Oh Wow... Latest From Matt Taibbi: 'Obama Goes All Out For Dirty Banker Deal'

Obama Goes All Out For Dirty Banker Deal
Mattb Taibbi - RollingStone
POSTED: AUGUST 24, 11:17 AM ET

<snip>

A power play is underway in the foreclosure arena, according to the New York Times.

On the one side is Eric Schneiderman, the New York Attorney General, who is conducting his own investigation into the era of securitizations – the practice of chopping up assets like mortgages and converting them into saleable securities – that led up to the financial crisis of 2007-2008. On the other side is the Obama administration, all the banks, and, now, apparently, all the other state attorneys general.

This second camp has all gotten together, put their heads together, and cooked up a deal that would allow the banks to walk away with just a seriously discounted fine from a generation of fraud that led to millions of people losing their homes.

The idea behind this federally-guided “settlement” is to concentrate and centralize all the legal exposure accrued by this generation of grotesque banker corruption in one place, put one single price tag on it that everyone can live with, and then stuff the details into a titanium canister before shooting it into deep space.

This deal is all about protecting the banks from future enforcement actions on both the civil and criminal sides. The plan is to provide year-after-year, repeat-offending banks like Bank of America with some stability and certainty, so that they know exactly how much they’ll have to pay in fines (trust me, it will end up being a tiny fraction of what they made off the fraudulent practices) and will also get to know for sure that there are no more criminal investigations in the pipeline.

<snip>

Much More: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/obama-goes-all-out-for-dirty-banker-deal-20110824

:banghead:

:kick:

do this he's afraid he'll lose to the Republican nom? If so, could you explain why? I'm really trying to understand this. Thanks.

This has everything to do with Obama's post-presidency job

Because he he ever sided 100% with the people instead of the corporation, he wont be needing $1 trilion dollar to win a re-election. Obama just continues to Disappoint.

All if he has to match President Perry to avoid a Perry president, then why do we have him in the WH. The way I see it, a solid liberal 1st term would be a million times greater than a center right 1st term and a center 2nd term.

:puke:

at his own game, is that what you're saying? :shrug: It's a bad move because he needs to separate himself from the other side, show a difference if he really wants a second term.

I am disappointed with the President, way too many times to count.

I miss Obama 2008, maybe we saw our own hopes and desires in him.
I probably should not even replied to this post, I was reacting to a story about Perry.
That man is really scary...

:hug:

During her first campaign: One was "Change" and the other was "Hope."

The Powers that Be have this down to a science, and they don't even have to think about it.

to be gulled. And gulled we certainly were. I for one am not afraid to admit it. He was TPTB's best misdirection ever.

Well-meaning Americans who were desperate to wake up from the nightmare that was Bush got "taken for the proverbial ride" as Maude Lebowski would say.

Since you're referencing movies, RTF, I'll share the scene this BS reminds me of... (from Scorcese's Mean Streets)


Scummy thug played by DeNiro represents the Banksters.

"You too good for this ten dollars? It's a good ten dollars. You know Michael, you make me laugh. You see, I borrow money all over this neighborhood, left and right from everybody, I never pay them back. So, I can't borrow no money from nobody no more, right? So who would that leave me to borrow money from but you? I borrow money from you, because you're the only jerk-off around here who I can borrow money from without payin' back, right? You know, 'cause that's what you are, that's what I think of you: a jerk-off. You're a fucking jerk-off! You're laughing 'cause you're a jerk-off. I'll tell 'ya something else, (lights ten dollar bill on fire) I fuck you right where you breathe, because I don't give two shits about you or nobody else."

Sheesh.

You are working for Geithner, rather than Geithner working for you, than what can you do?

If the truth comes out, you are toast.

Right now, the man has two choices: continue to aid and abet the side he works for, or else, resign.

And I think we know that he will not resign.

lily-livered, wanna-be president. He's a piece of work that only Texas could vote for time and time again... except Austin, Dallas, Houston, San Antonio and El Paso.

eta: The cities stand strong in spite of gerrymandering.

this is why the two party system must DIE.

if both parties would have a split to make 4, itd be a gravey train with biscuit wheels.

take this route, and when I've asked here I've only gotten the "he does what his masters tell him to do" kind of responses.

