Bank Bailout 2: Obama Lets Mortgage Abusers Off the Hook Leave No One Accountable

[Better Believe It]

Bank Bailout 2: Obama Lets Mortgage Abusers Off the Hook
The Obama Administration has followed a predictable pattern: Leave No One Accountable
By Common Dreams staff
February 9, 2012

After months of talks with state and federal officials, the banks have reportedly agreed to help some homeowners reduce their mortgage debt or refinance their homes at lower rates. Over 4 million familes lost their homes to foreclosure yet just 750,000 people who lost their homes to foreclosure will receive a one-time check for just $1,800 to $2,000, which for many will barely cover the cost of moving. The deal will only help a fraction of the struggling homeowners affected by the bank’s practices.

New York and California have reportedly signed off on the deal after initially holding it up in protest of lenient treatment of the banks.

The deal gives banks immunity from civil lawsuits for "robosigning," a practice whereby homeowners were rapidly evicted without proper vetting.

In his January 24th State of the Union address, President Obama promised a fresh investigation into mortgage abuses that led to the financial meltdown. Now, before that investigation has even begun, Obama is granting these 5 "too big to fail" banks immunity from "robo-signing" abuses.

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/02/09-5


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

The Top Twelve Reasons Why You Should Hate the Mortgage Settlement
By Yves Smith
February 9, 2012

1. We’ve now set a price for forgeries and fabricating documents. It’s $2000 per loan. This is a rounding error compared to the chain of title problem these systematic practices were designed to circumvent. The cost is also trivial in comparison to the average loan, which is roughly $180k, so the settlement represents about 1% of loan balances. It is less than the price of the title insurance that banks failed to get when they transferred the loans to the trust. It is a fraction of the cost of the legal expenses when foreclosures are challenged. It’s a great deal for the banks because no one is at any of the servicers going to jail for forgery and the banks have set the upper bound of the cost of riding roughshod over 300 years of real estate law.

2. That $26 billion is actually $5 billion of bank money and the rest is your money. The mortgage principal writedowns are guaranteed to come almost entirely from securitized loans, which means from investors, which in turn means taxpayers via Fannie and Freddie, pension funds, insurers, and 401 (k)s. Refis of performing loans also reduce income to those very same investors.

3. That $5 billion divided among the big banks wouldn’t even represent a significant quarterly hit. Freddie and Fannie putbacks to the major banks have been running at that level each quarter.

4. That $20 billion actually makes bank second liens sounder, so this deal is a stealth bailout that strengthens bank balance sheets at the expense of the broader public.

Read the other 8 reasons and full article at:

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/02/the-top-twelve-reasons-why-you-should-hate-the-mortgage-settlement.html


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

Obama’s Guiding Principle: Leave No One Accountable
By: Scarecrow
February 9, 2012

The Obama Administration has followed a predictable pattern we now recognize. It has consistently functioned like criminal defense counsel, whose mission is to get their criminal clients, the major corporations and executives who fund their elections, off with no admission of guilt, no forced resignations, and as little harm to their reputation, or that of the counsel, as possible. To do this, they neutralize anyone with an ounce of public purpose in their veins.

Its role is then to convince the public that whatever you thought or feared was going on in America, and whoever you believed had caused the collapse of America’s economy, caused millions to lose their jobs, their homes and their retirements and continued to loot the country, it’s time to look forward. Because everyone who matters — and that’s not you — now agrees, they say, to function in the public interest, even though it’s a bald face lie, since nothing has changed and the looters and their complicit overseers are still in charge.

Obama’s people have performed this function for America’s looters over and over again. They did it for Wall Street, the banks, the rich tax evaders, the insurance companies, the oil companies, the gas companies, the coal companies, the CIA, the DoD, and numerous torturers and their legal/policy enablers and associated war criminals in the previous administration.

Consistent with this strategy, Obama’s team must silence, neutralize or punish anyone who protests or blows the whistle on the massive criminality and corruption involved. It must also emasculate the left and what’s left of the liberal wing of the Dem Party, using the argument that the Administration is not nearly as awful as the other Party’s people, who openly glorify looting and killing and vilifying the victims.

Read the full article at:

http://my.firedoglake.com/scarecrow/2012/02/09/obamas-guiding-principle-leave-no-one-accountable/


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

Bank Bailout Day, February 9, 2012
By emptywheel
February 9, 2012

Forty-nine states, every one but Oklahoma, as well as federal regulators, will participate in a foreclosure fraud settlement that will release the five biggest banks (Wells Fargo, Citi, Ally/GMAC, JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America) and their mortgage servicing units from liability for robo-signing and other forms of servicer abuse, in exchange for $25 billion in funding for legal aid, refinancing, short sales, restitution for wrongful foreclosures and principal reduction for underwater borrowers. The announcement will be made on Thursday.

