meh.

Quit making stuff up.

[bhikkhu]

81. I can't find any indication that he is acting except for investment firms

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/07/13/is-new-yorks-a-g-looking-to-challenge-bofa-settlement/?ref=erictschneiderman

...etc. If you have any information, I'd be interested.

[_ed_]

19. False Choice

It's a false choice logical fallacy between "helping homeowners" and "prosecuting Wall Street criminals." We can do both, and do both well.

[woo me with science]

20. What a stunningly patronizing and insulting argument they are making.

To argue that helping homeowners necessitates letting banks off the hook is perhaps the most offensive pantload we have received yet from the Powers that Be.

[Inuca]

21. Once again from the same short article

A possible settlement emerged in March, with institutions including Bank of America, Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo being asked to pay about $20 billion for loan modifications and possibly counseling for homeowners. The attorneys general would have agreed not to litigate further on matters relating to the improper bank practices. The banks balked at the $20 billion; talks seemed to stall as Schneiderman and a others questioned the deal.

$20 billion does not sound like "letting banks off the hook" and the banks do not seem to be too happy about it. As I said above, I do not know if it is a good decision or not, I do not have enough information nor enough general knowledge about these issues. I always refrain from passing judgment on things I do not know enough about and with all due humility it would be better world all around if more people did the same.

[LeftHandPath]

23. They stole more than $220 Billion!!

Allow me to rob a bank for $10 billion. I'll be happy to pay back $1 billion and not go to jail.

If you think the banks are going to help anyone stay in their homes, I have a bridge to sell you.

[tpsbmam]

39. LeftHandPath is right -- $20 billion is BS -- they stole WAY more and it would take WAY

more to repay homeowners. More importantly, it ALLOWS THIS CORRUPT BEHAVIOR TO CONTINUE! It's a slap on the hand when, what should be happening, is some of the big name bankers taking the walk of shame in cuffs and spending time in prison on felony convictions. There was massive fraud involved here, and you want to let them sweep it under the carpet for a piddling $20 billion (and that IS piddling to them)?

MASSIVE mistake. You want to start to clean up the industry, start with prosecuting the hell out of the fraudsters -- at least that would make them and others think twice in the future.

This is a totally bullshit, corporate-ass-kissing move on Obama's part.

[Ken Burch]

45. And you'll defend the same useless result

just as you always defend the useless "healthcare reform" bill(the one that didn't have any meaningful gains since it doesn't impose any price controls on the insurance industry, who will just impose premiums so massively high on people with pre-existing conditions that there will be no difference for them then there was when they companies just refused to cover such people)and the "finance reform" bill that does nothing, and the surrender on the tax cuts, and the abandonment of working people(the death of card-check means that Obama can't do anything of value for working people this administration, since nothing short of that was worth a damn).

And you undoubtedly cheer for all his wars as well.

[Enthusiast]

28. Pantload it is. nt

[Little Star]

22. Yawn! What else is new?

[florida08]

24. just now a 5.8 earthquake felt in DC

lol..some shaking goin' on

[defendandprotect]

49. Was felt in NJ and all the way up to Boston -- and the Cape?

[Bryn]

73. I have my theory

Goddess Pele is angry at Hawaii's son... She has sent out a warning.

Meet Goddess of Firebaggers :)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

25. Great! Another Glorious "Deal" to be added to The List.

[KansDem]

26. This, with the report that the SEC is destroying documents that could implicate Wall St. criminality

WTF is this country coming to?

[truebrit71]

32. That's SEC...

;-)

[KansDem]

oops!

:blush:

[truebrit71]

51. No worries!!!

:hi:

[woo me with science]

54. Thank you.

That info is worth kicking, in case people missed it.

[Enthusiast]

27. K&R!

Institutionalized fraud. And that is just fine with some government officials in very very high places.

Primary his ass!

[bertman]

33. Add to that FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair's comments on Sixty Minutes that

the administration would ENCOURAGE mortgage holders who had improperly-issued loans to accept settlements with the mortgage bankers for fraudulent mortgages and agree not to pursue legal action. Never mind that the bankers/lenders have already absconded with BILLIONS in profits from those illegal and improperly -filed loans, but they have also been given HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS BY OUR GOVERNMENT despite the fact that they sent us into a depression and caused those homeowners' home value to decrease by huge percentages.

This administration DOES NOT GIVE A RAT'S ASS about anyone but the rich and the powerful. Anyone who cannot see that by now is blind, deaf, and dumb.

REC.

[Rex]

46. Even worse, they are justifying crime that affects millions and hurts

the working class more then anyone else. Instead of doing the right thing, they are taking the easy way out.

[defendandprotect]

50. And who knows how much further to the right Obam will go -- ??? Any guesses?

[BlueJac]

35. Obama is a dream come true..........

for Wall Street not main street or the average American. Obama does = Bush at times, actually more than not, but now we have so called Dems thinking it is all good now!!!

[uponit7771]

38. ***********ANOTHER OBAMA BASHING HALF TRUTH POST******** "say people briefed on discussion"

...whatever, no direct quotes of anyone...

How many times have we been through this?!!?!!?

[bhikkhu]

65. Who needs to read the article, when the headline is so clear?

I know what you mean. I did a quick google search for what Schneiderman has said in the NYT, and what their editorial page says. They are siding with Schneiderman, but its almost a toss-up - take $20 billion from the banks today, or bet that a bigger settlement can be won in the courts at some later time.

Hardly a "good vs evil" story, and certainly nothing like corruption, except to someone who's well along with their ODS.