I contacted my rep, Sens, and the WH today, both for this and for the pipeline stuff. I support Obama, but sometimes I'm just so :wow: he did THAT? :(

And one day you'll realize the truth about Obama really isn't any more complicated than that.

Goldman Sachs was his second largest contribution bundler. Among his other top ten contributors you find J.P. Morgan and Citigroup. UBS and Morgan Stanley rank among the big donor list if extended to his top 20.

for now I'm still just trying to understand, and this doesn't ring true to me. (Not that it's not factual, but just doesn't feel right, if you know what I mean.) I've been wrong about people before, so it wouldn't be the first time, believe me.

Don't ask us to make something up.

The economy will not improve (it...will...not...improve) until the housing foreclosure mess is behind us. Period. End of story.

That's why everyone from the White House to the states' representatives want to get the mess over with in some sort of way that isn't unreasonable. Everyone except one guy in New York, I guess. And ...surprise!...another guy in New York thinks that the New York guy is the ONLY one in the whole country that's right.

I don't know what sort of deal should be brokered, or IF a deal should be brokered, but it's elementary as to why everyone wants to resolve the mess as quickly as possible. We need the housing market to start getting better. Only then will the economy begin to signifantly improve.

jobs do not buy houses. Secondly, what is at play is prosecuting the thefts of houses from hundreds or thousands of families. Fraud, corruption, crimes. People were foreclosed upon for no reason. criminally. with false signatures. It was planned out. if your home was taken from you, would you want the investigation to continue? I rent and I want the investigation to go forward. Criminals need to go to jail. otherwise the crimes continue over and over.

that none of these fraudsters are being prosecuted. That is what is unreasonable.

Housing won't improve until the price of homes are in line with wages. So either the employment picture needs to improve drastically with more high paying secure jobs or the price of homes need to come down significantly. If home prices drop retirees and those close to retirement will be hurt. If wages increase to support home prices everyone will scream about inflation.
So instead they are looking for ways to prop up banks that are essentially insolvent.

Prices At all.

What Obama and his people are doing now is called "Covering Their Own Butts."

It's either that or else resign.

He chose Tim Geithner, moving him from heading New York Federal Reserve over to being Secretary of Treasury. He should have had enough information on Geithner to realize how complicit little Timmy was with the Banking World. All he had to do in Nov 2008 was "google" Tim Geithner, and he'd have known immediately how Geithner screwed the Japanese economy over, for the benefit of his Big Banking friends.

If Michael Collins, and Octafish can put together what Timmy's manipulations and maneuvering have done for Wall Street and against the common person, then it's fair to say that Obama knew as well.

And I think what it really comes down to is realizing this:

Geithner is not working at the pleasure of his Majesty the President. It is Obama who is working for Geithner, and for AIG, and for Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Bank of America et al.

And that knowledge eternally "changes" the meaning of "hope" for me.

It's about BAC being in dire shape and the administration stepping in to help them out by reducing their potential liabilities.

This settlement will not improve housing or the economy. Over the short term, it will make matters worse since it means an end to the moratoriums. More homeowners will be kicked out and more homes will be put on the market. The banks will have gotten away with fraud and theft, and will go right back to some form of hardcore predation.

allow them to keep their fraudulently gotten financial empires, and promise not to prosecute them for destroying the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of millions of innocent people world wide, they will never allow the economy to get better.

Your kidding right? You've really got to be kidding.

:evilfrown:

the truth.

The truth is that Obama is an employee of the Wall Street thieves.

I would argue that the White House, Congress and the Supreme Court are bought and paid for by Wall Street. They just shuffle the actors who play the roles every couple of years.

Not in this lifetime

Why on Earth would they change the game?

More reason to have publicly funded elections.

Who's going to do it? The beneficiaries of the system?

They won't poll the American people on that either.

God's work....

"This deal will also submarine efforts by both defrauded investors in MBS and unfairly foreclosed-upon homeowners and borrowers to obtain any kind of relief in the civil court system. The AGs initially talked about $20 billion as a settlement number, money that would “toward loan modifications and possibly counseling for homeowners,” as Gretchen Morgenson reported the other day.