And then there’s the settlement price: $25 billion, divided up several ways. $3 billion will go toward refinancing for current borrowers who are underwater on their loans, as well as short sales. $5 billion will go as a hard cash penalty to the states, which can use them for legal aid services, foreclosure mitigation programs, and ongoing fraud investigations in other areas (one official close to the talks feared that much of that hard cash payout will go in some Republican states toward filling their budget holes). The federal government will get a cash penalty as well. Out of that $5 billion, up to 750,000 borrowers wrongfully foreclosed upon will get a $1,800-$2,000 check if they sign up for it, the equivalent of saying to them “sorry we stole your home, here’s two months rent.”

If you read DDay’s full post (or if you’ve read anything here), it’s clear that the amount of fraud was astronomical: 60% failures in one case. And if you’ve read that far, you know this is a bail out, every much as the billions gifted to banks in September 2008 was a bailout.

The Administration wants to call this a settlement.

http://www.emptywheel.net/2012/02/09/bank-bailout-day-february-9-2012/


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

The banks have won, homeowners are re-victimized.
By: Cynthia Kouril
February 9, 2012

The NY Times is reporting that NY and California have agreed to sign on the 50 state deal and that is will immunize robo signing. If that is true, it’s over folks. The housing market is not going to recover any time soon and the court system will be permanently corrupted by forged and perjurious documents.

This settlement is an incredible breach of the social contract between the government and the governed.

On top of everything else, nobody seems to think it’s going to be helpful to the recovery of the housing market, help the economy, or do anything except bail out the banks, again. From the Times:

“I wouldn’t say it’s a panacea for the housing industry but it is good for the banks to get this behind them,” said Jason Goldberg, an analyst with Barclays.

Read the full article at:

http://my.firedoglake.com/cindykouril/2012/02/09/the-banks-have-won-homeowners-are-re-victimized/

[MrCoffee]

1. Fantastic post, thank you!

Everyone and their dog should read these articles.

[Better Believe It]

4. But I have a cat and she can't read!

[xchrom]

2. Ddu rec. Nt

[SammyWinstonJack]

3. He's making it extremely difficult to....

[Kaleko]

5. Stay asleep & oblivious?

[bvar22]

6. Well, I'm glad someone likes this "arangement".

.... it is good for the banks to get this behind them,” said Jason Goldberg, an analyst with Barclays.

You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[Dragonfli]

85. Business as....

...usual. Bi-partisan Crime and Punishment

[izquierdista]

7. Why do you want the Republicans to win?

Crying Obama supporters want to know

[FarLeftFist]

8. Was any actual law broken by the banks or is this just one of those things that are frowned upon?

Serious question. Is this a case of lack of regulation or is it a case of banks finding legal loopholes?

[chowder66]

9. This is about abuses

and what they are putting in place to create a standard going forward so these loopholes are not abused (at this level at least).

This does not stop state and federal agencies/law enforcement from pursuing further criminal activity.


http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-mortgage-settlement-announcement-20120209,0,2196038.story

[Better Believe It]

14. Almost bringing down the entire world economy into a new depression might be considered an "abuse".

Well, the banksters certainly deserve a stern warning and bailout or else they'll get another one!

[Rex]

49. So true!

"DON"T STEAL FROM THE AMERICAN PUBLIC AGAIN...unless you really need to." I wish we had adults in charge of the system and not people that like to give away MY money to crooks.

[chowder66]

66. I'm responding to you because

it seems you are either responding to someone else or you are trying very hard to put words into my meaning.

If you meant to respond to someone else then I apologize for misunderstanding your reply to my post.
If not, there is really nothing I can say because I think what I said was clear to the poster who asked the question.
I gave a snapshot reply and sent him/her a link.



Are we good?

[Better Believe It]

73. We're good! It was just a misunderstanding on my part

[nanabugg]

53. Will anyone either on the right or the left ever give President Obama credit for doing anything?

This is the first step in the direction of being able to hold individuals accountable. The Attorney General is doing everything possible with the help of the states to tackle this problem...it isn't over with this.

[MrCoffee]

54. Everything possible? How is this joke settlement "everything possible"?

Everything possible shouldn't include negotiating this vile piece of trash.

This is a major step back from holding anyone accountable.

