Video Emerges That Shows Hillary Blaming 2007 Housing Crisis On Homeowners

[eridani]

http://bipartisanreport.com/2016/01/17/disgusting-video-emerges-that-shows-hillary-blaming-2007-housing-crisis-on-homeowners/

illary Clinton officially and unwittingly put yet another nail in the coffin of her presidential campaign years before it even began. It seems the high-and-mighty candidate put her foot in her mouth yet again, and this time there is no going back. An interview has been dug up from Hillary’s 2007 presidential campaign in which she actually blames Bush’s housing crisis on the homeowners who lost everything.

The very Republican statement was made at the NASDAQ headquarters on December 5, 2007 while Hillary was still the Senator of N.Y. The statement was made before the Great Recession had peaked, and before there was any talk of Wall Street reform. Hillary was a big supporter of capitalism then too, it seems, and she didn’t really seem to mind that people were losing their homes due to corrupt policies, until it went mainstream.

The ever-wrong (soon to be second-time loser) Bill wannabe was actually quoted as saying:
Most searched candidate

‘Now these economic problems are certainly not all Wall Street’s fault – not by a long shot.’

WRONG. Those economics were very much the fault of Wall Street, and that is now an indisputable fact. Hillary then went on to ask her audience of financiers to fix the problem or she would have to “consider legislation.” I’m not sure what exactly they were supposed to be fixing, since moments before she took all the blame from Wall Street and placed it on the individual homeowners who had been swindled by huge corporations like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac:

[Green Forest]

1. Wow. Disgusting. She is still defending Bill's repeal of Glass-Steagall and refusing to reinstate it

I can't understand how any Obama supporter from 2007-2008 could support her now. Their memories must be much shorter than mine, their bullshit tolerance for opportunistic, amoral politicking much higher.

[merrily]

29. Easy. The PTB of the Democratic Party backed Obama in 2008 and are backing her now.

I think that explains how people who called her the most horrible names in 2008--much worse than anything any Bernie supporter has posted about her this go round--post now as though she walks on water.

[Hoyt]

2. I think lots of people/entities share the blame for the housing crisis.

[Human101948]

4. Blaming it on homeowners was a PR effort to shift blame from the brokers...

The investment banks were packaging mortgages that they knew were garbage--

“The simultaneous selling of securities to customers and shorting them because they believed they were going to default is the most cynical use of credit information that I have ever seen,” said Sylvain R. Raynes, an expert in structured finance at R & R Consulting in New York. “When you buy protection against an event that you have a hand in causing, you are buying fire insurance on someone else’s house and then committing arson.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/24/business/24trading.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

[Hoyt]

5. I agree, but the reason the loans were unsound/garbage was part of the problem.

And it was not just homeowners with unreasonable expectations. We've always tried to make home ownership easy in this country. It just got too easy and everyone expected values to increase. And lots of people were making good living from housing and related industries. Everyone thought/hoped the situation would continue.

Like I posted, there is plenty of blame which is what Clinton said.

[Human101948]

7. Who's to Blame for the Mortgage Mess? Banks, Not Homeowners

Who's to Blame for the Mortgage Mess? Banks, Not Homeowners

Yes, every foreclosure involves a homeowner not paying his mortgage. But every foreclosure also involves a bank that made the loan. And usually another bank, or several more, that profited from securitizing the loan. And still another bank, or several, that profited from servicing the loan. Together, those banks have done three things that created the massive glut of foreclosures choking America's legal systems and laying waste to its real estate markets:

-They knowingly made millions of loans doomed for foreclosure as soon as the check was written.
-They deliberately and/or incompetently failed to modify many salvageable mortgages.
-They were so careless with their paperwork and processes that they've undermined the rule of law, clouded the title to untold numbers of properties and complicated the processing of the massive backlog of foreclosures that hurts the economically crucial real estate market.