The banks, however, apparently “balked” at paying that sum, and no doubt it will end up being a lesser amount when the deal is finally done.

To give you an indication of how absurdly small a number even $20 billion is relative to the sums of money the banks made unloading worthless crap subprime assets on foreigners, pension funds and other unsuspecting suckers around the world, consider this: in 2008 alone, the state pension fund of Florida, all by itself, lost more than three times that amount ($62 billion) thanks in significant part to investments in these deadly MBS. "

Your post.

"As you know, many of my friends and most of my administration are bankers. The stories they tell are heart-wrenching, and might surprise the American people. For example, there's the story of the young banker who needed to mortgage his sixth vacation home because of uncertainty in the stock market. People need to know that we're all eating our peas, and now it's time for the poor, elderly, and infirm to eat a huge helping. Huge. Really huge. Enormous. "*

*for the parody-impaired: this is not an actual quote.

Coming through loud and clear.

Thank you, MannyGoldstein. Veddy scary, sounds so close.

People have been chiding me for using quotes that they can't find on the Internet.

Parody is often much more difficult to pick up in writing than in person. Your parody was close enough to reality that I'm sure there would be many people who would take the quote literally if not for the disclaimer. It is unreal only in that Obama wouldn't actually say that. In this era of corporate owned media, it is very easy for our elected officials to take actions to protect and enrich wealthy criminals while using populist rhetoric to cover it up. Our "mainstream" media will never call them on that.

He's looking forward to having multiple vacation homes himself in either 1 or 5 years. Also multiple board memberships, multiple book deals, multiple consulting gigs, etc., etc.,

Cue Scarlett: "With god as my witness, I'll never be less than a billionaire again!"

I feel their pain!

:rofl:

".......Donovan has good reason not to want an exploration of the origins of the housing meltdown: He has been a big-time player in the housing racket for decades. Back in the Clinton administration, when government-supported housing became a fig leaf for bundling suspect mortgages into what turned out to be toxic securities, Donovan was a deputy assistant secretary at HUD and acting Federal Housing Administration commissioner. He was up to his eyeballs in this business when the Clinton administration pushed through legislation banning any regulation of the market in derivatives based on home mortgages.

Armed with his insider connections, Donovan then went to work for the Prudential conglomerate (no surprise there), working deals with the same government housing agencies that he had helped run. As The New York Times reported in 2008 after President Barack Obama picked him to be secretary of HUD, “Mr. Donovan was a managing director at Prudential Mortgage Capital Co., in charge of its portfolio of investments in affordable housing loans, including Fannie Mae and the Federal Housing Administration debt.”

from Robert Scheer's article in The Nation

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1805558

everything he can not to.

I await the excuses, spirited defense, and of course "The List".

:eyes:

:evilgrin:
The excuse is "the prez is not a dictator". The defense is "it could have been worse".

Like the song sung repeatedly in "Harlan County USA"...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nzudto-FA5Y

Maybe democrats, myself included, are finally seeing that Ralph might have been right.

I'm getting a bit of that same sinking feeling I had under the BushCo dictatorship.

I think that I may go outside and drown instead of swim...I kid, I kid. but dammitall!

I am all for it.

Critics brought Enron, Worldcom, Adelphia, Global Crossing, Tyco, and many others down.

Roll your sleeves up, Matt! Do Something positive for once!

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

He's either stupid, or corrupt. And he doesn't seem to be a stupid man.

:shrug:

his bankster buddies is "trying to bring him down?"

I guess you think reporters should just shut up when Obama does something awful like this.

Why do the rest of us have to go too?

Then we can discuss Matt's enthusiasm.

Thanks for your answer in advance.

:evilfrown:

...:eyes:

PS---Cenk's take: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x611839

There won't be any more banker indictments since they could not convict the sleaziest of them all, Angelo Mozilo, after great effort. The securitization issue is being handled in civil court where it should be. Bank of America has already lost one such case and there were no orange jump suits! There won't be any!

