An editorial like this might cost you your job

[idrankwhat 0]

Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime
How the Bush Administration Stopped the States From Stepping In to Help Consumers

By Eliot Spitzer
Thursday, February 14, 2008; A25

Several years ago, state attorneys general and others involved in consumer protection began to notice a marked increase in a range of predatory lending practices by mortgage lenders. Some were misrepresenting the terms of loans, making loans without regard to consumers' ability to repay, making loans with deceptive "teaser" rates that later ballooned astronomically, packing loans with undisclosed charges and fees, or even paying illegal kickbacks. These and other practices, we noticed, were having a devastating effect on home buyers. In addition, the widespread nature of these practices, if left unchecked, threatened our financial markets.

Even though predatory lending was becoming a national problem, the Bush administration looked the other way and did nothing to protect American homeowners. In fact, the government chose instead to align itself with the banks that were victimizing consumers.

Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis. This threat was so clear that as New York attorney general, I joined with colleagues in the other 49 states in attempting to fill the void left by the federal government. Individually, and together, state attorneys general of both parties brought litigation or entered into settlements with many subprime lenders that were engaged in predatory lending practices. Several state legislatures, including New York's, enacted laws aimed at curbing such practices.

What did the Bush administration do in response? Did it reverse course and decide to take action to halt this burgeoning scourge? As Americans are now painfully aware, with hundreds of thousands of homeowners facing foreclosure and our markets reeling, the answer is a resounding no.

Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye.

Let me explain: The administration accomplished this feat through an obscure federal agency called the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). The OCC has been in existence since the Civil War. Its mission is to ensure the fiscal soundness of national banks. For 140 years, the OCC examined the books of national banks to make sure they were balanced, an important but uncontroversial function. But a few years ago, for the first time in its history, the OCC was used as a tool against consumers.

In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative. The OCC also promulgated new rules that prevented states from enforcing any of their own consumer protection laws against national banks. The federal government's actions were so egregious and so unprecedented that all 50 state attorneys general, and all 50 state banking superintendents, actively fought the new rules.

But the unanimous opposition of the 50 states did not deter, or even slow, the Bush administration in its goal of protecting the banks. In fact, when my office opened an investigation of possible discrimination in mortgage lending by a number of banks, the OCC filed a federal lawsuit to stop the investigation.

Throughout our battles with the OCC and the banks, the mantra of the banks and their defenders was that efforts to curb predatory lending would deny access to credit to the very consumers the states were trying to protect. But the curbs we sought on predatory and unfair lending would have in no way jeopardized access to the legitimate credit market for appropriately priced loans. Instead, they would have stopped the scourge of predatory lending practices that have resulted in countless thousands of consumers losing their homes and put our economy in a precarious position.

When history tells the story of the subprime lending crisis and recounts its devastating effects on the lives of so many innocent homeowners, the Bush administration will not be judged favorably. The tale is still unfolding, but when the dust settles, it will be judged as a willing accomplice to the lenders who went to any lengths in their quest for profits. So willing, in fact, that it used the power of the federal government in an unprecedented assault on state legislatures, as well as on state attorneys general and anyone else on the side of consumers.

The writer is governor of New York.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/13/AR2008021302783.html

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Why would it cost him his job? He's bashing an unpopular president and allowing his voting public to tell themselves that their problems are not their fault and coming off as a hero to the little guy.
Do you think the banks might yank contributions? That's a possibility; however the net result of "blame the banks" is easily morphed into "blame the small dodgy banks, stick with Humongous Bank."

[BillyVance 34]

Quote

Why would it cost him his job?

I think the point being made is that quite possibly some people in the Bush administration decided to "out" him specifically for that article by "busting" him in the prostitute scandal. Of course, I'm not saying they did or did not have a hand in that for that reason but it wouldn't be the first time someone with a dissenting opinion against the administration took a hit on the chin in some fashion, kind of like a "fuck you". I wouldn't put it past Cheney. He has been vindictive in the past.

Oh shit, is he gonna come after me now?

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

I wouldn't put it past Cheney. He has been vindictive in the past.

Oh shit, is he gonna come after me now?

Come after you? Hell, I just got an invitation to go hunting with him

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

I wouldn't put it past Cheney. He has been vindictive in the past.