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/01/20/whos-to-blame-for-the-mortgage-mess-banks-not-homeowners/

It was intentional fraud on the part of the mortgage brokers to approve mortgages that they knew were bad from square one. They were the professionals in the deals.

[Hoyt]

8. If banks had been saying No to loans, there would have been an uproar that the

middle class couldn't afford homes. The government was glad for the tax revenue, more happy people with homes, more jobs, low unemployment, furniture production, etc. Like I posted, plenty of blame.

[Mbrow]

11. and I guess

The illegal robo signings and foreclosing on home that didn't even have mortgages on them are the home owners fault as well? from the mortgage sales men on up them bankers set the stage to mine the wealth from communities that could ill afford them.

[Enthusiast]

13. Huge +1!

[Hoyt]

34. The illegal robot signings were a technicality. If I'm living in a house, I expect to pay someone.

With that said, more should have been done to help people who couldn't pay. But the had a part in the problem. The robot signings didn't really change anything. When I owned a house, my loan was sold several times. I still owed the money, and fact loan was sold didn't change anything. If someone made loan payments and was foreclosed on, that's a problem. But that is not what happened.

[brentspeak]

78. Yeah, I'm sure that Woody Guthrie would have agreed with you

that the bank-endorsed criminal robo-signings were merely a "technicality", and that the millions of homeowners who lost everything due to Wall Street's malfeasance and greed played were "a part of the problem".

You realize your postings here on DU are continuing source of unintentional comedy, right?

[Hoyt]

79. The robo signings were still a technicality that was used to forestall foreclosure -- which I'm fine

with. But, robo-signing didn't take anyone's home or bypass the foreclosure process that takes months and allows people to provide proof they paid if that is the accusation, which it wasn't. It also allowed people to restructure if they could. Robo-signing was simply a technicality that didn't cause anyone to miss making payments for months, maybe years. Now, there were other factors that did that, but not robo-signing.

You realize your wanting to blame everything on the so-called "oligarchs" is a major reason we have Donald Trumps in a position to take the Presidency, TPartiers and can't get decent legislation passed in Congress.

[Human101948]

30. A totally discredited right wing argument...

No, Lending To Poor People Did Not Cause The Financial Crisis

Despite the multiple times the right wing’s arguments have been debunked, they are once again repeating the false narrative that the financial crisis was caused by government policy and lending to low-income borrowers. The latest to weigh in is former-Senator Phil Gramm. On the Wall Street Journal op-ed page, he trots out the idea that government regulators used the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) to force banks to make loans to undeserving poor people and that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac purchased doomed subprime mortgage backed securities to meet the affordable housing goals. This, he says, was the main cause of the crisis. But this idea has been thoroughly discredited...

....The argument that CRA and the affordable housing goals caused the crisis have been debunked time and time (and time and time and time and time and time) again. The CRA has been in place since 1977, while subprime lending only skyrocketed in the 2000s. Even if one concentrates on the changes in enforcement of the act in 1995 (as Gramm does), the Act does nothing to explain the massive uptick in subprime lending concentrated from 2004 to 2006. What’s more, most subprime lenders weren’t banks and therefore weren’t even subject to CRA. That’s why only 6 percent of the high-cost mortgages at the time (a proxy for subprime) could even potentially qualify for CRA credit.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/08/15/2475531/no-lending-to-poor-people-did-not-cause-the-financial-crisis/

[merrily]

33. Baloney. Banks said no to loans throughout all history, until crap mortgage derivatives.

[freedom fighter jh]

42. Tax revenue?

Every mortgage means a fat deduction.

[Hoyt]

46. Property taxes, income tax on workers and builders, sales tax on new furnishing and stuff bought by

workers, etc. Besides, the tax deduction is another government action to promote home sales.

[freedom fighter jh]

61. Indeed, the mortgage tax deduction is government action to promote home sales.

I agree with you that there is blame to go around.