The robo-signings are state issues so the $20 billion is like a class-action award for actual damages. Just because bad things happen does not mean statute is violated (see the BP spill). There is no shame in a $20 billion settlement.

ESPECIALLY... when they want to be released from all future investigation/prosecution!

NO DEAL!!!

:shrug:

They thought it would bring too many other people down, too.

This "let's not look back" (on white collar and political crimes) philosophy has contributed greatly to the rapid destruction of our democracy.

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

you sad?

If you've missed it, Taibbi has gone after many of the country's largest banks. He's continuing the reporting by showing how politicians like Obama continually protect the banking industry.

The President and his administration essentially covering-up widespread fraud in the banking industry, wrapping it up in a bow and telling us "they've been punished" when nothing could be further from the truth is not "real muckracking?"

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

Taibbi is only a reporter. He's published the story. Why should we have to rely on critics when we elect people to make and enforce laws? Law enforcement falls directly under the executive branch's duties.

go on---let's see what you got.

Or are these the kind of perks you expect for the 7 plus million you've spent so far in that president's reelection bid?

Either way, that kind of money explains a lot of Obama's actions.
<http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/sectors.php?sector=F>
<http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/bundlers.php?id=N00009638>

It doesn't seem to have as much to do with "politics" as with realpolitik.

to all of the criminality of the banksters:

"The idea behind this federally-guided “settlement” is to concentrate and centralize all the legal exposure accrued by this generation of grotesque banker corruption in one place, put one single price tag on it that everyone can live with, and then stuff the details into a titanium canister before shooting it into deep space."

Why did I ever expect anything else? :puke::puke::puke:

A nice young man, with a good brain, and a lovely family and who presented himself as having a lot of heart, turns out to work for the Darth Vader side of the equation.

As Kurt Vonnegut used to end chapters of his books, "And so it goes."

ENRON was so wicked they didn't yet have laws against what they did. It was that crooked.

partner in the major market maker firm of carbon credits is David Blood, former CEO of Goldman Sachs Asset Management.

http://blog.nj.com/njv_paul_mulshine/2009/07/capandtrade_bill_blood_and_gor.html

Democrats and Republicans, 2 sides, same corrupt coin, only the purse holding them is a diffrent colour.


"The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can "throw the rascals out" at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy."

- Carrol Quigley, Tragedy and Hope (1966)

Sam Seder (Majority Report) has done a couple shows regarding this the past couple days. Very enlightening. And really maddening too.

K & R.

:mad:

It is, as Michael Collins so carefully instructed us, all "One Big Money Party."


And like George Carlin warned us, "You and I are not members of the Club."

...candidate Obama would kick this guy's ass....where'd he get to...?

Thanks for the thread, WillyT.

at least in part. So....makes me think that there is definitely an upside to it.

Think about it. AGs care about the economic health of their states, like governors do. So....why do you think that a deal to get the foreclosure debacle resolved seems attractive to them?

Think about it.

:evilfrown:

now sinking 5 billion into BOA, and I'm sure the AGs think about the economic health of their states, but their primary consideration must be upholding the law and not just for or against the vast majority of poor, middle class aka; "little people," you know those smokers of cannabis, but against the big boys as well.

On a thread by Poll_Blind.



So apparently this is a wise deal for the banksters and people wealthy enough to take advantage of this gift on behalf of the public but for all those people swindled out of their retirement savings by the same interests that want to reduce the social safety net, this doesn't smell good, much less seem wise or just.

John Suthers (Colorado) and a few more would prefer to keep investigating.

New york and Deleware are key, since most of the MBS trusts were established in these states.

He had aligned himself with the NY Attorney General.

Interesting dynamic there. I hope it's still true. I'm wondering how the VP feels. Joe Biden has always been very close to his oldest son.

Oh well, I'm sure the liberals will get blamed for it. :eyes:

He'll get re-elected with our help in 2012....but in 2016....It's on.

:beer:

I made it a policy never to vote for Republicans.

The idea behind this federally-guided “settlement” is to concentrate and centralize all the legal exposure accrued by this generation of grotesque banker corruption in one place, put one single price tag on it that everyone can live with, and then stuff the details into a titanium canister before shooting it into deep space.

