The bank settlement negotiations and deal are not figments of progressives' imaginations.

Thanks for making this an OP....

That's just wrong.

and that Timothy Geithner and Liz Fowler working for this or that company has no connection to them creating policies benefiting those companies at the 99%'s expense

maybe we should just be ingoring anyone who drags up those tropes--they clearly show that they're not only not paying attention, but are wilfully covering their sense-holes

Very small part of the picture. Nothing there about immunity for servicing or origination issues, or securitization.

Plenty of hooks for the banks to be on still. Plenty of red meat for the President's task force.

of the task force.

There has been, forgive me, breathless speculation about how far immunity for banks might go.

That the current deal proposal focuses strictly on foreclosure procedures should shock you and everyone else on DU. That's nothing compared to what's out there. And frankly the tiny amount of "immunity" being offered is completely on par with the relatively tiny sum being bandied about as settlement money.

You should provide the details and directly refute the "breathless" (LOL) speculation point by point.

Tiny piece of the pie. Awful and criminal behavior, but a fraction of what's available to go after banks with.

the same deal that progressives were supposedly all "breathless" (LOL) over a few days ago.

more. Why is the link in this article different to what was posted recently as the deal that was being proposed? That deal definitely was proposing stopping any lawsuits by victims of those practices with a settlement with the banks. I am not sure if it would have prevented criminal prosecutions.

But no one was dreaming, and this was not the first such proposal. The problem they are having getting these proposals agreed upon, is that the people, many of them victims, will not accept letting the banks off the hook again.

And secondly, because of States Attorneys such as CA and NY who have refused to go along with them. And the protests that have targeted the banks. So had not all these factors been present, there is little doubt that a proposal to let the banks off the hook with a slap on the wrist, which is what that money is to them, would have happened by now.

The pressure that was put on the States Attorneys nearly worked, but they were pressured by the people in their states not to even think about it. Last week the number of States Attorneys refusing to join such an agreement grew to 13.

Had it not been for the 'breathless' dissenters, none of what is now happening would have happened. So thank you all, breathless dissenters, we need more, not fewer of them.

needs this.

"The bank settlement negotiations and deal are not figments of progressives' imaginations."

...settlement was alway out there, never finalized. The rumor wasn't the settlement, it was that Obama was going to announce a deal had been reached and sellout homeowners. Neither has happened.

The deal is still being negotiated by AG Miller, this is no different from when it was rejected the last time.

As for the President, he made no mention of the settlement, but came out strong by announcing the appointment of Schneiderman to investigate mortgage fraud.

In fact, Schneiderman is still rejecting the settlement.



Banks square in mortgage fraud crosshairs again
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002225832

http://www.dsnews.com/articles/state-ags-reviewing-settlement-draft-2012-01-23

Progressives and progressive news and blogs accurately reported what Obama's admin announced.

"The Obama admin made the announcement that they were weeks away from announcing a settlement."

How does a report that they're nearing a deal in three weeks equate to Obama is going to announce (allegedly in the SOTU) a deal selling out homeowners?

He did the exact opposite: He announce an investigation headed by the AG who is the most vocal critics of the banks.

own admin stated that they were weeks away from making an announcement. Thus, the "breathless" (LOL) promotion came from the horse's mouth not by "breathless (LOL) progressives. The links provided by the "poof" OP (http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002224852) do not support the claim that Obama was going to announce the deal during SOTU no matter how much people want to pretend otherwise.

By the way, the negotiations still continue despite Obama's SOTU address.

So, no. He did not do the "exact opposite."

mmmmmm.

The only "trained monkeys" I have observed are those who attempting to muddy the waters and divert attention from this issue.
The time to speak out is NOW,
not after the fact.