But when you said "the government was glad for the tax revenue," it looked like you meant the fed govt. No? They don't benefit from property taxes (indeed, that's another deduction) or sales taxes; states do. And I don't know that anyone is talking about state government promoting home ownership.

Blame to go around: When my now-ex and I were looking to buy a house, every realtor we talked to tried to press us into a mortgage. One told us that good financial planner "dies with a mortgage." No one had an answer to my question about what would happen if our situation were to change and we did not have enough money for payments. Because I'd been working for years while we rented and because neither of us had big spending habits, we were able to buy our house without a mortgage. If we had opted for a bigger house and a mortgage and then were not able to pay, we would have been at fault for letting those folks talk us into it, but so would they have, for talking us into it. In our case, these guys came across as professionals talking to us about our best interests. Until the crash, I felt vaguely guilty for not listening to them. Now I understand that they were just salesmen looking out for their own interests.

[Hoyt]

66. I never trust any salesperson. And yes, the mortgage folks were only interested in closing a loan,

getting their money and getting out. And they were guilty of making it too easy. I agree completely.

And it wasn't just poor people buying there first house as part of the so-called "American dream." People with higher incomes were reaching for bigger houses in the hopes of making a killing on a highly leveraged loan. I have to cut through a really rich section of town often. The number of sales and foreclosure signs there were astonishing at the time. Don't feel sorry for folks like that, to be honest -- the flippers helped to bid up the prices of houses too.

[burfman]

75. I think you've got more discipline than most Americans.

I don't know how many people are able to buy their house in cash outright that are not zillion-airs - or perhaps more likely your a lot more disciplined than most of us. I myself got one of those "home-equity" mortgages to finish off the basement in addition to the regular one when I got my house. Things went along OK till the economy melted down in 2008, took the house prices with it and at the same time the company I was with folded. Recently the worth of the house increased just enough to refinance and get it down to one mortgage. I think if the Federal deduction ever went away most of America would have to move out of their houses. Anyways - a tip of my hat for being able to not have that mortgage hanging over your head! Must be nice!

Burfman............

[freedom fighter jh]

84. It's been real nice even if the original cause was neurotic.

For years before we bought the house, I had a well-paying job but no children yet, not much purpose in life, and not many expensive desires. That made it easy to save money.

I don't know if discipline had much to do with it.

[burfman]

85. Makes perfect sense in retrospect.

Kids -> purpose in life. House paid off & not many expensive desires -> being able to know that you could walk away from the nice paying job if so desired and spend more time with the kids. So maybe you weren't being so neurotic.

[freedom fighter jh]

88. Thanks, Burfman.

I was just being kind of purposeless until the kids came. As I am again, now that they're grown and gone.

And yeah, I did quit my job once the old man got a well-paid gig and we moved out to the burbs. It was good to be able to to be home and raise the kids till they started school.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

70. Your attempts to absolve Wall Street of blame for the crash is inexcusable. It is established fact they

...we're responsible for th

[Enthusiast]

12. Huge +1!

[Hoyt]

82. For the most part, the loans were bad only if prices dropped. Otherwise if one got in trouble, they

could sell the house at least at or about breakeven with the mortgage balance. I still believe lots of folks/entities were involved in the problem. I agree bankers pushed loans like drugs, and didn't take steps to to modify salvageable mortgages. But, I also believe too many people who took the loans weren't thinking about what they would do if they lost a job, had an illness, etc., thinking they'd cash in on the skyrocketing value of homes.

[merrily]

31. Your posts are way off base. Since forever, banks were the ones who decided whether a borrower

could afford a loan or not. Once crap mortgage derivatives came into the picture, banks were actually paying loan originators more for risky loans. The average borrower was clueless about the sudden shift. They were assuming that, if the bank granted the mortgage, the bank had determined they could afford to pay it.

[Hoyt]

40. I agree the system rewarded more loans. But the government didn't crack down on

that. And people - including well to do folks - did take out loans they couldn't pay.

Like I said, a lot of people/entities are to blame.

[merrily]

41. FYI. Repeating yourself doesn't improve your position. It only wastes time.

[Hoyt]

44. Maybe the "average buyer should have had a clue" before taking out a mortgage the

couldn't afford and planning on getting rich as the home value kept going up. And the banks shouldn't have packaged the loans, Freddie should have looked closed, government regulators should have required tougher lending requirements, etc. Lots of folks/entities played a part.

[Vincardog]

81. IF every loan had been paid in full it couldn't have covered all the fraudulent derivatives

Manufactured by the Banksters.
They packaged garbage loans into THOUSANDS of times more AAA+ derivatives.
They sold these lethal financial instruments to retirement funds looking for safe returns,
and bought insurance to benefit themselves when they blew up.

The blame lays entirely with the Bankster and their fraudulent business practices.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

86. this is the heart of the matter

if the "banks" making the loans would have had to keep them on their books - it would have never happened

[CorporatistNation]

69. Hillary IS TOAST on The Wall Street Stuff! THIS Just Adds More Fuel To The Fire

that is quickly becoming more broadly known while bolstering the solid foundation of Bernie Sanders serious contention for the Democratic nomination in 2016. Her propensity for saying whatever she thinks will work for whomever in any given moment is her undoing.

[Peregrine Took]

77. + 100 n/t

[jfern]

3. Hillary is definitely the Republican kind of Democrat

[Helen Borg]

6. Those bums!

[davidpdx]

9. OMG how dare you dig up something that happened over 8 years ago

*Poutage*

[BlueJazz]

10. She's changed now.

4 worse. What happened to the Hillary that bravely fought for us regarding health-care-for-all years ago?.

[SwampG8r]

15. She didnt exist

She was a pr creation
Her statements this week open a new window into why she "failed" in the 90s
She never tried for single payer just lip service to look good

[Hoppy]

14. That's why I'm voting for Hillary. She told her audience of financiers to fix the problem. Then, she

told them to "Cut it out."

The economy hasn't tanked since then so they must have listened to her and fixed it.

[notadmblnd]

35. Yeah, she fixed it all alright. Just like she solved Flint Michigan's

poison water problem last night simultaneously during the debate. She didn't say whether she told the governor to "cut it out."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1023251

[DisgustipatedinCA]

16. She was the Senator of Wall Street. Ironically, this is one of her claims I actually do believe.

$600,000 for talking to Goldman, and now she's blaming the American people for Wall Street's disastrous fuckup.

Don't ever forget whose side this person is on.

[Divernan]

17. Her campaign's coffin is nearly one solid sea of nail heads.

From OP link:

Clinton officially and unwittingly put yet another nail in the coffin of her presidential campaign years before

PLUS, as special added bonus, she drove the very first nail into "the coffin" of her daughter's greatly anticipated political future, via "Chelsea's First Lie".

Yes, friends, in 2020, when the Clintons announce Chelsea to run for Senate, we'll all be reminiscing about where we were when we heard Chelsea's first lie. Watch out Kirsten Gillibrand. Don't you be running again in 2020! It's Chelsea's turn! The facts that Chelsea lives in a modest $10.5 million "apartment" and has a husband who owns his very own hedge fund, will make her Wall Street's darling, for sure!

And remember, fellow Democrats, when it comes to a New York seat in the United States Senate, the Clinton Family always has right of first refusal!

[CorporatistNation]

71. Spread the Word... Upcoming Voters Deserve to Be FULLY INFORMED!

!

[newfie11]

18. Good!!!

Let it all surface!

[Vinca]

19. At least we know where her true allegiance lies.

Not that it's been a big mystery.

[dsc]

20. no video for me at link

so I have to use her quotes, which I frankly doubt are fair given her hysterical presentation, but even the quotes she cherry picks aren't all that bad. Yes, homeowners who lied to get loans, and more than a few did, are responsible for what they did. They share the blame with the bank who let them do it.

[KingCharlemagne]

21. Despicable IGNORE - nt

[stevenleser]

26. As the person who responded to you shows, you are not allowed to be levelheaded about this.

You and Hoyt above have it right.

First of all the quotes don't really indicate Hillary said what the OP said she did.

OP seems to suggest she blamed the whole thing on homeowners. She didn't. She spread the blame around to all responsible.

And yes, if you take out a loan you know you cannot possibly afford, you bear part of the responsibility. Lots of folks who couldn't afford homes and knew they couldn't afford homes did not opt to get one of these mortgages.

And yes, disreputable mortgage brokers were selling all kinds of sunshine and B.S. to encourage folks to get the loans and the bankers were greedy and all that. Doesn't change the fact that folks bear some responsibility if they get themselves in over their heads financially.

[merrily]

36. Wrong. See Reply 31. Hillary is saying the same thing right wingers on CNBC were saying in 2008.

[JRLeft]

27. Here you go.

https://m.

[dsc]

39. i mean the video where she says what is quoted

[JRLeft]

45. This quote?

‘Now these economic problems are certainly not all Wall Street’s fault – not by a long shot.’

She did blame the homeowners in that video.

[stevenleser]

47. Did you even read what you posted. Not ALL Wall streets fault. That means it is partially Wall

Streets fault.

[JRLeft]

50. I guess as a Clinton supporter you're looking for a way to

soften the blowback she's going to receive from her own words.

[stevenleser]

51. I guess as a Sanders supporter, you are eager to distort anything his opponents say. nt

[JRLeft]

55. You know damn well she blamed the homeowners in that video, but

you want to pretend like she's not saying that in her video.

[stevenleser]

56. No, I'm not pretending she doesnt think homeowners deserve part of the blame. I'm reality based.

I'm not conveniently ignoring the totality of her point like you are.

[JRLeft]

57. She's blinded by the Wall Street cash she receives personally and for her campaign.

[stevenleser]

64. That's an interesting attempt to move the goalposts from the field to the ocean but its meaningless.

[dsc]

49. not the one you posted

you posted the I represented wall street. sorry it does have one of her quotes I didn't realize she spliced two vidoes together, she should have labeled that instead of leaving us guessing. But this is clearly taken out of context but even then, Hillary is right on that. Some homeowners decided to try to get something for nothing and got burned. They deserve some of the blame.

[JRLeft]

52. There was another clip in the video watch again the entire video..

The quote is there she blames homeowners.

[dsc]

53. I saw it now

not your fault but the video should have been labeled as a cut and paste.

[stevenleser]

48. You can see you are not going to get anywhere even though you are clearly right. nt

[AllyCat]

22. Yeah, and cut it out! Or something.

Wish there was more of that video. Quite short and hard for context to be established

[Javaman]

23. it's amazing to me how anyone continues supports her.

to them, she's just A-Okay as long as she changes her mind to fit the new narrative.

I don't trust her, I never ever will. And this is just more evidence to support that.

[JRLeft]

24. Bernie should air that ad.

[CharlotteVale]

28. Yes, and bring it up at the next debate.

[merrily]

37. In all likelihood, the next debate will be too late. They planned it that way.

I don't think they've even set a date for it yet.

[morningfog]

59. There is one more scheduled in Feb, before Super Tuesday.

[merrily]

60. Thanks! Just not before Iowa and NH. I must have conflated.

[Kalidurga]

32. It's Hillary's 47% moment.

[RiverLover]

25. OMG, her HUSBAND is one of those to blame for the housing crisis. The only good thing about her

blaming banks' victims is that she shows she (& her husband) have been republicans all along, who infiltrated our party.