Sheez.

The Rockefeller File

by Gary Allen

http://conciencianoosfera.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/rockefeller-files.pdf

I read this about 25 years ago and I've watched the story unfold. It scared me then...it's really scary now.

I'm scared, but I ain't afraid.

He takes all his financial advice from Tim Geithner. It will be that way until Geithner is gone.

would be saying the same things about the deal if Bush was still president.

Not that I don't think a corporatist might still be better than a right-wing nut job, but it's important to at least acknowledge it.

We all know we're screwed but nobody's supposed to say it and, worse, to demonstrate it with facts.

I doubt the corrupt tyrants will dignify this report and i doubt out mainstream media will ask any embarrassing questions. :(

We still have banks to big to fail. That was what the big old bail out was supposed to be for. We were supposed to give criminals just enough to keep from destroying the world economy and put in safeguards. None were put in. The banks are bigger than ever. The can steal all they want knowing that the government will let them off over an over.

Reminds me of how the war criminals bush and cheney couldn't be prosecuted because we had to put it all behind us.

That is why he was ALLOWED to win the election.

What is happening now is that which was always planned to come to pass. TPTB knew that only a nominal "Democrat" could open the door to the eventual destruction of SS and Medicare/aid.

No one goes to jail.
No fuss, no muss.

it's most definitely your right to do so. The "Bush's 3rd term" thing though is just plain stupid. And yes, I do know about hyperbole and all that, it's still wrong in a gazillion ways.

And that's the way he's governed. Corporations, first and second, no matter what they do.

Pointing that out is what he considers to be bad behavior

..

the "unaccountability president".

Not only is it unethical, it's stupid politics.

Now we'll hear all kinds of populist rhetoric coming from the RW candidates about how "if I were president, all those corrupt bankers would be in jail." Obviously it's all bullshit, and they'll be even more on the take when in the WH than Obama. But they'll be able to say it, just to draw a phony distinction between Obama's behavior and their hypothetical presidencies.

By caving in on everything in a half-assed effort to secure either campaign funds or a cushy post-presidency gig, Obama has ceded the high ground to the Republicans, who can now portray themselves as protectors of the working class by virtue of not being Obama. Nice going, Mr. President.

REC for Rolling Stone and Taibbi and anyone else who worked on this piece.

giants like the NYT, Washington Post, LA Times are forever making excuses for the behavior of the Financial PTB or completely ignoring anything they do wrong. I guess that's because they are the "job creators".

Oh, wait a minute . . .

n/t

Repocon

I'll write in a worthwhile candidate if there are no other Progressives to choose from. We ARE NOT powerless; we can vote for whoever we damn well please, whether or not they get the endorsement of the elite.

And I will be doing the same in the primary. That will be the Democratic Party's chance to open their eyes.

The financial industry (if there ever was a misnomer) has the country by the throat. They have already destroyed millions of people and can finish off the whole world at will. Don't worry about Al Qaeda, worry about Wall Street.

With a republican congress he can do nothing to rein them in. The best thing to do is to let this one go, hope that the American electorate are less self-destructive in 2012 and then get cracking on some legislation and regulations that will keep this from happening again. Until then, as far as being protected goes, you're on your own.

Obama has to pick his fights. By doing it this way, the cost and injustice will be a fraction of the damage that will otherwise occur.

takes it away from the people and the courts.

Obama didn't need to pick this fight but he has and he's fighting against the people on behalf of the same criminals that trashed the economy in the first place and I agree with the poster up-thread, this is a stupid political move.

The best way for the future elections to be less self-destructive is for political leaders to visibly demonstrate to the people that choices exist other than this superficial good cop/bad cop routine.

If the financial industry has the country by the throat, the people must take the nation back even if that means a state by state and eventually a national fight.

If the financial industry could/would be so cynical, greedy, powerful and suicidal as to "finish off the whole world at will" that only adds imperative for the people and their leaders to confront such a terrorist organization before it grows even stronger and not to enable its' ever increasing power and hold over the nation/world.