[chowder66]

67. Hi nanabugg

It is a good step in the right direction and yet there is much more to pay attention to. I'm not sure if some can ever find good in much of anything...except maybe in their own arguments.

[Mojorabbit]

80. I heard over and over on this board that the settlement would not let them off the hook

and people would have redress in civil court but the first article says this, "
The deal gives banks immunity from civil lawsuits for "robosigning,".
That seems to preclude any second step? or am I reading this wrong?

[Dragonfli]

86. No, they only have to pay about $2,000 For each foreclosure fraud and homeowners can not sue.

They get to keep most of what they stole and this agreement will mean there is not a damn thing that can be done about it.

[Enrique]

10. they are being accused of fraud

I thought everyone knew that.

[fascisthunter]

59. nah... see, this article came out, and now people pretend to not know

[MrCoffee]

11. You're asking four different questions there

Actual law broken? Almost certainly the banks committed fraud, but it's going to be insanely difficult and staggeringly expensive to prove to a jury

Frowned upon? Not by Wall Street, clearly. They caused this mess to begin with.

Lack of regulation? Absolutely. The repeal of Glass-Steagall and the enactment of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act led directly to the financial crisis, there's no doubt about that at all.


Legal loopholes? The banks drove the proverbial truck through every one they could find.

[PufPuf23]

21. Excellent post MrCoffee nt

[FarLeftFist]

39. Thanks for clearing that up. Obviously this is:

1-An extremely good argument for stronger regulations.
2-A joke of a payout.

[MrCoffee]

42. Both of those are absolutely true

Especially the joke of a payout.

[Mojorabbit]

81. I would love to see a few jury trials in places like Detroit

before this is adopted. I bet there might be some cases won. It would be lovely to see it it would be so.

[sabrina 1]

20. The Robo signing was a crime. Just this past week, finally, at last,

ONE CEO was indicted on that charge. So I guess they needed to hurry up to prevent any other small town DA from going ahead and indicting a few more of them. All of them are now off the hook for that crime.

And it's no thanks to the DOJ that this part of the whole fraudulent scheme was even discovered. The corruption of the record-keeping of home ownership was only revealed when ordinary people fought back against wrongful fore-closures and took their cases to court. One of those suits, in Florida, uncovered the robo-signing on behalf of Banks that could not produce proper documentation showing them to have the right to foreclose. From there it was discovered to be widespread across the country. So, I guess something had to be done to protect the criminals, and now it has.

And, robo-signing was not the only crime, but it is the one they have now been given immunity from and the one that could have landed lots of people in jail.

[Robb]

22. Civil courts can't "land people in jail." They've been given only civil immunity on robo-signing.

Jail is still an option.

In the agreement’s expected final form, the releases are mostly limited to the foreclosure process, like the eviction of homeowners after only a cursory examination of documents, a practice known as robo-signing.

The prosecutors and regulators still have the right to investigate other elements that contributed to the housing bubble, like the assembly of risky mortgages into securities that were sold to investors and later soured, as well as insurance and tax fraud.

Officials will also be able to pursue any allegations of criminal wrongdoing. In addition, a lawsuit Mr. Schneiderman filed Friday against MERS, an electronic mortgage registry responsible for much of the robo-signing that has marred the foreclosure process nationwide, and three banks, Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo, will also go forward.

[sabrina 1]

40. It's not clear in the article, that the immunity from charges re robo-signing

is only civil? This is what it says about robo-signing:

The immunity the banks receive for this payment is fairly narrow, certainly in comparison to what had been rumored earlier. The banks will only be released from investigations and charges related to foreclosure fraud and robo-signing—not all the malfeasance leading up to the crash, like the origination and securitization of bad mortgages.

That is not clear imo. But hopefully you are right.



The only case so far of a CEO charged in the Robo-signing fraud which happened just a few days ago:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/07/robo-signing-docx-missouri_n_1261369.html

The bolded excerpt does seem to confirm that it is only civil immunity though:

For the first time since the start of the robo-signing crisis, a senior executive has been indicted on criminal charges of forgery and faces jail. The forgery charges against a mortgage processing executive come as the nation's largest banks attempt to close the books on a civil investigation into widespread document fraud and could spark further federal criminal cases.

A grand jury in Missouri handed up the 136-count indictment late last week charging Georgia-based DocX -- a subsidiary of the massive mortgage processor Lender Processing Services -- and its founder and former president Lorraine O. Brown, with forgery. The indictment alleges that DocX employees fabricated signatures on hundreds of real estate documents, some used in foreclosures.