....During the Clinton administration, the CRA was reinvigorated and used to control mergers. President Clinton said the CRA “was pretty well moribund until we took office. Over 95 percent of the community investment … made in the 22 years of that law have been made in the six and a half years that I’ve been in office.”[123] The CRA became an important tool in Clinton’s “third way” as an alternative to both laissez-faire and government transfer payments to directly construct housing.[122]

CRA ratings, however, and not CRA loans, were the main tools of altering banking practices. A poor rating prevented mergers. Community activist groups became an important part of the merger process. Their support was crucial to most mergers and in return the banks supported their organizations. By 2000 banks gave $9.5 billion of support to activist groups and in return these groups testified in favor of select mergers. The creation by mergers of the mega-bank WaMu in 1999 came with a ten-year CRA $120 billion agreement to fund housing activist efforts. In return CRA activists back the merger of one of “worst-run banks and among the largest and earliest banks to fail in the 2007–09 subprime crisis.”[122]

Banks that refused to abandon traditional credit practices remained small. By controlling mergers, CRA ratings created “believer banks” that not only originated loans labeled CRA-loans but extended easy credit across the board.

By controlling the merger process the government was able to breed easy-credit banks by a process of artificial selection.[122]...

Wiki

So many of today's problems stem from the damage that man did as our president, and people are ignoring it. Its so frustrating. He may have lucked into a robust bubble economy while in office, but that is no excuse for us to ignore all he did to spur trickle down republican policies which have dogged US ever since he left office.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12778899

[merrily]

38. Yep, and not only because of repeal of Glass Steagall, either, but she blamed it on Bernie!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511024747

[RiverLover]

43. Seriously. There are no words.

Seething anger. That's all I've got right now.

[merrily]

62. Oh, RiverLover, please let it go. It creates cortisol in your body and cortisol is evil,

unless you are in the process escaping a charging hippo or something equally urgent and energy draining.

Force yourself to smile. Even that makes your body create stuff that is better for you than cortisol.

[Ino]

73. I'm going to print out your post...

and put it on my monitor. Good words!

You're not called merrily for nothing

[Bread and Circus]

54. "Now these economic problems are certainly not all Wall Street’s fault – not by a long shot."

Where is the video or proof she said this? What was the context?

[RiverLover]

58. Here you go~

[Bread and Circus]

63. The quote I am asking about is not in that video

To me, If feel it is the most damning quote as it essentially exonerates her buddies on Wall Street. However, where is the evidence of the quote?

[Oilwellian]

67. Here's the entire speech (and quote)

She said it at 4:45.

[Bread and Circus]

74. Thank you very much.

[merrily]

65. Remind me who or what made available the option of paying extra fees to avoid documenting income?

[bvar22]

87. It is the banks JOB to protect their depositers money.

Coming up with a scam to give people Thousands & Thousands without checking their background and income is gross malfeasance on the part of the banks, and should be a felony.

[merrily]

89. Agree!

[EndElectoral]

68. Yeah, that's pretty disgusting.

[Quixote1818]

72. kick

[azmom]

76. Kick

[Babel_17]

80. Institutional responsibility is separate from individual responsibility

People are responsible for how they took out loans. The investment sector is responsible for bringing the economy crashing down.

Can we somewhat agree on that?

Individual homeowners didn't all approach the mortgage industry and say, "Here's an idea, make me complicit in a scheme to give out crazy mortgages to people who should think twice about getting good ones."

In the movies we sometimes see a criminal create a diversion by throwing lots of cash in the air. Nobody is surprised by the reflex of people to grab the cash. Taking out a mortgage is not a reflex, but the motivation of those throwing those mortgages around isn't fundamentally different from those of the criminal trying to get away by throwing cash in the air.

They both committed a crime, and were in so deep that that they had to play things out. Those mortgages were made available due to systemic failure. We saw the collapse they signified coming, and didn't stop it.

[nashville_brook]

83. devasting.

[Bernblu]

90. Disgusting is correct. She's a brought and paid for by the Banksters

[WillyT]

91. Jesus...

[azmom]

92. She's done