Oh shit, is he gonna come after me now?

Come after you? Hell, I just got an invitation to go hunting with him

Sucks to be you

Recall that Bush's administration contains a bunch who learned their dirty tricks trade under Nixon.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[BillyVance 34]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I wouldn't put it past Cheney. He has been vindictive in the past.

Oh shit, is he gonna come after me now?

Come after you? Hell, I just got an invitation to go hunting with him

Sucks to be you

Recall that Bush's administration contains a bunch who learned their dirty tricks trade under Nixon.

So true... I remember reading that somewhere.

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[lawrocket 3]

How does a politician deal with a crisis? By deflecting blame!

Gee, Mr. Spitzer, you are an attorney. Why didn't you mention the explicit pre-emption under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999? You know, the one that authorized financial institutions to do insurance, etc., as well as banking, and contained an express pre-emption? I.e., section 104(d)(1) of the act?

Why not mention that the Senate Banking Committee stated in its report:

Quote

"[T]he committee is aware that some States have used their regulatory authority to discriminate against insured depository institutions, their subsidiaries and affiliates. The committee has no desire to have state regulation prevent or otherwise frustrate the affiliations and activities authorized or permitted by this bill. Thus, Section 104 ... ensures that applicable state law cannot prevent, discriminate against, or otherwise frustrate such affiliations or activities"

Oh, yes. That would mean blaming Congress for passing it - and blaming Clinton for SIGNING IT!

It was in 2000 when when bankers associations in West Virginia and Massachussetts asked the OCC for opinions on whether their states had pre-empted laws. Oh, you left that out, Mr. Spitzer.

Quote

The federal government's actions were so egregious and so unprecedented that all 50 state attorneys general, and all 50 state banking superintendents, actively fought the new rules.

Where did you all fight it? In court? The Act has an "expedited dispute resolution" section where the state regulators could file a file a petition with the federal Appeals Court in the state's district and receive a determination within 60 days!

Oh, yes! The COURTS make this determination. Not the president. Boo hoo, you fucking asshole.

Quote

In fact, when my office opened an investigation of possible discrimination in mortgage lending by a number of banks, the OCC filed a federal lawsuit to stop the investigation.

What? The OCC did what the law said it was supposed to do? It filed suit? The nerve! Let me guess - YOU LOST! Sour grapes, anyone?

Quote

Throughout our battles with the OCC and the banks, the mantra of the banks and their defenders was that efforts to curb predatory lending would deny access to credit to the very consumers the states were trying to protect. But the curbs we sought on predatory and unfair lending would have in no way jeopardized access to the legitimate credit market for appropriately priced loans. Instead, they would have stopped the scourge of predatory lending practices that have resulted in countless thousands of consumers losing their homes and put our economy in a precarious position.

So, you got your ass kicked LEGALLY, meaining you bitch about it politically.

Quote

the Bush administration will not be judged favorably.

Why? Because it enforced the law? A new one signed in by his predecessor? Should he have simply ignored the law?

Quote

So willing, in fact, that it used the power of the federal government in an unprecedented assault on state legislatures, as well as on state attorneys general and anyone else on the side of consumers.

Again, bullshit. He may be right about the "unprecedented assault on state legislators" but fails to mention that the GLBA of 1999 was what did it! Not Bush.

There are PLENTY of LEGITIMATE reasons to hate Bush. Why not focus on those instead of pulling this horseshit? Why not look to Moynihan and Schumer (NY Senators at the time) for a bit of relief, eh? They both voted "Nay" on it. Actually, the Senate was a strict Party Line Vote. The House passed it 362-57. Then the POTUS signed it. The 1999 POTUS signed it. Not the 2003 POTUS.


This is another fucking politician not telling the WHOLE STORY. Because to tell the WHOLE STORY would make him look LIKE AN ASSHOLE.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Recall that Bush's administration contains a bunch who learned their dirty tricks trade under Nixon.

Or, enforced dirty trick laws signed in by Nixon. or Lincoln. Or Clinton. Or Reagan. Etc...

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[BillyVance 34]

Quote

Because to tell the WHOLE STORY would make him look LIKE AN ASSHOLE.