"This is the first time any grand jury in the country has indicted a corporation or a high-level executive at a corporation for 'robo-signing,'" Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster told The Huffington Post. "The grand jury is alleging that the documents have false signatures on them, that the notarizations are fraudulent and that it was all done with an intent to deceive. If that’s true, it makes the [foreclosure] documents forgeries."

I hope it is only Civil. This is a better deal than the original one, and kudos to Schneiderman and Harris for holding out to improve it. But imo, there should have been no deals made and let the law take its course as it does for the rest of us.

[jsmirman]

63. Unless I am mistaken

and unless articles I've read today are mistaken, criminal liability is most definitely not off the table.

[sabrina 1]

68. I know they are not off the table for most of the criminal activities, but

I am not sure about the robo signing. Hopefully they can still prosecute those cases as they were definitely crimes which destroyed the record-keeping not to mention the people who lost their homes as a result of faked documents.

[fasttense]

89. It was actual fraud.

The bankster corporations signed millions of papers knowing they were false. They created, out of whole cloth, paperwork to make it appear as if the deeds were filed appropriately (including creating some documents that confiscated homes NOT under foreclosure or even having a current mortgage). They failed to file millions of documents in state and county records offices so they would not have to pay taxes and fees. They broke the chain of custody on million of deeds so that those titles will always be in question. They illegally foreclosed on millions of families.

Yeah, there were actual crimes committed but no one will be accountable.

[woo me with science]

12. This will continue until we get the money out of politics.

Occupy.

[sabrina 1]

46. And we seem to be going in the opposite direction on that issue also. There is

more money than ever in the system, which only means that more is owed to the campaign donors than ever before. Unless there is a miracle at this point, the prospects of what just happened are even greater now, than they were before.

It really is up to the people at this point. How can someone decent even run for office without millions of dollars, or in the case of the WH, a billion as of this year, coming from somewhere.

And each time it gets worse, we are told to be patient, wait until THIS election is over, THEN we'll fix it. I could make a long list of what was supposed to be fixed after each one of the past several elections. Not a single thing has been fixed, war crimes that I am aware of.

[fascisthunter]

60. Occupy is THE ONLY way

Democrats are just not listening... their little workers are arrogantly ignoring reality, so why even bother. Occupy.

[hifiguy]

13. What did you expect?

In all seriousness, has anything Obama has done in the last three years led you to believe that the banksters are not Priority No. 1 for him and the rest of this nation's political apparatus?

No that doesn't mean I won't hold my nose and vote for him. So settle the eff down.

[Better Believe It]

16. We may have to hold more than our nose.

[Robb]

15. I disagree, apparently.

Five banks are off the hook for civil lawsuits on a single issue (robo-signing).

Those five can still be sued in civil court on any number of other issues -- loan origination, valuation fraud/conspiracy, misrepresentation, etc.

And, notable, every bank in the country is still on the hook for criminal charges stemming from, well, anything.

But please, continue.

[Better Believe It]

18. This was the lawsuit. It's now a done deal. Not a very good one.

[Robb]

19. No, this was a single settlement. Come on now.

[Better Believe It]

50. So post information on all of the other lawsuits that are being litigated. They must be big ones!

Thanks for the information.

I thought this was the biggest and most important lawsuit against the banksters.

I guess it's just short of being meaningless so we should all move along.

Nothing to see here!

[fascisthunter]

61. well done!

[Robb]

69. That's some misplaced smugness, considering one of them is already mentioned in this thread.

Had you read through the responses, or really the news in the past few weeks you might've noticed.

Here's the first complaint: http://www.ag.ny.gov/media_center/2012/feb/FINAL-SUMMONS-AND-COMPLAINT.pdf

In the unlikely event you read it, note the list of defendants. Also, as I said upthread, there are 49 more states out there with their own attorneys general.

Your sources, as pointed out elsewhere in this thread, are not always as reliable as one might hope. I wish I had a suggestion to help you, but I'm at a loss.

[MrCoffee]

23. And there are so many things wrong with that one issue it's hard to keep track of them all

Without the suits on robo-signing, what happens to the chain of title question? That's kind of a big deal.

As was stated brilliantly here: "We’ve now set a price for forgeries and fabricating documents. It’s $2000 per loan."

The civil lawsuits on robo-signing were the EASY suits to investigate/prosecute. You realize how incredibly difficult and insanely expensive it is to investigate and prosecute the easy ones, right? The criminal cases (if any actually go forward to trial, which I doubt, primarily because of the difficulty of prosecution) will be nightmares. Yet we sold them away for NOTHING.

If all it was was to settle one issue, why give the banks $20,000,000,000.00 in NEW MBS business to pay for the write-down/refi part? Why throw another bailout into the mix?

[Robb]

27. These five banks are forking over $26-39 billion. To settle one issue.

There is a task force in place to press a hundred others. I predict they will start with the low-hanging fruit -- origination.

I don't share your pessimism in the least. This was fluff, and both sides know it. The real fight is ahead.

The first major shot is New York’s MERS lawsuit, which is going forward with the blessing of this settlement. There are 49 more states.

[MrCoffee]

28. They are absolutely NOT forking over anywhere near that

The biggest hunk of the settlement is the $ 20 billion write-down/refi credits to the banks...the banks get to issue new securitized loans on the mortgages...that money is coming from institutional investors and taxpayers through Fannie/Freddie.

The banks are NOT forking that money over.

The kicker is that the $20 billion could actually be an overpayment of what the banks would have done anyway. ProSense linked to this Emphasis is mine

Dean Baker, co-director at the Center for Economic and Policy Research:

“I’m not thrilled with the settlement, since it doesn’t accomplish much, but at least it doesn’t preclude further civil or criminal suits. In terms of the commitment of payments in the form of write-downs, we don’t have a clear counterfactual that allows us to gage how much would have been written down anyhow. We also have the peculiar situation where the banks get to pay the penalty with write-downs of debts to MBS investors.

As for MERS, I think Schneiderman sold us out by signing off on this monstrosity in order to preserve his pet lawsuit. Can't prove anything of the sort, but it's the feeling I get.

[Robb]

33. Those five banks are setting aside reserves.

They are also continuing to be in the business of banking, at least for the moment. Don't conflate the two.

The five mortgage servicers in the settlement — Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citigroup and Ally Financial — have largely set aside reserves for the expected cost of the accord and investors are likely to cheer its announcement because it removes one more legal worry for the industry, analysts said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/09/business/states-negotiate-25-billion-deal-for-homeowners.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&emc=na

[MrCoffee]

35. The expected cost does not include the write-down/refi

The expected cost is the $2,000 checks they'll be writing to people who were illegally foreclosed on.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

29. Really? So in your mind, Obama is giving hell to the big bankers?

39B is nothing compared to the fucking they deserved and would have likely gotten had this deal not been struck. Is there ANYTHING Obama could do that you wouldn't defend without need for prior consideration?

[Robb]

32. And "immunity against civil suits on robosigning" is equally nothing.

"Is there ANYTHING Obama could do that you wouldn't defend without need for prior consideration?"

I have, unlike some here, a record that criticizes and praises this administration when events warrant.

Why you feel it must be about me speaks to the weakness of your position, I think. Are you able to make an argument without resorting to "Oh, you like everything Obama does!" nonsense?

[Better Believe It]

51. Please post credible links on the "real fight ahead"lawsuit.

I just haven't seen much about that fight in the news or on the internet.

I'm sure it exists!

Looking forward to your links.

[Robb]

70. You have an opportunity to self-delete this post and save face.

An apology would be refreshing, too. But whichever. http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002289221#post69

[Better Believe It]

74. So that's the really big ground braking lawsuit we need to watch and should ignore this settlement?

The national lawsuit agreement just announced pales in comparison to the one you posted that's been initiated by a single state.

Sure.

You're kidding.

Right?

[Robb]

75. Very dishonest, not at all what I said. You said "this was the lawsuit. It's now a done deal."

This is the first lawsuit. I showed you the second.

The next 49 will be equally interesting.

[Better Believe It]

91. OK Let's see your links to the other 49 lawsuits that matter.

But, are you OK with the major lawsuit or do you think the banksters have been punished to severely?

[Robb]

94. You're going to have to kick your own propaganda today.

It's clear you want to shout around the facts. Have at it.

[PufPuf23]

17. Organized corporate crime pays in the USA.

Justice for the People is not even on the table but establishing limited liability and immunity for systematic fraud -- illegal in fact or not covered by law -- is the heart of the federal or state solutions regardless of Party.

The result of the savings and loans scandal, financial institutions were broken up, disbanded, and paid fines. Individuals paid fines, went to jail, and were barred for life from the financial industry. Resolution Trust Corporation sorted out the mess and sold viable business back to the private sector.

The People were systematically led like sheep into an economic bubble and fleeced as are the tax payer and other citizens.

[woo me with science]

99. Well said. nt

[MineralMan]

24. I think I'll check the analysis from other sources.

Yours are frequently unreliable and distorted. Until then, I don't believe anything entirely. Good luck. I'm sure some will believe whatever you tell them to. I'm not among those.