[hay rick]

84. Here's another article you don't have to read.

From NYT, 8/22... a little context for the $20 billion...
link: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/23/opinion/its-a-flawed-settlement.html?_r=2

The administration also says that the proposed settlement would require the banks to write down the principal balance on underwater loans. According to news reports, the banks are likely to pay around $20 billion in the deal. With 14.6 million homeowners owing $753 billion more on their mortgages than their homes are worth, how far does the administration think $20 billion would go?

It may not be good vs. evil but it sure looks like a handful of banks against millions of Americans.

[bhikkhu]

99. That's the primary article I was looking at

...and you might note, while the settlement is for one small issue -robo-signing - and the benefit all goes to homeowners, Schneiderman is opposed to it because it gets in the way of a broad case he has against the same banks, on behalf of some big investment funds.

In other words, if the settlement is dropped, there is no guarantee or even any indication that benefit will go anywhere but to investment funds.

[hay rick]

101. Huge faceless investment funds.

So it's bad guys vs. bad guys, nothing to see here- just move along.

I expect that the investment funds want to go after losses incurred from investing in "AAA" mortgage-backed securities. I also think that many of the investment funds that suffered large losses are mutual funds where mom and pop and you and I had some or all of our retirement savings parked. The funds are large enough to represent us indirectly in litigation that we could never pursue individually.

Obama's initial attempt to help distressed homeowners (HAMP) failed in large part because it relied on banks to do the right thing with little regulation or oversight. Informative article here: http://longislandbankruptcyblog.com/problems-hamp-count/

The proposed settlement sounds like more bending over backward for the banks. Banks bite the bullet for 3 cents on the mortgage-loss $1, homeowners and investors eat the rest.

[blkmusclmachine]

40. "The Banks Own The Place:"

Remember that one? Unsalvageably corrupted. Whatcha gonna do?

[DeSwiss]

41. K&R n/t

[Rex]

44. So where are all the enablers? I understand, you don't want to

post on this thread. What could you say or spin?

[banned from Kos]

53. this thread is filled with financial illiterates siding with a NY AG who wants

to go pursue MBS securitization lawsuits on BEHALF of insurance companies and big banks.

The NY AG doesn't give a fuck about compensation for bad robo-foreclosures.

[sabrina 1]

77. Give it up.

You have demonstrated time and again whose side you are on. This thread is filled with DEMOCRATS who elected DEMOCRATS to deal with the treasonous Wall St. Criminals who crashed this country's exonomy, raided its treasury and then forced the American people to bail them out.

Why are you defending those criminals?

[girl gone mad]

80. You should know from financial illiteracy..

Mr. "Michael Hudson is a liar" and "quantitative easing doesn't help the banks."

I proved you wrong in both cases.

[banned from Kos]

94. No elected Senate Democrat in DC supports your whack-doodle theories

the gold standard, anti-Fed, CT nuttiness.

None.

[girl gone mad]

111. Gold standard?

lol.

[elias7]

107. Bait much? We have learned too well from the Republicans.

Hard to discuss when people care more for the rightness of their opinion than being civil, or being well read for that matter.

[truedelphi]

52. I meant to be rec 82, but then someone un'recced it.

Party loyalty over Truth, I guess.

[paparush]

55. Reporting live, from George Bush's 3rd Term, the hits just keep on rolling.

[fascisthunter]

56. disgustingly criminal

covering up crimes that have destroyed our well being. You fucking sell-out loser!

[amborin]

58. article about this in Naked Capitalism was shocking

[Taverner]

61. Goddamn! Why is Elliot Spitzer not AG????

[alp227]

85. have you seen the documentary about Spitzer, Client 9?

That film exposed how the prostitution revelations were largely out of retaliation for Spitzer's proseuctions of Wall Street corruption.

[Taverner]

89. Makes sense to me...

He was unfairly charged

Just a fucking CLIENT????

[Plucketeer]

63. Deleted message

Well, not really. But if I let go like I'd like to....... :grr: Why not just sweep the whole fetid mess under the carpet!

[colsohlibgal]

64. Unfortunately Not Surprising At All

This is the kind of thing "lefty" Obama apologists like Stephanie Miller tend to gloss over. There are other very troubling aspects of Obama's tenure so far, such as he's locking more people up minus due process than Dubya.

What's really disturbing is for people like Stephanie to brand real progressives as the "professional left" like it's a bad thing.

The bottom line is that, so far, this has been classic bait and switch, talk a good game running, turn solidly right the minute you win.

Barack is already cranking up the 2012 bait but we all (other than Dubya) know the "fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me" truth.

[Samantha]

78. I hope he doesn't cave, there were several pension funds

who invested in those so-called triple A secure investments, and the State of NY was one that lost a lot of money. Some of the pensions involved were those of the fight fighters. Who will make that good -- or will the State of NY come out saying they need to accept a cut in the name of shared sacrifice???? New Jersey was another state that lost a lot of money.

Many of these transactions went unreported to Registrars of Deeds in various states, and the fees that would have been collected for the transfers went down the drain as well. Why exactly should states "forgive" the banks their transgressions. These banks are the least deserving of forgiveness during these economically hard times, and fire fighters and other unionized organizations should not accept the loss on behalf of their participants.

I hope the DA of NY holds the line. Make the banks settle.

Sam

[hay rick]

87. K&R

[Scurrilous]

97. Kick

:kick:

[GeorgeGist]

103. If you believe the ritch are going to save America ...

then by all means vote for Obama.

[PufPuf23]

113. Pathetic adherence to the rule of laws and failure of DOJ.

An entitity (the USA) cannot ignore (recent) past and expect to move forward.

[Quantess]

116. No, don't think of it as "betrayal".

Obama isn't thinking about you little regular people.
It is loyalty to Wall Street.