Well, he made himself look like an asshole on another front. He went after the brothels and their customers big time as an AG, only to get busted himself. Poetic justice.

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[lawrocket 3]

Yes, it was another front in which he made himself look like an asshole. But that's beside the point.

of course, he IS an attorney. Spin a tale to the lay public that omits the 90 percent of the story that blows your story out of the water, and only put out argument on 10 percent that makes you look like the heroic David against the evil Goliath.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Quote

Quote

Why would it cost him his job?

I think the point being made is that quite possibly some people in the Bush administration decided to "out" him specifically for that article by "busting" him in the prostitute scandal. Of course, I'm not saying they did or did not have a hand in that for that reason but it wouldn't be the first time someone with a dissenting opinion against the administration took a hit on the chin in some fashion, kind of like a "fuck you". I wouldn't put it past Cheney. He has been vindictive in the past.

Oh shit, is he gonna come after me now?

My bad. I thought he was the new Gov.

[Amazon 7]

This would not be the first time that provisions of the "Patriot Act" have been used to go after those who did not do the bidding of this administration.. OR those who did not agree with them.


When the Justice department is used as a political tool of one party.. we are just one step closer to living under a totalitarian regime.

Anyone want to guess how many law graduates of a certain law school with far right wing ties are now working in this justice department and administration???

[BillyVance 34]

Quote

This would not be the first time that provisions of the "Patriot Act" have been used to go after those who did not do the bidding of this administration.. OR those who did not agree with them.

When the Justice department is used as a political tool of one party.. we are just one step closer to living under a totalitarian regime.

Yeah, anybody remember Valerie Plame and her husband?

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

This would not be the first time that provisions of the "Patriot Act" have been used to go after those who did not do the bidding of this administration.. OR those who did not agree with them.

When the Justice department is used as a political tool of one party.. we are just one step closer to living under a totalitarian regime.

Yeah, anybody remember Valerie Plame and her husband?

You mean Joe Wilson? The one who lied about yellow cake? That husband? You know, the same one the 911 commision said provided a misleading report?

Ya, I remember

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Yeah, anybody remember Valerie Plame and her husband?

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


You mean Joe Wilson? The one who lied about yellow cake? That husband? You know, the same one the 911 commision said provided a misleading report?

Ya, I remember

Now there is some interesting far right wing SPIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIN .

Is that the story Lush Rimjob is peddaling now to discredit them??

[lawrocket 3]

Apparently, the further background that I provided on this issue is being obscured.

That can lead to a couple of conclusions:
1) My explanation is not worthy of a response;or

2) My explanation is too air-tight to be attacked and is therefore being skipped over because logic and reason cannot prevail over hatred and feelings.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

Quote

This would not be the first time that provisions of the "Patriot Act" have been used to go after those who did not do the bidding of this administration.. OR those who did not agree with them.

When the Justice department is used as a political tool of one party.. we are just one step closer to living under a totalitarian regime.

Yeah, anybody remember Valerie Plame and her husband?

You mean GEORGE W. BUSH? The one who lied about yellow cake? You know, the same one the Senate Intelligence Report said provided a misleading statement in the 2003 SOTU Address?

Ya, I remember

Fixed it for you.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Quote

Yeah, anybody remember Valerie Plame and her husband?

You mean Joe Wilson? The one who lied about yellow cake? That husband? You know, the same one the 911 commision said provided a misleading report?

Ya, I remember

Marc -

Laying aside, momentarily, the specific assertions, I think you may be confusing the “WMD Intelligence Commission” (aka the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction) with the 9-11 Commission?
The 9-11 Commission Report doesn’t say anything about Iraq-Niger-yellow cake-Ambassador Wilson.

W/r/t the WMD Intelligence Commission’s findings on attempts to procure uranium ore & yellow cake (personally I prefer chocolate cake ) from Niger, most of the blame was directed toward CIA’s WINPAC, which is part of the CIA DI (Directorate of Intelligence). These are the folks who do intelligence analysis on proliferation of WMD & missiles and are the same folks that got the blame for the aluminum tube debacle. Secondary culpability was assigned to CIA DO (aka Directorate of Operations, the ‘spies’ and those who do intelligence collection) and the National Intelligence Officer for Strategic and Nuclear Programs (NIO/SNP).