[MrCoffee]

25. The blue link bank is already being built

Stay tuned, I'm sure there are more to come.

[FSogol]

30. Well said. n/t

[DisgustipatedinCA]

31. BBI didn't analyze anything. Links were posted. You have no space to talk about unreliability

I know you like to let uncomfortable threads die, but I think you're off your freaking rocker if you want to talk about someone's reliability and honesty. I know where you spent the Bush years, and I'll never forget that you lived a lie for a long, long time--you admitted as much. Now, whose judgment and veracity do you wish to question?

[MineralMan]

34. He or she chose the articles to post. I find those sources to be unreliable.

As for the Bush years, I have no idea what you are talking about. If you're going to play more games with the time when I posted on Free Rebublic, you're wasting your time. I left there in 2006, and spent my time there battling over science and bigotry. It was a wasted effort.

I'm not attacking BetterBelieveIt. I'm saying that the sources he quoted are unreliable and biased against President Obama in many areas. I will look for other analyses.

Since BetterBelieveIt did not say what he or she thought about those articles, I will assume that he or she really holds no ideas regarding this, and is only posting other people's thoughts.

[Kaleko]

62. Several glaring self-contradictions stand out

in your post. I will address only one of them.

In the above post you create the impression that your 4 years at Free Republic were spent in vain.

I left there in 2006, and spent my time there battling over science and bigotry. It was a wasted effort.

But here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=248827

and in several other posts on the same thread, you profess to be proud of doing a lot more than educating Freepers.

...I also worked quietly to provoke people into behavior that got them banned at that site. I was acting as a provocateur and disrupter at that site. I was very successful at that.

How do we know that you are not using the same skills you perfected at FR just to get people banned from this site?

[MineralMan]

64. Read my posts on DU.

I don't know what more I can tell you than that. I'm not doing that on DU. I'm a lifelong Democrat and Democratic activist. You're welcome to read all 40,000+ posts I've made here.

[sabrina 1]

79. Those sources are extremely popular progressive sources and always have

been. Except for Naked Capitalism which deals with economic issues.

Throughout the Bush administration they were the places to go to get facts on what was going on, to uncover the lies, to point out the truth.

Nothing has changed for progressives regarding those sources. There are a few right-of-center individuals who have latched on to the Dem Party who do not like the left and who as a result have attacked progressive sources, but considering where they are coming from, no progressive cares much for their opinions.

[MineralMan]

93. Popular does not always equal accurate.

Those sources are written by many different people, and do not fact check the articles posted on them. Many times, the editorializing of articles posted on those sites ignores inconvenient aspects of an issue, and even sometimes distorts the facts that underlie the editorials.

Whenever analysis is the function of an article, it should be carefully examined against the facts. When that is done, it often turns out that the articles from those sources are not actually well-analyzed.

Yes, they may well be popular with one group, but still may not be accurate. I do not use any of those sources for researching news stories. I've not found them to be useful.

You will do as you please in choosing your sources. I'll do the same.

[sabrina 1]

97. Well, all of that can certainly be said of most or what makes up our current

news media. Those sources proved to be way more accurate over the past decade than CNN, The NYT and many other major, so-called respected news outlets. Which is why Progressives went to them rather than the MSM who disgraced themselves as far as journalistic standards are concerned. Today, not much has changed re the MSM. They are currently rated at approx #47 on the World's Free Press Chart. So, I would not be any more confident in getting actual facts from them now than I have been since the Bush era.

People like Emptywheel, linked to in this OP, was and is one of the most reliable people on the internet when it comes to fact-checking. Which is why she has such a big Progressive following and has had for years.

But if you want to rely on the MSM for facts, that is your decision. All I can say is that it was people like those linked to in the OP who did the fact-checking on the MSM and exposed their outright lies at times, and their substituting of memos written by the RNC for actual news more often than I can remember.

I will take those progressive sources any day over the MSM because I also know that if they make a mistake, they will correct it. Still waiting for the MSM to do the same thing except when they were caught red-handed.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

100. you got thrown out of FR

And I do know what I'm talking about. Pretend all you want. I see with my own eyes.

[MineralMan]

101. Yes, I was banned there after I left.

Last edited Fri Feb 10, 2012, 09:53 PM - Edit history (1)

Why does that matter to you, that you would post about it in a Bank Bailout thread? Not to mention a thread about helicopters in Los Angeles. Why do you care that I once used to post on Free Republic to defend science and fight bigotry, among other things?

Please don't continue along these lines. I'd appreciate that very much. I make no secret of my posting history on the Internet, nor of my political activism. Anyone can find whatever they wish about me. If you continue to post irrelevant stuff and making accusations about me in threads, I'll have to wonder about your motivations.

[Romulox]

36. Reads like a personal attack. nt

[MineralMan]

37. It's not. It's an attack on the sources.

Alert on it, if you like. I have no idea what Better Believe It's opinion is. It is not expressed in the post. However, I have seen many posts that quote those sources. Many have proven to be inaccurate and biased.

Better Believe It is just the messenger. What he or she thinks, I have no idea, based on the post.

[Kaleko]

52. Another distortion of what you actually wrote - plain to see for everyone.

You come up with so many self-contradictory statements, and spread over many different threads, it would be a full-time job to keep track of them all.

Your post #24 is directly addressed to BBI and implies that he told people what to think.

I'm sure some will believe whatever you tell them to.

[MineralMan]

65. Please enjoy yourself. You'll find plenty of my posts to examine.

[Kaleko]

72. Let's see now..

You post a personal attack, and when you get called on it, you keep denying it ever happened.

Then, when you can no longer refute what you actually said, you respond with: "Please enjoy yourself."

How's that for upholding those much-vaunted journalistic standards you use to beat up on the OP in this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002279744#top

If that's not an attempt to silence another DUer, I don't know what is.

[girl gone mad]

58. Right, these sources are just not up to your meticulous standards.

If this were instead Murdoch's NY Post attacking a progressive icon, you would wholly endorse it.

[Uncle Joe]

26. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Better Believe It.

[treestar]

38. Now we don't just micromanage the President, we micromanage federal prosecutors

And complain about settlements they make on our behalf? We'd rather spend billions on litigations which may or may not turn out favorably? I don't believe anyone without an agenda has an opinion on this settlement. Who has time to follow this litigation in the kind of detail one would have to in order to really make an informed analysis of it?

Consistent Obama bashers are of course going to be able to find some factor among the many that went into this and twist it into a "bad" thing to do.

[MrCoffee]

41. Your argument is "We can't possibly hope to understand this, so it must be good"?

That's a lousy argument in support of a $20,000,000,000.00 boondoggle for banks.

[brentspeak]

43. The argument is even worse than that

It's "Anyone who dares to take the time to look closely at the details and ask questions obviously has an agenda."

[MrCoffee]

44. The willful ignorance is staggering

Not understanding an issue is one thing. Not even bothering to understand it is something else entirely.

[Kaleko]

82. And to use that willful ignorance as a club

to bash liberals over the head with to stop them from telling uncomfortable truths takes the cake.

[sabrina 1]

84. For all those who were wrongfully foreclosed on and lost their homes,

litigation once they have demonstrated why they were wrongfully foreclosed on, is their only option to try to get back some of what they lost. After making mortgage payments for sometimes 25 years or more, putting a lot of money into improving their homes over the course of those years, only to have it stolen from them in a corrupt foreclosure process, from which they receive nothing, I think they have a right to use the courts to try to get some justice.

If it costs those who engaged in those injustices to deal with all the lawsuits they are now facing, they should have thought about that before stealing people's homes from them.

As an old saying goes 'if you can't do the time, don't do the crime'.

Why should these people be bailed out of every situation they get themselves into? I'm sure we would all love to be treated that way each time we do something wrong.

[jannyk]

45. k&r

[Major Hogwash]

47. Quoting from a blog now??

Firedoglake!!!!!

Hahahahaha!!!!!!

[MrCoffee]

48. Still laughing?

I don't really see the comedy value in giving people who were illegally foreclosed on and forced out of their homes $2,000 as a "settlement", but you must find it hilarious.

[xiamiam]

55. +1

next someone will post obamas approval rating among liberals is 95%

[Better Believe It]

57. MSNBC: Mortgage settlement leaves most homeowners to fend for themselves

Mortgage settlement leaves most homeowners to fend for themselves
By John W. Schoen, Senior Producer
The Bottom Line at MSNBC
February 9, 2012

“You’re hardly skimming the surface,” said Paul Dales, a housing economist with Capital Economics. “It could help some people a lot, individually. But in terms of the big-picture, overall economy and housing market, it’s really just a drop in the ocean of the problem.”

.... the vast majority of more than 11 million homeowners who owe more than their house is worth, along with six million who are in foreclosure or behind in their payments, won’t get help. That’s because the settlement applies only to loans held on the books of the five banks that agreed to settle.

Loans held by government mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which account for more than half of U.S. residential mortgages, aren’t eligible. Nor are most loans that were sold off to private investors or are held by lenders who aren’t part of the settlement. (State and federal officials are negotiating with other lenders to try to expand the reach of the program. The deal won’t be finalized until a federal court judge signs off, which settlement negotiators say they expect in a few weeks.

Under terms of the settlement, the five lenders won’t have to pay out the bulk of the $25 billion. Some $17 billion represents credits applied toward targets lenders have to modify some of the loans on their books. Some of those modifications would have happened anyway. Based on a complex formula, bankers will earn credits on a sliding scale depending on the type of modification. The least costly refinancing methods might earn a lender as little as a nickel on a dollar; the costliest would generate a dollar-for-dollar credit.

Read the full article at:

http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/09/10365356-mortgage-settlement-leaves-most-homeowners-to-fend-for-themselves

[WillyT]

71. More Hope And Cave...

Jesus...

[mmonk]

76. And here I am trying to start my life over from the collapse in the housing

market and having lost much. I try not to hate but forgiveness isn't in me since I'm trying to get disabled offspring through life also. I care not for the ideology of deregulation that led to this. I do not care for the New Democrats of the Third Way and their compromising to buddies of the Republican party whose ideology all this belongs and of course, not these criminal manipulators themselves. They screwed me and mine and don't care much about it except to say sit down and shut up.

[woo me with science]

77. Kick

[colsohlibgal]

83. Banksters Win Again, Regular Folks Lose As Usual

I can't wait to hear happy clappy liberals try to explain this away, it's a joke.

This is a complete travesty but then Obama and his team have sided with Wall Street from the beginning.

[Better Believe It]

92. The talking point is: Don't worry there are a lot more lawsuits pending!

[Starry Messenger]

87. k&r

[inna]

88. Wow. Thank you for posting this. Rec #45

[annabanana]

90. So. Did Schneiderman sell out? Or, as he said last night on

Rachel, is this money just a down payment?

[tridim]

95. Good news for the victims of mortgage fraud and BBI hates it.

Typical.

[Better Believe It]

102. Right. Wall Street has lost and the people who have been thrown out of their homes have won!

Seems like a rather weak "talking point" with nothing based in reality but it sure sounds good!

Pop the champagne bottles, working people have won another big one against Wall Street!

Yippeee!

Watch the people celebrate this historic victory!

[tridim]

103. I'm a victim of mortgage fraud, and I'm happy with the settlement.

Without the settlement I would get nothing.

It is justice for the little guy, FINALLY. And you hate it. Typical.

[Better Believe It]

106. I understand your economic desperation. But you would be far better off with a settlement that's .

Last edited Sun Feb 12, 2012, 11:56 PM - Edit history (1)

not on the banks terms. This cave in to the banksters demands at the expense of folks like you wasn't the only possible outcome.

The Wall Street tycoons and other corporate crooks have obviously made you desperate for some financial relief, however modest and inadequate it might be. They try to take advantage of folks who are hurting by dangling out some badly needed money.

Therefore I can understand your willingness to accept a small settlement for all of the suffering they have caused you and your family.

Did the banksters illegally force you out of your home?

[Cameron27]

96. k&r

Thanks for posting.

[woo me with science]

98. Kick

[mfcorey1]

104. What the settlement really says:

Under the deal:

- Roughly $1.5 billion for direct payouts, in the form of $2,000 checks, for about 750,000 Americans who were unfairly or improperly foreclosed upon; another $3.5 billion will go directly to states.

- At least $10 billion for reducing mortgage amounts.

- Up to $7 billion for other state homeowner programs.

- At least $3 billion for refinancing loans for homeowners who are current on their mortgage payments but who are underwater.

The deal is subject to final approval by a federal judge.

[Swede]

105. AG Settlement Ends Robo-Signing and Provides a Model for Preventing Foreclosures

“The foreclosure settlement announced today will help build a stronger housing market while keeping more people in their homes. But while a significant step toward fixing the foreclosure crisis, this settlement was never intended or able to provide a comprehensive remedy. Much more work is required.

Despite its limitations, the settlement requires real reforms in the mortgage servicing industry to stop sloppy business practices and out-and-out fraud. It also will help stabilize housing markets and property values by giving more homeowners a chance to restructure or refinance out of unaffordable loans that are underwater.

The settlement calls for ramping up foreclosure prevention through large-scale use of loan modifications that lower loan balances for struggling homeowners. This approach could become a model for the rest of the market, especially Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which control 50% of the market.

http://www.responsiblelending.org/media-center/press-releases/archives/AG-Settlement-Ends-Robo-Signing-Provides-Model.html