I’m really curious as to the origins of the interpretation and analysis you described? Thanks.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[TankBuster 0]

Quote

I think the point being made is that quite possibly some people in the Bush administration decided to "out" him specifically for that article by "busting" him in the prostitute scandal. Of course, I'm not saying they did or did not have a hand in that for that reason but it wouldn't be the first time someone with a dissenting opinion against the administration took a hit on the chin in some fashion, kind of like a "fuck you". I wouldn't put it past Cheney. He has been vindictive in the past.

So, Billy, lemme see if I got this. Cheney grabbed Spitzer's penis and placed it in that pro's vagina? Is that what happened?

The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer.

[BillyVance 34]

Quote

Quote

I think the point being made is that quite possibly some people in the Bush administration decided to "out" him specifically for that article by "busting" him in the prostitute scandal. Of course, I'm not saying they did or did not have a hand in that for that reason but it wouldn't be the first time someone with a dissenting opinion against the administration took a hit on the chin in some fashion, kind of like a "fuck you". I wouldn't put it past Cheney. He has been vindictive in the past.

So, Billy, lemme see if I got this. Cheney grabbed Spitzer's penis and placed it in that pro's vagina? Is that what happened?

Spin it however you want. I'm not saying that the Bush admin had it out for him. I'm just saying it's a possibility because they've done it to others.

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

I'm not saying that the Bush admin had it out for him. I'm just saying it's a possibility because they've done it to others.

As has EVERY recent admin - except for Carter and Ford. Johnson was infamous for his "pecker in the pocket" philosophy and ruined plenty of people. Nixon had his enemies list. Reagan had plenty from the admin that sold people out. Bush, Sr. had all the CIA connections necessary. Clinton has everything from Linda Tripp to every key Republican in the impeachment to dead bodies.

Why not stick to what this article claims - that had he and other state regulators not been thwarted by the caprice of the Bush admin, then this housing bubble bursting would not have happened.

And his so-called explanation of the Bus admin's action is about as arbitrary as a political writing can get.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Amazon 7]

Shall we refresh from some recent events???

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/03/10/ST2008031001923.html

The wiretap was set up as part of a federal investigation of an exclusive prostitution ring, known as Emperors Club VIP. It charged well-heeled clients as much as $5,500 an hour for "exclusive, beautiful, educated companions of fine family and career backgrounds" while ensuring "privacy and discretion when dating and traveling," according to the company's Web site.

The site used a series of diamonds next to photographs of the women to rate them, with those having the most diamonds commanding the highest prices. The site has been shut down.

Last Thursday, federal authorities -- using an agent posing as a client and wiretaps that recorded about 5,000 calls -- arrested four people in connection with the prostitution ring






So.. who is REALLLLLY believing this was just random???

I would love to sell you some real estate with great moutain views in North Dakota

[lawrocket 3]

Shall we re-examine what spurred the suspicion? Apparently, Bush has some undercover operatives working for the North Fork Bank - who filed a Suspicious Activity Report on Spitzer. (Yeah, there were a quarter of a million of them in 2000, but that's just fact. The number of them has roughly quintupled since then, thanks to the bullshit "Patriot Act" but that's just another "fact" in the interest of "fairness" - such an evil thing)

And these SAR's have a special place for Politically Exposed Persons.

Oh, and there is the issue that the wiretaps had, uh, WARRANTS. That means that a judge approved the wiretaps. (Note - there may be an issue as to whether the warrant expired during some of the wiretaps. Again, the interest of "fairness."

So, are you suggested a similarity between a warranted wiretap and an unwarranted wiretap?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[lawrocket 3]

Shit. This sounds like Kennedy going after his mob buddies.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/crime_foreclosures_dc;_ylt=Aj7lQG3DwQnLEoKtl1gql82s0NUE

The US Attorneys Office charged 19 people with mortgage fraud. And this ring was shut down in 2006. I mean, how the hell did this happen? Under Bush's watch? No way. Cover the eyes and ears because you might not want to know about this.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime

The whole "predatory lending" issue is a joke.
It should be called "speculant borrowing" issue.
People lied in their loan applications about their income. Now they are whining and crying how they were "deceived" by "predatory lenders".
Another side of entitlement generation.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *