Do you go all the way back to the originations, and look at the fraudulent loan data and how it was represented to investors when packaged into securities?
Do you look at the tax treatment provided in these securitization trusts, set up as REMICs (real estate mortgage investment conduits), and fine those who profited from that tax treatment with REMICs that were illegally designed, which you can actually fine at 100%?
Do you look at the misrepresentation of the loans in the securities by the trustees?
Do you look at the possible violations of Sarbanes-Oxley requirements that CEOs certify information, including information on their issued securities, in reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission?
Do you look at the now-widespread reports of servicer abuse, including the ways in which servicers drove borrowers into default with illegal fees? Do you look at the tax evasion inherent in MERS, the electronic registry designed to avoid fees incurred on mortgage transfers? Do you look at the same “MERS officers” signing documents for multiple different banks and servicers in multiple different context, or any of the 20,000 MERS Vice Presidents, despite the fact that the company has only 70 employees?
Do you look at the garden-variety forgery and false documents delivered in courts and at county recorder’s offices, the back-dated assignments, the assignments only created after the foreclosure date?
Let’s just say that the mortgage industry offers a target-rich environment for willing prosecutors and regulators.
But will has been precisely what’s been missing. In the aftermath of the savings and loan scandal in the 1980s, over 1,000 financial executives went to prison for violations of law. During the current crisis, orders of magnitude larger in scope, nobody of any consequence has faced prison time. This is as corrosive to our economy as it is to our society, and it invites further fraud and abuse from the powerful forces on Wall Street, who are getting away with the crime of the century in slow motion.
In the aftermath of the foreclosure fraud settlement, and as we look ahead to the working group on securities fraud co-chaired by Eric Schneiderman, one of the best people to look to for answers on how this whole thing could have gone – how it could still go – is William K. Black. The author of The Best Way to Rob a Bank is to Own One, and a central figure in exposing fraud among both financial executives and members of Congress during the S&L scandal, Black has been relentless on exposing the lax nature of regulation and prosecution during the past decade and more. His latest scoffed at the new task force on securitization fraud:
Bank CEOs leading “accounting control frauds” now do so with impunity from the criminal laws. They become wealthy through fraud and even if they are sued civilly they almost invariably walk away wealthy with the proceeds of their frauds.
Elite financial institutions officers engaged in fraud face a dramatically reduced risk of prosecution compared to 20 years ago when financial fraud was far less common. TRAC reports that the number of financial institution fraud prosecutions under Obama is less than one-half the number 20 years ago. Bush (II) was slightly better than Obama in prosecuting non-elite financial institution frauds, but both were pathetically bad.
Black wrote that before the foreclosure fraud settlement was announced, but while the negotiations were happening in earnest. I’m sure he has plenty of thoughts on the settlement, how it came about, and what could be done, with the proper amount of will and resources, to truly restore accountability and justice for the fraud committed by the financial oligarchy.
Please welcome Bill Black to Firedoglake.




358 Comments





Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Bill, Welcome to the Lake.
Hi David. Thanks for the invite.
How did they get Harris & Schneiderman to cave, or was their behavior part of the play acting from the beginning bc both plan to run for higher office? (Or some other motive, whatever it might be.)
Welcome back, Bill!
We are all anxious about these events and anxious to talk with you about it.
Professor Black, welcome to FDL and thanks for agreeing to this live chat. My first question concerns the fact that no terms have been released on this settlement as of yet, a week after the announcement. How unusual is that in your practice, and if the agreement in principle has to still be turned into actual language, what are the prospects that this settlement gets even worse than it is right now?
Thanks for all you do WKB, can’t say but will come back later.
Thank you for joining us, Bill.
DW
Hey Bill …..
It all has to begin with the endemic mortgage origination fraud, which led to the endemic fraud in the sale of fraudulent mortgages the enedmic fraud in the sale of financial derivatives (CDOs) and the endemic foreclosure fraud. It would be nuts to compartmentalize the investigations if one were making a serious criminal investigative effort.
Welcome, Bill Black. Oddly, I first became familiar with the terms “self-fulfilling prophecy” as a defense against opening up investigations of the savings and loan industry, working for a MD representative who had to take on the role of investigator as the S&L’s tumbled in that episode of fraud. I understand you did a bit of backgrounding in that brouhaha, and found we had much sounder prosecutorial bodies acting then.
Thanks, this gets at my next question, about how to design prosecutions on all this. Aren’t we running up against statutes of limitations on mortgage origination fraud, for the most part? Is there a way to get at this using federal statutes that have a longer timeline (perhaps FIRREA)?
Welcome, and thanks for being here with us. You have earned a lot of respect on these kinds of issues, so let me ask a difficult question. How can it be that Holder and Breuer can have the law firm connection they have to the creation of MERS, and not have that fact be known to everyone and reacted to appropriately?
The rush to conclude the settlement and to hype the settlement demonstrates that what we are suffering from is a political exercise rather than a serious criminal investigation. The efforts of the administration, e.g., to announce the deal by the State of the Union address and to invite favored AGs to sit with the First Lady during the SOTU are sad and destructive.
Welcome, Bill. Thanks so much for being here today.
You’ve said before that when you were working on cleaning up the S&L mess you sought better laws, but when they wouldn’t pass them, you worked with what you had. And you felt that if we’d just enforce the ones we have it would be better than putting energy into passing new laws the same agencies will still not enforce.
Clearly this legislation goes in the wrong direction. But do you still believe it is a failure of our enforcement mechanisms that facilitates the ongoing criminality, or does this bill in many ways tie their hands forever?
Thanks for visiting.
In an effort toward transparency on this settlement, do you think there would be value in identifying key state legislators with the ability to subpoena settelment-related docs from state AGs? Any idea if it would even be feasible in one or two states… assuming there are some state legislators — with the proper authority — who still believe in the rule of law?
Welcome, and thanks for speaking out to educate those of us who are economically challenged. I actually turn on the volume control when you appear on the teevee machine. Though you’ve taught me a great deal, still don’t know what those of us who have only been harmed indirectly can do. I DID contact local county clerk regarding the MERS mess . . . and the job was too big to be of interest to him. Apparently, by permitting fraud to occur in smalls ways, we have allowed ourselves to be victimized in gargantuan ways.
Bill,
I’m an ex Real Estate Paralegal and I know how very important land records and chain of title is. Do you think this will ever be addressed and corrected without people having to place a cloud on title?
Good afternoon and welcome back to FDL this afternoon Professor Black.
Earlier this afternoon I saw this article from the Bowling Green, KY Daily News about the local county government authorizing the joining of a class action law suit against the banks in the settlement and MERS:
Is this another possibly viable path against the banks? It sure does seem that it is some of the local level County Clerks and registrars of deeds that have lost revenues through MERS failures to properly record that may yet allow more of the overall failures to become known.
Yes, it took years of effort, and making the prosecutions a top priority, to achieve the results that the regulators and the prosecutors achieved in the S&L debacle. It also took far more investigative resources and prioritizing the elite criminals. None of those things has occurred in response to this crisis.
Bill, might you speculate as to why no serious investigations have, so far, occurred, regarding what some consider to be the largest fraudulent “transaction” in history?
Is it a lack of will, a lack of interest, or is it possible that a serious investigation would reveal that the federal government, in its larger “bail-out” of Wall Street, specifically, the actions the Federal Reserve, violated some of the Fed’s own rules, such as Section 13.3, of the Federal Reserve Act? Violations which might, very well, rise to the level of being illegal?
Any thoughts on these questions, which you might be willing to share, would be appreciated.
DW
I second this question. In the tobacco settlement, state legislators played a major role specifically in determining what would be done with the money after the fact. We’ve already seen announcements that some states will just take the cash and put it into their General Funds to fill their budget holes. Obviously state government can play a vigorous role in that department.
Thanks, we did dig in and it seems there were so many more independent legislators then. Also MD AG Steve Sachs could not have been more ethical.
Good afternoon Professor Black,
How can we call it a settlement if it isn’t committed to paper to be able to review the ‘ settlement’ ?
Are the AGs in a conspiracy to commit fraud by agreeing not to prosecute fraud as required by their sworn oaths ?
Prof. Black, a great honor to have you here at FDL.
I heard it stated a few days ago on Thom Hartmann – by a woman here in the Kansas City area, ( Shawnee, KS actually) – that every time there is a fraudulent financial statement issued regarding the fraud being discussed here that it is a new crime with a new statute of limitations.
FIRREA extended the statue of limitations so we still have time to go after the most egregious mortgage origination fraud if President Obama fires Holder, Breuer, Geithner, and Donovan (HUD) and appoints real banking regulators to make the criminal referrals that are essential to produce successful prosecutions of the elite bankers. The President’s new working group doesn’t even include the banking regulatory agencies — one of several reasons that it is obviously more smoke and mirrors.
Professor Black, now that we’re down to the RMBS working group, which does have the ability to go after some manner of origination and more prominently securitization fraud, how could you put that task force in the best position to succeed? What would the staffing have to look like? What subpoenas should they be issuing to get the most damaging information out of the banks? Who would be the top targets?
Prof. care to venture an opinion about whether there is any chance to mount prosecutions based on state or Federal False Claims?
So good to have you here!
This is absolutely true on securities fraud, with respect to the annual statements reported to the SEC and investors. This also brings in the possibility of Sarbanes-Oxley violations, because the CEOs of the companies must certify SEC reports, and any fraudulent information contained therein brings criminal penalties – 10 years in prison, according to the statute – on those CEOs, if I remember correctly.
On mortgage origination fraud, the states have their hands tied a bit because of statutes of limitations, but as Prof. Black said FIRREA extended them at the federal level.
The laws are better now (longer statute of limitations). What we most needed legislation was to get the money to close the frauds (not a problem now) and to expand our administrative enforcement powers (which FIRREA did in 1989). So, the current crew has ample laws to prosecute and bring serious enforcement actions (not the SEC’s weak beer). There is no excuse for what has become total impunity for the senior officers who grew wealthy through the frauds that hyper-inflated the bubble and drove the crisis.
one of several reasons that it is obviously more smoke and mirrors
Do you think enough of the American populace will wake up and acknowledge that this is, indeed, class warfare . . . and we demand some warriors? If no warriors appear, it seems to be it’s gonna be a choice for the average man of serfdom or anarchy.
IF, and I say big IF Obama did fire some of those Thieves would you be interested in representing us in one of those positions?
Welcome Bill Black!
Yves Smith mentioned you in her interview on Harry Shearer’s Le Show last Sunday and said it’s her impression you’re not keen on using RICO. Can you expand?
Prof Black, I’m wondering if you have any ideas about how we can fix all this criminality? More stuff like Occupy, maybe (and keeping Occupy alive?) Marketing what’s known in emotionally-impactful ways?
A key point. And obviously, you have people like Khuzami and Breuer, who were part of the original “securities fraud working group” in the Financial Fraud task force and did nothing with that responsibility. In fact, given Khuzami’s time as general counsel at Deutsche Bank when they were a leading securitization trustee, it seems he should be under investigation rather than directing one, no?
Would it be useful to comment, Prof. Black, on the coordination of the fraud and anti-prosecution as a strategy in the context of globalization?
Good afternoon, Professor Black and FDLers!
My questions: If the rule of law in the financial sector is dying or dead, how then might American’s conduct their business? It is a matter of trust. And, these days, when predators have immunity from the law, who can rationally trust America’s banks and other financial institutions?
California, in their side deal, added an additional enforcement monitor just for the state, to ensure compliance on the mandated principal reductions and other elements. They’re looking for a monitor now. Prof. Black would be a nice choice for that.
Thanks for being here Mr Black and all your great work. Rumors just now circulating on ABC news that the california AG, Harris is on O’s list for supreme court judge when ginsburg steps down. So her brother in law is deputy AG and raised $65 million for O in 08 and Harris with very little to show becomes CA, AG and now might be put on supreme court. And holder was part of the law firm behind Mers. And Geithner the top Fed Cop on Wall Street when all the crime was being committed.
The webs they weave. And it is all out and in your face that is how little they feel worried about the people. The whole thing is one big giant ponzi fraud and they all know, MSM carries water for them, and next stop if they have there way is to start a war with Iran. But don’t think that will happen until they blow up Greece cause mass panic and pass all kinds of BS that will make what Hank did last time round look like child play
Too bad we can’t clone him!
Prof. Black,
You have referred to an “Underwriting Rule” that existed during the S&L crisis, which was subsequently changed to a guideline. Does that change significantly undermine the prospect of pursuing fraud? How can I find information about that rule?
Given how much time has passed, just how compromised would an investigation be now? Memories fade, evidence may be destroyed, immunity sought… There is no statute of limitations on fraud but prosecuting it must become significantly more difficult. If we were to get a serious regulator, such as yourself, into a position to conduct investigations, is it too late?
Jaime
CWF
Yes, he would. Of course I wish he would take something at the Federal Level. I do not see changes for the better if we cannot slow down the criminality.
People have to be able to get answers and we aren’t getting any now from Washington.
The Rule of Law, szielinski, under assault on so many levels, from the crashed economy, to the use of drones, spying upon American citizens, and so on, is central to a civil and just society.
The deliberate and intentional destruction of the Rule of Law MUST qualify as a “high crime” … if not something worse.
DW
The working group has a mandate, with one exception, NOT to investigate mortgage origination fraud, which would be insane if it were intended to investigate and prosecute. To give you an idea of the required scale: we had 1,000 agents investigating the S&L debacle. The working group, at peak, will have around 30. This crisis caused greater than 70X the losses of the S&L debacle and the scope of elite fraud in this crisis is comparably larger. The Dallas Task Force, alone, had over 100 professionals, to look at one hotspot of S&L fraud. The total FBI force assigned to mortgage fraud is slightly over 300 and they are overwhelmingly assigned to investigate relatively minor frauds. There has not been a single serious investigation of a major origination fraud. There has not been a serious investigation (federal or state) of mortgage foreclosure fraud. So, the resources are inadequate by at least 60X. Worse, the only way to succeed against this kind of fraud epidemic is to have the banking regulatory agencies identify the accounting control frauds and do the great bulk of the investigative work. Our agency made > 30,000 criminal referrals in the S&L debacle. That same agency made ZERO criminal referrals during this crisis. Until Obama appoints real banking regulators who make supporting the criminal investigations a top priority no effort to convict a meaningful number of the elite, fraudulent bank CEOs can succeed.
They can’t; they won’t; and what this tells you is that the American people have not expressed enough outrage to force Obama to put real prosecutors in place. Remember, Geithner sought to prevent even investigations, much less prosecutions, of the systemically dangerous institutions (SDIs) (the top 20 banks) on the grounds that investigations could destabilize a fragile economy. Think of that logic — we should leave felons in charge of many of our largest banks as a means of achieving financial stability. One of our family rules is that it is impossible to compete with unintentional self parody.
As the ACLU has experienced, courts are increasingly disinclined to allow ‘intent’ to be associated with criminal acts – greatly increasing prosecutors’ burdens. Is this going to make it almost impossible to bring charges without actual spoken or written words from those committing criminal acts, to show that there was real intent?
It’s beyond treason.
More along the lines of dakine01 @18 — county register class action suit. Emptywheel posted two diaries last year about county register of deeeds Curtis Hertel of Michigan and his class action lawsuit against MERS. I just did a fast google to see where that’s at — don’t know, but I see Hertel wrote an open letter to Michigan AG Schuette urging him NOT to join the settlement. He makes a good point about criminal vulnerability:
We seem to have lost the capacity for moral outrage. We have economists constantly preaching that we must not take this emotionally, that, ala Godfather, “it’s just business.” Real reform has always been the product of well-focused moral outrage. There is nothing more practical than holding our elites accountable for their misconduct. Any other approach leads to crony capitalism and the erosion of democracy.
Professor Black would be a nice choice for any responsible (and empowered) position in this mess–and the higher up the position, the much mo’ better for us.
What an honor to have him here, David. Thank you so much.
Welcome back to FDL, Bill!
When I purchased my home in metro KC, I got to talking about MERS with the banker who originated the loan. According to her, MERS got a law passed in Missouri allowing them to forego recording each transfer of the mortgage with the Jackson county recorder of deeds, and instead keep their own records of the ownership of the mortgage.
I’ve looked for the precise statute, but can’t find it. I assumed that MERS got some kind of law like this passed in each state, so as to bypass the local recorders of deeds, otherwise their setup would fall flat.
But it got me to thinking . . . if DC is apparently unwilling to seriously investigate MERS, what would it take to unwind the state laws that allow them to play fast and loose with the recordkeeping on the loans? Any particular state that might be most amenable to returning power to the local recorders of deeds?
Ruth, not sure I understand. Do you mean there are cases where the court finds that intent cannot be inferred from the fact that the (overt) act was committed?
And do have a case in mind? ACLU case in Texas?
There is a problem, particularly in the DC and 2d Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court with judges/justices who are extremely hostile to prosecuting elite white-collar criminals. That makes the choice of President all the more important (and control of the Senate). Do not give up. Any good prosecutor of elite white-collar criminals will lose some cases, particularly on appeal. We had a 90% conviction rate v. S&L elites despoite the hostility.
When you prosecute and bring real civil suits and administrative enforcement actions after serious investigations you put facts in the record. This changed the view, even of many hostile judges, as to what had caused the S&L debacle and it created the political space for real reform. The Bush and Obama administration actively seek to avoid putting facts into the record and creating that political space for real reform because doing so would harm their leading financial donors.
It’s the law and economics – public choice theory – indoctrination.
Just a cynical observation, but putting forward Professor Black’s name in association with any aggressive and/or remedial prosecution would ensure it never happens. Just as the current crop of republican legislators have been trained to say NO to this administration’s legislative agenda, it seems the current crop of administration insiders rush to record their NO vote any time a progressive or rule-of-law person is proposed to uphold the Constitution. (My, oh, my . . . look at Spitzer, and Warren, and I’m sure a host of other, lesser-knowns . . .who have, one way or the other, been marginalized.)
And the only remedial measures I’ve heard aimed at us (the 99%) is 3rd party activism, or grass-roots, ground up organization. I’ve heard we need to run for local school board, or local dog catcher and get our feet wet in the political process. This looks, to me, like telling a community to train their own security guards to prevent local bank robberies–that are occurring in real time. By the time the locals get trained . . . there won’t be any money left in the bank to guard.
I think OWS might prove that, once people begin to understand this complex subject, they DO get outraged. I wanted to go kill someone after reading Griftopia.
It’s just a big subject, and the fact that Greenspan et al are also pseudoscientists takes some study and serious critical thinking to come to terms with.
Bill,
I think the reason people are not exactly outraged is because these issues are hard to understand for a layman. I try to condense it the best I can and simply ask:
How many more times do we have to pay the banks for those mortgages?
Angry people understand that we bailed out the banks the first time. They just have not been made aware of the other 12 or so times since then.
A most superb family rule, Bill … perhaps the “family” of humankind might well consider the value of adopting it?
Most Americans have yet to realize the scope and likely consequence of what has “transpired”, economically, and they shall be easily diverted were a war with Iran, for instance, to just happen to “happen”, after due “sexing-up” is “applied” and applauded, of course.
The “media”, which is a part of the political class, has done little, quite intentionally, one imagines, to educate the public about what has occurred.
DW
OCCUPY the 2d Circuit!
Send a message to the Roberts Court.
Agreed.
I have to disagree. The american public are outraged. you see it in thousands upon thousands of comments all over the net. You see it through OWS and why it was so violently crushed. Where you don’t see is on MSM. Take greece in point. The people have been protesting for 2 years plus and what does the PTB do. Put a banker in charge, create a proxy govt, and force more rape and pillage on the people, and use the police to gas them should the people express outrage about that.
MERS is a disaster. Even conservative economists (see Hernando de Soto) have long written that the U.S. public recordation system is one of the reasons that the U.S. rose to become the world’s strongest economy. The real estate lenders, however, for the sake of avoiding a few filing fees, decided to essentially replace the brilliantly successful public system with their pervasively fraudulent private system. MERS cannot survive any serious national investigation, but the foreclosure fraud settlement suggests that they will not face a serious national investigation.
Hear, hear.
Right, which is why it was so criminal to release liability on a mountain of physical criminal evidence, all of which could have been entered into the record. But registers of deeds, people like Phil Ting, are going ahead and putting this information into the public record anyway. Can that be leveraged to somehow shame the federal regulatory apparatus into action?
I think thirty plus years of disinformation, largely but not entirely coming deliberately form one party, telling us that outrageous behavior is just normal, that anything business does is fine, that compassion is socialism, has contributed to that numbness that ordinary folks often feel when confronted with a new outrage.
Especially when, like this one, it is so complicated. On top of which most people are spending all their energies trying to survive, hang on to their own job (by working long hours), take care of their families, and drag themselves from one day to the next.
Thus, they glom on to easily understood issues to be outraged about…say, gay marriage, instead of a financial mess so tangled professionals have trouble following all the threads.
I think MERS poses a grave threat to title.
Excerpt from May 19, 2006 report to Fannie Mae re Lavalle investigation findings:
“It is axiomatic that the practice of submitting false pleadings and affidavits is unlawful,” said the report, a copy of which was obtained by The New York Times. “With his complaint, Mr. Lavalle has identified an issue that Fannie Mae needs to address promptly.”
I. Findings on Foreclosure Procedures
We conclude that foreclosure attorneys in Florida are routinely filing false
pleadings and affidavits regarding the plaintiffs – MERS or servicers – interest in the
proceedings and regarding lost, missing or destroyed promissory notes. The practice could be occurring elsewhere. It is axiomatic that the practice is improper and should be stopped. Fannie Mae has not authorized this unlawful conduct. As a result of the MERS hearings in Florida, Fannie Mae recognizes the issue and is taking action to correct it.
Mr. Lavalle warned Fannie years ago that MERS couldn’t legally foreclose because it didn’t actually own notes underlying properties.
The report agreed. MERS’s approach of letting loan servicers foreclose in its own name, not in that of institutions owning the notes, “is not accepted legal practice in all states,” the report said. Moreover, “MERS’s counsel conceded false allegations are routinely made, and the practice should be ‘modified.’ ”
Excerpt from May 19, 2006 report to Fannie Mae re Lavalle investigation findings:
I. Findings on Foreclosure Procedures
We conclude that foreclosure attorneys in Florida are routinely filing false
pleadings and affidavits regarding the plaintiffs – MERS or servicers – interest in the
proceedings and regarding lost, missing or destroyed promissory notes. The practice could be occurring elsewhere. It is axiomatic that the practice is improper and should be stopped. Fannie Mae has not authorized this unlawful conduct. As a result of the MERS hearings in Florida, Fannie Mae recognizes the issue and is taking action to correct it.
In 2005, Mr. Lavalle warned Fannie Mae that some judges had ruled that the Stern firm was submitting “sham pleadings.” Nonetheless, Fannie continued to do business with the firm until it closed its doors last year, after evidence emerged of rampant forgeries and fraudulent filings.
Robert D. Drain, a federal bankruptcy judge in the Southern District of New York, said in court last month that the failure of the mortgage industry to deal with pervasive problems involving inaccurate documentation and improper court filings amounted to “the greatest failure of lawyering in the last 50 years.”
Excerpts from Gretchen Morgenson’s NYT column:
This has been particularly prevalent in my experience in cases of bias in employment. Sorry, don’t have a particular case at present in mind, will get back to you on this.
Could we, like, infiltrate with a 10 year plan or something?
We could create secret societies of “anti-criminal, anti-pseudoscience economists” at universities. I’m only kinda joking, but really, this is war, man.
Did you see Eric Holder and Shaun Donovan’s post “Holding Banks Accountable” a couple days ago? Published on Huffington Post, Daily Kos and Las Vegas Sun. From the comments, apparently went over like lead balloon, even on Democratic partisan website Daily Kos (6 diary recs, 3 tip jar recs, 17 total comments). Do you have a comment?
I’ve heard it stated that even those who have (in the past few years) paid off their mortgage and have a ‘satisfaction of lien’ recorded in the local courthouse are not necessarily out of the woods. Like a bad dream, at some future date, some (former) mortgagor can claim that they never received the money (supposedly forwarded to them by a servicer) and a balance is still due. IOW, lien satisfaction and clear title may merely be more smoke and mirrors, and the solution will be to pay for your property twice–or lose it.
Very well said, Bill.
Until this is understood by a compelling majority of American citizens, the slide toward neo-feudalism, and worship of the Divine Right of Money will continue and accelerate.
DW
Well, we need to get to explaining/marketing the truth (and it is true, 100%) that this war will be over that same bankster cartel’s economic plan primarily.
Oh, actually, I can think of a few myself. Thanks for clarifying. Yes, that is definitely a problelm in employment cases, age discrimination, sex discrimination, etc.
Sorry if that sidetrackeed the conversation.
Good idea. One of the revealing facts about the settlement is that the Republican candidates for their party’s nomination are locked in furious combat and are looking to bash Obama with any available weapon, but they have ignored his failure to prosecute the elite bank frauds and obscene efforts to try to use the settlement to immunize those elite frauds even from criminal investigation. Hmmm, can we think of any reason why the Republicans would not bash Obama for going soft on elite financial frauds?
I think about this all the time, I am a lawyer with a NY license, and I must say, with great regret, that when the rule of law is so blatantly and systematically flouted on such a grand scale, and with such far-reaching consequences for the population at large, and when the law enforcers are so clearly seen to be shirking their duty to enforce, then I can find no rational reason why the people should not rise up and take vengeance directly. How likely do you think it is that we might start seeing such incidents as the people become increasingly aware of what has been perpetrated upon them? And do you think that might affect the willingness of the law enforcers to start enforcing? I can’t believe I am even having to ask this question in this country, but it really does seem like that is where we are. Your thoughts?
I don’t think there is a lack of outrage. there is plenty on this and a host of other issues. And this is in spite of MSM attempts to whitewash everything. But what do you do. protest and get beaten, gassed, slung in jail for several days. Gee just look what rahm has set up for anyone wanted to protest the G8. Look what happens to people in greece protesting.
Again I don’t think it is lack of outrage. these people are psychos they care nada about what we think or want. Just in case we get a little too outraged they set police dressed up as military thugs on you.
The people who ought to be most worried about the title problems caused by MERS are the title insurance companies. If there’s a problem with the title on your home, and they said it was clear, they are on the hook.
Sadly, they’re also “shareholders” of MERS, and so desperately want this to go away. If anyone is pushing for general amnesty in the foreclosure mess, it’s the title companies.
Yes.
Which is why my mind is moving into serious, hard-core strategy territory. Like, I think we might need a volunteer game theorist or 2 or something.
First, thank you for your efforts with the clerk. Most efforts to get folks to investigate elite frauds fail. Keep on pitching. Try your AG and state reps.
EXACTLY! So when a Deed of Trust/Mortgage note is not attached to the property in the Register and approved by the Registrar the police do not have the authority to remove people from the home.
It’s that simple. The police are then working strictly for the banks and not the city/county which pays their salary. They in fact are acting fraudulantly by forcing people out of their homes.
You’ve a most-wicked sense of humor, Bill.
Of the sort much appreciated here.
;~DW
Speaking of State AGs, what’s your take on Chris Koster here in Missouri?
You have often referred to a criminogenic environment, but this is an incomplete analysis. The problem is not rampant crime in the economic system. It is the system as criminal enterprise, that is kleptocracy.
There is a major difference in these two views. According to you and liberal economists in general, the economic/political system is essentially sound. So you advocate putting “pressure” on Obama and the Democrats to “force” them to take measures and adopt policies to curb and punish criminal acts. But of course this never happens. And the reason it doesn’t is because your analysis is wrong. If you look at things from a kleptocratic perspective, it is axiomatic why reform will never work or even be tried, why the guilty will remain not only free and uninvestigated but made both richer and more powerful.
My question to you is how much longer will it be before you and liberal economists take the plunge and address kleptocracy as it is and not in the tentative way you have done so far and most economists have avoided altogether? And if you do not, at what point do you and they become part of the problem?
You may wish to join us in the Diner at morning time here/FDL. We will soon be talking theory and investigating a new way forward.
It is fundamentally a lack of will, though at the senior levels they do not even have a conception that elite bankers can be frauds, so it is also an example of one of our mantras — if you don’t look, you don’t find (when it comes to sophisticated financial frauds).
True.
They tipped their hands in that op-ed by saying that “our greatest priority is getting relief to homeowners quickly.” Of course, the settlement allows for a 6-9 month period where eligible borrowers will be “identified.” The liability release, which could lead to a surge in foreclosure actions in many states, take right away.
Sadly, I think this is a feature, not a bug, of our current law enforcement. Even though we are working harder, for less . . . and can see inaction by those we select to protect us or serve us–when push comes to shove, the individual has to weigh whether a night (or week or months or more) in jail is worth demonstrating and protesting. Settling for less–but still something–at least right now, tips the scales toward inaction (IMO).
No, not unless we end MERS.
if the people rise up they will crush it. Use the NDDA to throw those that seem the most threat in a dark hole somewhere, the MSM will repeat over and over again it is the work of anarchist or domestic terrorists, and the opportunity will be used to pass even more draconian laws
And don’t leave out — continuing to get rich off the government by buying up what they destroyed in the cycle of foreclosures:
http://firedoglake.com/2009/03/23/timothy-geithner-making-countrywide-executives-rich-again/
Honestly, as a former lawyer with only a little experience in real estate and title insurance, I don’t see how making it “go away” this way resolves future problems.
How will there not be clouded titles on all of these fraudulently foreclosed-on properties? It seems to me they are setting up future problems for themselves. The recording system for deeds and notes and mortgages/deeds of trust goes back so far, how can a lawsuit settlement possibly clear all those titles? (and how can we answer that without knowing the terms?)
Sorry–I’m in Florida. We have an unconvicted crook for governor, and cronies in almost every cabinet post (including AG).
A most excellent observation, PP.
The police are “applying” the “force” of “law” for fraudulent purpose, making the police clear accessories to the larger crime.
Were there but a functioning Rule of Law …
DW
David,
Can you contact me please – about this. I don’t want to break any rules here but I would like to respond to some of the comments here.
Jaime
;-)
Correct. They are protecting themselves with an army of Peace Officers. Fiction is not as shocking as Fact.
I know.
Right there with you.
Welcome and thank you for coming to chat with us, Professor. The following is a portion of an email I sent to my son as a follow up to a conversation we had (lol–he thinks I’ve gone from liberal to radical! He’s 49 and claims to be libertarian if anything; I’m 67.)
Is there anything you don’t agree with? Doesn’t the break down of the rule of law necessarily end badly? Isn’t the result more likely to be “we, the people,” end up as serfs or pawns of the privileged few to the point where they control our every move. Down with democracy means out with freedom?
As a litigator, I know that most courts are hostile to the use of RICO v elite white-collar criminals. The primary potential advantage RICO gave me in civil suits was treble damages. In virtually every case, however, I could prove regular damages that exceeded the defendant’s ability to repay. So, bringing a RICO action meant a lot more work, allowed the defense to delay the case through motions, pissed off many judges, and got me nothing useful.
Meet ‘em on your front porch–with a firearm–and see how long that works for you. We KNOW that many who supposedly work for us DO NOT; but the risks vs. rewards pits property against freedom (actual freedom).
Thank you for the invite! I’ll try to be there!
“Whoever controls the volume of money in our country is absolute master of all industry and commerce…and when you realize that the entire system is very easily controlled, one way or another, by few powerful men at the top, you will not have to be told how periods of inflation and depression originate.” – President James Garfield, 2 weeks before his assassination.
With a POTUS and US AG unvilling to prosecute we have nothing but state’s AG’s. If they are unwilling to nbuck the establishment’s position (i.e. “the settlement”) we are nowhere.
More re @49 Curtis Hertel MI register lawsuit against MERS. I left a comment in that diary wondering what the point of such a suit is:
haha… it’s obvious why Mitt doesn’t. I presume Santorum and Newt are hoping they can significantly benefit at some point. But in fairness, Paul has voiced his disgust with the crony capitalism. He just doesn’t fit the MSM narrative, so he — like all populists, such as Kucinich or Nader — get ignored or marginalized by the MSM wing of The Elite.
And thanks DDay. I intend to chase state legislators. I see no reason why we can’t identify at least one or two state legislators with real authority on this.
As for demanding the AG docs, I suggest that simply because transparency is extremely difficult for the Political Class to oppose PUBLICLY. The key is to find someone who will risk comity in exchange for potential justice.
As Buffett has long said, “my class is winning” (hands down). The Wall Street Journal published an explicit attack on working class American homeowners who might receive payments under the foreclosure fraud settlement and the on line comments show the great success they had in prompting class hatred — of the poor. Charles Murray’s new book’s key policy recommendation is that the wealthy (i.e., the good people) should preach to the poor about how inferior they are in terms of culture and morals.
How could the senior bankers be “frauds” when they hobnob with the political and judicial elite (merely pretending that the judicial elite are not part of the political class, here)?
How could one’s best buds be “bad”?
Ah well, crony capitalism at its worst …
As Hugh suggests @84, ’tis the entire “system” which is corrupt … likely beyond reasonable redemption.
The self-selected “natural elite” are playing an “end-game” and they care not what will result.
DW
The state AGs do not have the combined resources to conduct more than one, possibly two investigations of the massive frauds that drove this crisis and there is no effective way to combine their resources to conduct such extraordinary investigations.
I think you said in an earlier comment that there hadn’t been enough pressure was put on Obama to force him to get rid of the people like Holder and Geithner and get people in place who will investigate, enforce and prosecute. Personally, I don’t hold out much hope that Obama would do that, but if here is a chance, do you think that a million (or millions) of signatures on online petitions delivered to the White House and/or the campaign HQ…and copies taken to the news departments of every major network and cable news would do any good?
Also, regarding the Fannie Mae law firm’s report in response to Ray LaVelle’s investigation, I was most shocked by the fact that they do not stamp paid notes canceled or paid in full. The report said that they return these endorsed-in-blank (negotiable!) notes to the servicers if state law requires it or if borrowers request it, and the other 40% are sent to a third party for shredding. Negotiable instruments! People who have paid the notes (even if the mortgage no longer attaches to their home) could be taken to court to pay again if those notes fell into the wrong hands (or were sold to a holder in due course). And the report said if it was a holder in due course, the homeowner had no defense. That is unconscionable…those notes should be stamped paid or canceled immediately, regardless of whether they are returned or destroyed. The law firm didn’t seem to think this was a big deal because apparently no one had complained….
Many civil actions can be mounted under the false claims act. That seems to be the case with today’s announcement of a settlement with Citi, prompted by their endemic fraud against the FHA.
I think all these great commenters can take it from here, I need to run out on my getaway weekend. Thanks very much Professor Black for taking the time today.
If you get a chance, I’d recommend you skim through Bill Moyers’ talk at the end of the links at this a.m.’s Diner, gives a really thorough view of how the ‘self-selected’ have gotten the grip they have on power. It is possible to undo that crime, with intense and long effort.
I can’t read all this until later. I just dropped by to say thank you for all you have done to put the brakes on this monstrosity, and for educating me about subjects such as control fraud. Keep up the stellar work.
Thanks to you DAvid and Mr Black. Very enlightening.
Because they have Superpacs too?
What a Fortunate Fund Raising Coincidence for Obama
By: Jon Walker Thursday February 9, 2012 2:59 pm
Less that 48 hours after signalling that Obama wanted very rich donors, like perhaps Wall Street executives, to give unlimited money to his allied Super PAC, his Department of Justice announced it reached a deal on foreclosure fraud that contains very favorable terms for the big banks.
What a fortunate coincidence that top bank executives who should very happy about this deal now have an officially endorsed place to show their gratitude to Obama by making unlimited campaign donations to help his re-election. This is truly some lucky timing.
We know how to prosecute it, more importantly we know how to prevent it from happening. My book and tons of my articles (available free at our UMKC economics blog: NewEconomicPerspectives and my SSRN author page) discuss these things in detail.
Do RICO trials have juries? Shouldn’t it be the juries you care about, not the judges? I thought judges were the umpires — quoting John Roberts.
In an essay about Mark Twain, Orwell referred to the idea of “success is the same as virtue” as the Great American Myth.
Heh.
Some things never change.
When my hubby occasionally waxes political (it’s not his cup of tea), his view is that we (the inhabitants of this planet) are all sharing the same nest–and those who excrete the most, who think their ‘superiority’ somehow insulates them, will ultimately find they have despoiled their own nest–the stench and filth permeates throughout. He’s always said he never understood the elite’s philosophy: He who dies with the most toys WINS! [Wins what, he will ask--they're still dead!]
Thanks David for all you do. You and Yves have done a great job on reporting on the fraud(ulent) settlement.
We adopted long ago the motto attributed (though historians quibble) to the House of Orange in its seemingly impossible 100 year war for independence against what was then the world’s strongest military force (Spain): “It is not necessary to hope in order to persevere.”
We persevere. If you give up they win. When we fight we (sometimes) win.
Wow. Missed that.
When I said the title companies want it to “go away,” I mean they want the potential claims against their title insurance to be someone else’s problem. If they get a settlement agreement that says “whatever problems there were in the past, title companies who acted in good faith have no liability going forward,” they will breathe a sigh of relief.
OTOH, there is, as you note, a huge problem going forward for the title companies. When someone purchases a home next year that was part of the MERS mess last year, will the title company guarantee that title? And if they don’t, will banks and real estate folks shun them for being “too picky”?
Excellent point. I have done a series of articles about Apple’s suppliers in which I explain how anti-employee control frauds find it optimal to locate in fraud-friendly nations. This is considered “free trade” by regular morons who create oxymorons.
Have to leave.
Thank you, Bill, David, and Bev.
Great comments, Firedogs!!!
Much appreciation to all.
DW
The “criminals” just learn how to better execute the next crime. So many “liberal economists” can’t keep up.
These are crimes against humanity.
I meant, how do we get “the cops on the beat” to actually do their job?
New Economic Perspectives blog
Sad to say, you are pointing to a big deterrent, as being honest and complying with the laws does too often make it hard to operate in a business community that prefers not to be – or work with – the picky one.
We do not lack the knowledge. That is not the problem. It is simple while we were being brainwashed and dumbed in school and by MSM they grabbed all the power and funneled the money in circles that always goes back to them. They have zip incentive to change this unless their power and wealth is threatened. And changing one suit in teh WH with another or in congress or in the supreme court and so on is not change
Occupy has been very helpful in this regard, but until folks like Mukasey (Holder’s predecessor) and Holder and Geithner and (both famous) Paulsons are shunned by society as moral failures — rather than being elevated to the most prestigious positions in our nation we have objective evidence that we have inadequate outrage.
That just removes any shred of doubt that both parties are working for the criminals that exploit us, and that anybody who votes for EITHER party is acting directly against their own interest as mere fleshie citizens. But just withholding the vote, while necessary, is not sufficient. Direct action of the kind none of us really want to contemplate will be required to change anything material, I’m becoming increasingly convinced.
OTOH, it might gain them a bunch of customers from those who want to purchase homes. When pushed by a bank or realtor to go to a title company known for winks and nods, I could easily see the buyer saying, “No, I want to go to a title company that actually does its job.”
Banks might, but Real Estate Professionals won’t. Title Insurance companies won’t underwrite either if they cannot follow clear chain. Therefore, their liability would not be imposed. It is when MERS and the Banks side step all the processes that ensure proper transfer of any part of property either change of owner, or mortgage holder.
Demand more from your elected representatives. Fire them if they represent the interests of the 1% v. the national interest.
Sure, but you know that isn’t going to happen!
WORD!!!!!
So the criminogenic environment in high finance is a global phenomenon kind of by nature and by international laws and standards?
At some point the idea of a “International Banking Cartel” stops sounding like simply a concept from one of Alex Jones’ rants…
I guess that sort of terminology is still considered a little over the top, though. :)
It’s a cause of tearing our hair out here often, that we see the very perpetrators of the worst offenses, and those whose ignorance provided a run-up to our economic disaster, presented in leading media outlets as the authorities on it. (Also at seminars to ‘incent’ further entrepreneurs.)
Almost no member of congress, and increasingly on the state level, cares a twit about constituents. They don’t need votes; they have money. Why do you think they’re going out of their ways to piss off every voter group imaginable. It’s a lot easier to manipulate the outcome when the turnout is low.
If you think the entire economic system is a kleptocracy, why would you think voting would be any different.
Bill,
So do you think if we helped others to see and understand that they are paying the banks again and again for those mortgages, ie: ramp up the rage; We might be able to force Obama’s hand?
I wrote a very detailed piece (available on NewEconomicPerspectives) explaining why the procedure of the settlement (i.e., the Obama administration meeting separately with Dem and Rep AGs and the buying of CA’s assent to the deal) was despicable.
They have zip incentive to change this unless their power and wealth is threatened
We don’t have the cohesion to challenge their wealth (e.g. through boycotts, work stoppage,elections, etc.). We can’t challenge their power . . . they absorb and ‘re-educate’ those few ‘outsiders’ who infiltrate their ranks. Again, that leaves acceptance (downward spiral to serfdom) or anarchy. Was the Arab Spring an anomaly or a roadmap?
Are there no legal actions or remedies that force an “officer” or employee to do one’s job? It seems to me that there would be lots of individuals who could bring such an action.
Absolutely, if the potential buyer takes the time and researches what the companies have done previously, but that isn’t often the case.
i agree and it is sad to say but that comment by Mr Black just emphasizes how little power the people have. Really kick them out at the ballot box? how many times has that been tried? the whole system is rigged and they even rig the voting results if they don’t get what they want.
“Whoever controls the volume of money in our country is absolute master of all industry and commerce…and when you realize that the entire system is very easily controlled, one way or another, by few powerful men at the top, you will not have to be told how periods of inflation and depression originate.” – President James Garfield, 2 weeks before his assassination.
That’s an interesting thought to pursue — the difference between what should have been and what can be. Back in the Hertel diary I quoted you and presented my own dream about how things could go forward — Bobby Ewing in the shower. I’d love to know what you think about that, and how you feel now about what you and Randy Wray said in October 2010:
Just watching how the news goes, it’s so clear to me that we’re just making stuff up now. The gears are stripped, law has failed, and we are flying in the ozone. But only the administration is dreaming big at making shit up, the defrauded are still stuck on the letters of the law when it’s already failed so big…too big to ever fix. I guess I’m interested in dreams outside the box. Like we’re free of law and history, which I think we really are. Your thoughts?
I have come to the point, and this is very sad, where their utterly dishonest column, did not surprise me. If they had gotten their way entirely they would have achieved the elite bank frauds’ greatest dream — the ability to loot with express impunity. Instead, they have had to settle for implied impunity. It is clear that Holder and Donovan along with Geither are the fraudulent bankers’ most valuable allies. Obama, of course, is responsible for his cabinet choices and their policies are his policies. The Republicans, also sadly, are even worse.
I’m thinking there has to be a way of one group openly advocating something legal yet covert and effective that the other group acts upon.
“How to PRETEND to be a wanna be oligarch bootlicker, and why you should consider being one as a career choice till the time is ready and you hear that the eagle has landed”
etc.
I know this is really outlandish, but the alternative…
Europe reminds us that as bad as the Obama administration is on many grounds, it can get worse. The EU and ECB leaders have pushed the Eurozone back into recession through their insane austerity programs — something that every Republican candidate for their presidential nomination (and the Washington Post) have been pushing even as they see the policies lead to catastrophe in Europe.
Bill, Thank you very much for being here today.
Any final thoughts / comments for us?
Thank you again.
(the post will stay open for comments for a while)
I’ve been saying since 2008 mark all mortgages paid in full. We must because they can’t attribute any of the tax payer money to coverage of a single note.
There’s never going to be enough of us who even can actively keep up with the tricks of the 1% to vote them out without some additional strategies of some sort.
I wrote a very detailed piece (available on NewEconomicPerspectives) explaining why the procedure of the settlement (i.e., the Obama administration meeting separately with Dem and Rep AGs and the buying of CA’s assent to the deal) was despicable.
Well thank you for that and all you. Just not sure how much more people need to read. Many know what is going on and not just with this but with all the other BS, fraud, and the ever growing surveillance state. Many know all this despite MSM to cover it up and cover BS on a daily basis. The question is what can we do and it is a question that those in power ask to.
Guess what they discovered we can change it at the ballot box, LOL they know is no change. We can mass protest and well i think OWS shows how they will respond to that.
That is why i say it is all in the open now, in our face because they have figured out our options and have assessed we have none
what a wonderful discussion, thanks Bill and Dave
and, always, Bev
You and I and those here have taken the interest to inform ourselves, but that isn’t nearly common enough. Passing it on is of vital importance, and making your voice heard in your community in as responsible a way as possible.
Yesterday’s double header misogyny (Issa, Friess) proved it to me, i.e. that they don’t need voters or anyone else any more.
Thanks David, BevW, Elliott, and Prof. Black for a vitally important discussion.
Yes, the repeal of the underwriting rule (which occurred under Clinton as part of his (and Gore’s) embrace of “Reinventing Government”) made the world vastly more criminogenic and made it harder to prosecute the fraudulent lenders. The failure of the Bush administration to reinstate the rule — after the FBI and industry warnings of a fraud epidemic was essential to allowing the crisis. The failure of either Dodd-Frank or the banking regulators to reinstate the rule shows the continuing rule of the anti-regulators.
The rule had three key requirements: (1) you must underwrite before you lend, (2) the underwriting must demonstrate that the borrower has the capacity and character to repay the loan, and (3) you must maintain a written record of the underwriting. This essentially forbade liar’s loans (which had a 90% fraud incidence in the ongoing crisis). It also meant that there was a paper trail demonstrating that the lender knew that the loan was bad before making the loan. Fraudulent lenders often either removed the bad evidence from the loan file or placed false information in the file. When we were able to prove that it established a felony (false books and records and false statements to a federal examiner) and was admissible to establish the intent to make a fraudulent loan. Fraudulent lenders loved liar’s loans because they prevented the creation of the paper trail proving that they knew the loan was fraudulent when they made it.
Well in an hour and a half you’ve bested Holder and Donovan in total comments, not even mentioning SUPPORTIVE comments — and their posts have been up, what, two days now? In terms of substantiation by “we the people” … you’re it, and they’re a figment. Thanks so much for being here.
I’ve been typing away like a chipmunk on a spinner in a cage working from the front to back responding. I’ll stay on for a bit answering some of the later questions. Thank you Lake dwellers for having me on and speaking about these issues. I think the survival of our democracy is at stake, but I know that we are following policies that are so criminogenic that they produce recurrent, intensifying financial crises.
This is the reasoning that prevents our outrage from reaching the highest levels of power and routing out the corruption. Reelecting Obama will only confirm to the power elite that we don’t really demand accountability.
Bill,
Take your time. We are still here. I really appreciate your time with us.
I don’t know whether that happened in MO, but I can tell you that MERS was created in a manner that was designed not to require any state legislative changes, so I think it is unlikely to be true.
yay! :-)
(I do hope you get to Bobby Ewing in the shower @148. That’s the one that sticks with me.)
Yes, we need state hearings and U.S. Senate hearings to expose the facts to the public. The House is now hopeless, as we saw in yesterday’s Issa hearings on contraception.
For anyone that wants to continue this conversation, hop over to MY.FDL. Someone start a diary!
So glad you liked the Moyers piece. I thought it was fantastic, very extensive and clear.
Thank you for all you do.
A generation of U.S. lawyers have been taught via Easterbrook and Fischel that a rule against fraud is not necessary or even particularly important in the securities sphere because markets are automatically self-correcting. Bubbles and (material) fraud are impossible in self-correcting markets.
Always demand the original note and a notation that the underlying debt has been paid in full.
We can keep going here.
I’m staying here till the credits end and the lights come back on. Happy popcorn!
That would explain why I couldn’t find anything in the Missouri Code.
And it doesn’t surprise me that the banker didn’t know what she was talking about. Not in the least.
Apparently they don’t have much faith in capitalist ideology if they are busy scuttling it.
That is putting your finger right on it, girlfriend. And, if voting is futile, what comes next?
I’m a criminologist. I know that vigilantism always leads to terror and extortion and the death of the rule of law. I don’t give up on the rule of law and I don’t accept Holder and Mukasey’s refusal to protect and defend the constitution of the United States.
I guess we can, cant we.
:)
They lack the capital to pay more than a tiny fraction of the damage — which puts it back on us.
Oh shoot. I read a comment thread on Naked Capitalism recently about a guy’s effort to get the note from his bank. Unbelievable. I don’t think I can find it now. But it’s my impression that “show me the note,” either during your mortgage or when you pay it off, is a fail. The banks just won’t, plus they retaliate against you for even asking. Plus I remember reading about a case in California, think Gomes vs. Countrywide(?), where the guy was trying to use the court to get the bank to show the note or to recognize that they hadn’t, and the court threw him out and now show me the note is screwed in California? I didn’t understand it all and I keep wishing someone would write more about California. I’m in California.
I think if we can overcome the brainwashing of 50% of the population, and create an “anti-economic pseudoscience ” movement, the electoral process still has hope.
Cynically, that was my take-away, too. “We don’t care who we offend; low voter turn-out is preferable, and the rabid, on either side, wins.
Thank you for doing this and much more, Prof. Black.
If anyone is interested in working to get Prof. Black into a position to investigate fraud, let me know.
I come by it honestly, I’m many things by background, but more Irish than anything else. The Irish came to the realization that it was, slightly, less painful to laugh than to cry.
People, like myself have to go to school or get special training for at least two years for Real Estate laws and sales. Each state has different stipulations on the laws. You are correct in the banker not knowing what she was talking about.
It’s as if they, the banks decided they knew more about space shuttles than NASA does. It is serious and criminal.
OK. He is trying to investigate one of the large frauds, which as I’ve explained, is essentially impossible with his limited resources.
I AM! I think a lot of us here are. Can you write a diary here at FDL on the subject?
Cool!
The broader point is that the entire rubric of “relief for homeowners” is a fig leaf for a useless and moderately harmful (but it could have been far worse) settlement. A real investigation and prosecution plus civil suits v the massive mortgage origination fraud would have provided far greater relief for homeowners. More to the point, the true liability for their frauds of at least four of the five big banks in the settlement is so large that they are insolvent. They should be placed in receivership and the FDIC should immediately have led to appropriate, vastly greater relief if the goal is to help the victims of the fraud and get the housing markets going again.
Ideas:
Simpple public education campaign for both democrats and libertarians about what a dingbat greenspan was and how neoliberal economics that encourage fraud is QUACKERY. The skeptical community is an asset. There should be a scienceblog about it.
http://scienceblogs.com/
Yes, and several of the State AGs deserve our praise for blocking what the Obama administration wanted to give the largest, endemically fraudulent banks — formal immunity from criminal investigation and prosecution. Ultimately, however, we must keep our focus at the federal level and demand new leadership if we are to end the de facto immunity elite bank frauds now enjoy.
This is indisputably accurate. We simply must accept the necessity of acting outside the box, electorally as well as in other ways. It’s scary to contemplate, but we must. Or things will never get better.
If you’re still here, Prof Black, could I beg you into trying to get a blog at scienceblogs?
Yes! Paper ballots and watch them being counted.
There isn’t anyone to vote for.
Prof Black, thank you so much for being here today, and staying late.
I remember when you called him Obi Wan Mukasey on Harry Shearer :-)
But it’s funny, I don’t hear Mukasey’s name brought up much in terms of this mess. Plus, in the fraud settlement, we’re supposed to be happy that there’s to be a “monitor,” but Mukasey has gone on to be a corporate monitor and they sound like another mechanism to launder money and absolve blame between govt and corporations. Hands washing hands, hands in each other’s pocket. No blame, no enforcement, and every violation is like a heartbeat, lub dub, money goes round again and the violator’s crime list is cleared. If there wasn’t a monitor, at least there’d still be a crime to prosecute.
Ultimately, libertarians ask us to engage in unilateral disarmament vis a vis the elite corporate frauds. They will use their wealth, particularly under Citizens United to ensure the destruction of anything resembling “free enterprise” because they win under crony capitalism. Their actions create a “Gresham’s dynamic” that causes bad ethics to drive good ethics out of the markets — “market” forces become perverse if cheaters prosper. Only regulatory “cops on the beat” can break this perverse dynamic and save “free markets.”
Is there anything that can be accomplished by “citizen outrage” in terms of forcing Obama or the AGs to think more seriously about prosecution?
There’s so much outrage out here, and as more and more articles surface about the complete fraudulence of “robo-signing” and other mischief, I feel citizen anger will grow.
How can we channel it in a productive direction
And even if there were, most people wouldn’t vote for them.
We need to backtrack and get people educated and un-brainwashed first. Out of that, leadership will emerge.
Even Paul has not called for more vigorous prosecutions of the elite frauds, at least not in my hearing and reading.
Correct. We have to write in for all levels from President down to county council.
That is the funniest, and the truest, thing I have ever seen you post. Bravo!!
The problem is, and you can see it here too, that most everyone has a deep investment in “market valuation”, both financially and ideologically, while that concept is being trashed by the supposed priests.
Abandoning the ideology is very threatening and painful and so they prefer to continue being cynically manipulated.
And the context for the elite is not just some wave of immorality. The coming ecological and resource crises are triggers. I guess my point is that there is a function to their pseudoscience and “correcting it” requires an immense refocusing which neither our society nor 99.99% of individuals have the capacity to do.
I was most shocked by the fact that neither the FHFA OIG’s report or the report to Fannie even discussed whether Fannie made criminal referrals when it learned that its agents were engaged in endemic fraud.
by design.
We need MASSIVE organization before writing in could work.
Yes, they can have juries.
I really appreciate your tenacity, Professor Black. Thank you ever so!
But then, is it a constitutional crisis that we have on our hands? If so, then what?
I go back and forth on that. Like, hour to hour. lol
I think the best regulatory mechanism for Wall Street would be to deleverage them by increasing capital requirements… and eventually transitioning to some sort of commodity-backed money.
And yes, I have a little libertarian in me. But just saying.
So, that just leaves you in impotent limbo. Politically correct impotent limbo, but impotent limbo nonetheless. White collar crime results in deaths, does that not affect your moral equation?
Not QUACKERY; Fraud in theory — for the purpose of incriminating the public in their own demise.
A crime against humanity by the financial priestly caste.
I have long written about kleptocracy as the ultimate form of control fraud in the public sector.
I sense from skeptical circles that Krugman-style Keynesism is really coming back in style among skeptics. Like, 60% of skeptics think Krugman is one of the best economists.
You appoint people who have a track record of success, who believe in serving as cops on the beat, and you hold them accountable through the media, the blogs, and congressional oversight. Nothing is perfect, but we can,and have done, vastly better.
Like homeopathy, it’s both quackery AND fraud.
I don’t know what simple people are suppose to do because we are essentially without a financial industry that we can even use. People don’t want to go to these banks for the same reasons they don’t want to go to the Mafia for a loan etc. I don’t know how Obama thinks this country will ever recover when working people living with very thin financial margins can’t trust lending institutions not to destroy them with no accountability.
As far as I’m concerned allowing the bankers to treat Americans this way is like the father who lets his buds rape his kids and convinces the kids it’s not a big deal. I see Obama as having little to no integrity based on this situation alone. Americans are face with getting along with criminals that can and will turn on them and cheat them in their hour of need.
This is a disease destroying our way of life and making banking another industry that simple people need to avoid having anything to do with. I think this situation shows Obama to be a crook and a danger to the country and the recovery which is not really happening, I don’t care what the propaganda machine is saying. Stores closing all around still. Is it that bad or is it just me?
I don’t find any hope in that hope. We all want to be in denial, because the alternative is scarier than we are ready to deal with. Including our esteemed guest, IMO. Doesn’t matter, because I have no doubt that events will continue to educate us all.
I don’t recall any specific comments either. But he has spoken against crony capitalism and, I suspect, he thinks ending the Fed (not that it’s about to happen) would result in ending much of the crony capitalism. And that’s quite different from demanding justice, but… hey… it’s the best (and I believe most sincere) rhetoric at the moment!
You don’t need an “international banking cartel” for the “competition in laxity” among nations (competing by promising the weakest financial regulation) to cause the disaster. But one should not assume that things are hopeless and give up. Fight to change the dynamic.
The attitude of the attorneys who drafted that report seemed to be ‘you don’t have to worry about any liability (or obligation to do the right thing) unless a lot of people sue you and that hasn’t happened, so carry on’. Kudos to LaVelle for trying to get Fannie Mae to address it, and that report seems pretty damning to me in terms of what they knew and did nothing about.
You know that’s actually an ENORMOUS project you’re talking about there. lol. But, thank you! That sounds like an excellent start.
New leadership? Haven’t you implied here that we must vote for Obama again?
Also, I think that to a certain extent… going after the criminals is attacking the symptoms, not the cause. (Though I firmly believe the crooks must be prosecuted.)
The real problem is the system, particularly our elected officials who act as enablers.
Despair and hopelessness means they win. I prefer to fight.
Agree. There is no way out but through, and the route through is terrifying.
Tell me more.
Part of my hope is based on having experience with the skeptical community and their collective ability to educate people. That they include almost ALL the scientists in ALL the disciplines further implies that I might not just be in denial.
Start a skeptical movement regarding economics, and the entire skeptical community, globally, is on your side.
And we still have the internet, whereas the soviets never did.
“the repeal of the underwriting rule (which occurred under Clinton as part of his (and Gore’s) embrace of “Reinventing Government”) made the world vastly more criminogenic”
What regulatory body repealed the rule and how was that repeal caused by have Clinton/Gore doing the standard gov. reorg – in their case called “reinventing gov”?
My experience in the financial industry convinced me that no one fears fines against the institution – habits do not change because of those fines because board of directors are owned by the CEO these days. Is there any way to get anyone jailed for at least liar loans?
Exactly, that’s the central point of Jamie Galbraith’s most recent book.
Krugman was chosen by the PTB (Bernanke hired him at Princeton) as their puppet to delineate how far “left” the public dialogue will be allowed to go. He defended O’s appointment of Summers, Geithner.
That is a quote from 2004. The people that wanted to keep that truth from being told across the globe have pinned him to the wall. Of course, he did most of it himself with infidelity, but they are still after him and trying to do more harm to him than they did to Elliot Spitzer. They are evil and will stop at nothing. So trickery will have to be a part of a plan to bring them to account.
What science community. It is increasingly bought by 1%ers to do their bidding. They are way far ahead of us.
We are experiencing the consequences of privatized Keynesianism: immense credit doled out by private interests (from which they got a nice cut) which debt obligation was then transferred back onto the public. There’s little elite faith in Keynesianism because they don’t have faith in capitalism for what’s coming.
Krugman is just a plant.
Jamie will be here on the FDL Book Salon – April 7th with his new book.
That is my perception as well.
Bill,
Do you think that the people can develop their own version of Marxian theory and go around the banking elite?
…sigh. Once again, not yet published.
Oh, great question! OWS uses V’s mask. What did you think of V for Vendetta? I swear I wish someone would interview Alan Moore, the guy who created V, though he disassociated himself from the movie and I loved the movie. V makes the point that the poetic justice he delivers is in lieu of there being courts that would do the job.
Moore’s supposed to be this kind of mad genius, and apparently he’s working on some OWS thing?
Like, what’s he envisioning now?
Couldn’t Bill Moyers interview you again and Moore? Like I said above, I’m looking for outside the box, and funny and sharp.
My dear athena, it is not just about economic science anymore. It is now about raw power. Don’t get fooled into fighting the last war.
It is POWERFUL to be included on the scienceblogs list. It makes you THE authority with scientists not in your discipline.
Both democrats and libertarians like you, so I doubt the community would protest you being added as an (THE) economist.
You and Yves could apply together citing NC for your blogging experience:
http://scienceblogs.com/channel/about.php
newbloggers@scienceblogs.com
Suggest that they ask the economics experts at the JREF forum:
http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?f=83
…what they know and think about you. 75% of the forum knows you and Krugman are some of the most scientific economists out there.
I don’t tell people who to vote for. I can tell you that I find Obama to be a huge disappointment and that I fear what would happen on a vast range of social issues if any of the current Republican candidates for their party’s nomination were elected President. (Rights for women, access to contraception, gay rights, judicial appointments, etc.) I understand folks who refuse to vote for what they see as the lesser of two evils. I see periods in which America has made astonishing gains, and I have not given up on the political process. I understand that others have, and I understand some of the reasons why. To me, hopelessness and despair are self-defeating.
Falling on deaf ears. See 235.
If growth was the attractor that prevented this “competition in laxity” before, and if growth is becoming difficult to believe in, the replacement is crime.
The ideological system has no means of combating this mode.
Science IS power. Scientists make the nukes. Scientists control everything. They’re just still not onto what’s going on with THIS stuff yet.
Yes I call it the Netflx strategy. Just create a whole new paradigm that’s better and leaves them in the dust. Personally, I think state banks like North Dakota is a big part of the answer. People that care about the community and look after it and want to enrich the community. Not a bunch of parasites on high living in Lalaland and free of any sense of community and feeling toward fellowmen.
I know, I know. But he doesn’t think markets are self-regulating and fraud is impossible. He’s just, umm…really really biased, I think.
Setting aside the presidential election, and even elections for senate and US House, what state or local positions would you see as most critical for re-instilling a sense of hope for the rule of law when it comes to economic crime like the mess we’ve been discussing?
Some state AG? Local DA? Recorder of Deeds? Governor of NY?
I agree that fines are typically useless against a financial firm. The federal banking and S&L regulators jointly terminated the rule and replaced it with a (deliberately) unenforceable “guideline.” I believe that the guideline remains in place. (There have been some statutory changes and the Fed, finally, used its authority on July 14, 2008 to adopt a rule under HOEPA that essentially forbade liar’s loans.) The “Reinventing Government” movement was hostile to regulation. Banking regulators (I personally witnessed this) were instructed to refer to (and think of) banks as their “clients.”
No. Communism was also exceptionally criminogenic.
And that’s what they did with economics, too. But Greenspan’s shame has opened up a window for a new, emerging consensus. Students at Princeton and Harvard are demanding to be taught Keynes as intro now.
LOL, Alan’s an old friend. If I knew how to contact him right now I would. He’s a bit of a Luddite though.
Exactly. Which is why we need a Scientists Strike. Occupy Science.
I’m afraid it’s populated by compradors, though.
If we could get Chicago on board, we might get some where.
I don’t suggest hopelessness OR despair. I suggest rage. I suggest impatience. And I understand that those who are reasonably comfortable do not share that motivation. That is not to disrespect you, because I do respect you, but your interest and need for change that comes SOON is limited by your high comfort quotient. You did say above that you don’t love Obama, but that the Rethugs are worse. That would certainly seem to indicate an intent to vote for Obama. I have to regard any such intent as completely wrong-headed, and believe it is part of the problem, in that it can only push us deeper into the quicksand we are already in.
Elizabeth Warren was one of the folks who got it right and according to the most recent poll she is in a very tough race.
I know. It is very hard for people to understand how dynamic the fight is, the 1% understand it, though. They know they only need to control the moment, and then move on to control the next moment. They leave the rest of us behind to expend our energy debating about the history of their actions.
I have worked my way to the end, so I will sign off now with renewed thanks to all of you and David, Bev, and Jane for making this possible.
Best,
Bill
Hold your breath waiting for that to have any influence.
Only people who attend Poison Ivy schools these days are ones who aspire to be Oners. The few who demonstrated will soon cave to their pocketbooks.
Sort of like Liberty, Equality, and Brotherhood of all Americans?
Bill,
Thank you again.
I don’t think many feel Warren would be allowed to win no matter how many votes she got. I believe there is no political trick, favor, or out and out crime that will be spared in making sure people believe other people find her lacking. And to send a message to any that want to stand against them on this level. Warren needs cover from good people with power. If Obama was one tenth of the man he likes to blab about being, he would send in people to make sure that this election is real. I think he could care less personally, he’s got his.
Thanks, Prof.
Have to disagree on this though, “Communism was also exceptionally criminogenic.” I’ll take the implication that Capitalism is, with less doubt.
No you haven’t. Re-read my comment at 84. You continually say that politicians must be pressured or voted out of office, but you fail to recognize, despite masses of evidence, that politicians aren’t pressured. Threaten them with loss of office and they will go into the private corporate welfare system of lobbying and think tanks where they will make multiples of their current salaries with far less aggravation. And those who replace them will come from the perennial choice between the corporatist Democrat and the corporatist Republican.
Failing to understand that kleptocracy is the system means nothing more than advocating solutions to the wrong problems. It means your efforts will be misdirected both in practical and theoretical terms, and as I said, leaves me wondering at what point you become part of the problem, since by willfully and persistently mischaracterizing it you allow it to fester and grow that much more.
You may think this is terribly unfair, but there are real lines being drawn here, and you and yours can no longer temporize about them. You can not have it both ways. You can not in good faith limit your criticisms to what is comfortable to you and your class. You either complete the analysis and act on it or you stand with those you say you criticize. You may not like this choice but it is the choice we all must make. And as you take a leadership role, you should be among the first and not the last to make it.
I’m thinking that in Europe, like in U.S., Oners groomed their “leftie” candidates a long time ago. My hypothesis is that O was recruited via his parents, so essentially before he was born. Leftie elected head of Greece caved before you had time to sneeze.
I don’t think most of the scientific community is as bought off as you think it is, and I still think you’re underestimating the political power of the scientific consensus, both in terms of popular opinion and in terms of the actual, true strength and reliability of a lot of modern science.
Not scalable in politics.
YMMV
Thank you so much for leading a great discussion. Please come back.
Warren is one of them, not one of us. She’s a shill, a plant.
The guest may be among the best that is now available to us, but despite that, your analysis is precise and accurate in every respect. We have got to force ourselves to deal with these truths.
I have no way of verifying those facts, but you don’t have to be a conspiracy theorist to just take an unvarnished look at the known and observable behavior patterns. They reveal the truth of where we are quite clearly enough, IMO.
Hugh, hope you’re doing well. Hope you heard about Mary. In Memoriam, Mary Beth Perdue
Ludwig was correct above when he said that the actions and rhetoric of the “capitalists” themselves completely refute the possibility that they actually believe in capitalist theory. Where does that leave you?
Exposing the Uniparty is very, very important.
That’s step #1, IMO.
Some things he can only say by implication.
Hugh is back!! What you’ve said today is really important. Hope to see you around more…
Yes Lefties who snooze get rich and re elected. It is killing the people. Then there are Dems like Baucus and Lieberman who should be kicked out of the party because they don’t belong there and are working against the party agenda. False dems are destroying the party from within and give cover to Dems that don’t vote, don’t fight, and prematurely cave while lunching and collecting the bennie mother-lode.
I don’t see that. Why do you say that?
Bill,
Again, I appreciate your time here with us today and I have all the regard for you and your past work. On the Marxian theory with a modern twist I will have to disagree. Capitalism, as we see is also criminalogic. I think we must take what we know from all these types and form a more perfect system. In particular, a system that rewards all and not just the few at the top.
I like the idea of state banks. I liked the special feature on North Dakota’s state bank that was on the Capitalism: A Love Story DVD.
Netflix? I’m an airhead, I get transfixed by visions. Like I could not accept V’s death (say NO!), and I’m also not too sure about the idea of blowing up a building to change the world back to good. Poor building, not its fault, and now what? I wanted to combine V with Disney’s Beauty and the Beast. God is in the rain. Fireworks. And the building doesn’t get blown up, it gets sparkled out of its dark spell and the world is restored. See?
Now what would that translate to in OWS? Haven’t had that vision yet.
You miss my point entirely. There is no D party anymore.
No, they could be deluded. Or suffering from subclinical cognitive dissonance.
I try to intentionally hold doubt in my mind when speculating on the motives and beliefs of others. (I’ve had too many genuinely intelligent really believe I was operating under bizarre motives to assume I’m immune to that same phenomenon.)
oh DUDE! I mean DUDETTE!!! please please please
Really. Hung around waiting to be hung by O, which she was. That was her role.
As the great American Dream gets hoovered up, the 1% expect that prosecution with become secondary to survival.
It’s a crime against humanity, comrades.
I can see a Bill Black at a “science blog”
But Just curious as to why you want Susan Weber (Yves Smith) at that blog – While she is quite smart, can indeed write and influence others, her background as a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Business School.is in options trading, macroeconomics and currency analysis, working as investment banker, management consultant, and corporate finance advisor. She is not an economist as can be seen by reviewing her straw man approach discussing economics.
I’m not sure there ever was.
UNIparty that’s good. I always visualize a two headed giant that likes to argue between the heads like Tweedledee and Tweedledum but when it comes down to it, they agree on cannibalism and dining heavily. The lesser of two evils is a worn out idea even though spot on. I think it is imperative to see the OnePercent’s UniParty for what it is, because both parties are waltzing us to the same ledge to split the insurance money so to speak.
What Ecahn is saying that they have crossed party lines. There is no longer a distinctive Conservative or Libral bloc. They have all become Maggots looking for another fresh piece of America to ravage.
Ah, the insanity defense.
I thought she was an economist. I thought the fact that NC is “hers” and has such a huge readership (where Bill fairly blogs often) would increase the chance of science blogs accepting them.
I very well might be mistaken, though.
It always seems to come back to Greenspan and his not allowing the Fed to regulate ANYTHING!
Zinn’s FDR was the one who did just enough to save the system for the Oners. Can’t say I’d argue with that.
Now that there is no FDR we could reach two diametrically opposed hypotheses (or any number in-between). Either Oners are so in control, and so sure of themselves, that they no longer need an FDR to shill for them (my preferred hypothesis.)
OR: that Oners have overstepped.
“her straw man approach discussing economics.”
A precis please?
Mr. Black your 160 comment defines the three underwriting necessities. I believe states do have these commerce code in place. I intend to find and use these codes to block a $200 million USDA/State revolving Fund loan. Thank you!
NC is hers and has interesting and often good contributors like Bill.
But no – not an economist – she is a business news writer now with an excellent insider background in the derivatives industry/hedge fund business where she has many contacts.
No, not insanity. Everyone holds incorrect beliefs for complex reasons. It’s part of the human condition.
Although I suspect that the .1% somehow self-selects for clinical sociopathy somehow. Especially the foreign policy people. Who might or might not also have similar domestic policies they quietly advocate.
Huh. I imagine a cyclops with a v shaped unibrow.
Yeah, that wouldn’t be appropriate for scienceblogs. They’re in-your-field-of-science degree snobs. lol.
That’s AND. They have not overstepped their control, they have overstepped the bounds of Capitalism.
I saw is as… that Warren was double crossed by O. I thought she expected the appointment. I think he promised it to her, or implied a promise based on “how things go” then took her work for insight and reneged on some thread bare excuse. That is his pattern.
Fitzpatrick?
“Everyone holds incorrect beliefs for complex reasons.”
Or so they say.
Read her book “ECONned: How Unenlightened Self Interest Undermined Democracy and Corrupted Capitalism” – I see no problem with the point she is making, but along the way her discussion of economics either shows a lack of knowledge, a love of straw man argument, or she reduced it to words that were easily understood by the audience. My view is that folks buying the book are usually able to discuss economics so I am not seeing the last reason as real.
Can’t we be at a stage where it’s a bit of both?
Warren knew O’s pattern, any person awake for 2 days in the last 3 years would have. That’s why you have to view Warren as complicit.
Capitalism had NOTHING to do with it. Capitalism is just a buzz word used in talking points.
You’ve never realized that one of your deeply held beliefs was wrong?
I allowed for that possibility in my comment. You must make up your own mind, hopefully based on evidence.
Free market advocates openly micromanaging every market function? Sorry, that don’t pass the laugh test. They have no “scientific” belief, only a strategy to deliver the goods to themselves, regardless of the rubric they operate under. That’s why I say it’s about raw power.
Are you really gone now? Fooey. Can I hope you’ll think about @148 and write a new column updating your Oct 2010 one? Thank you so much for being here and staying longer.
Science is not about the truth. It is about hypothesis testing, waiting for the next bit of evidence to support or refute your hypothesis.
Speaking for myself, many of my hypotheses have not proven out. The difficult part is figuring out how much evidence is enough to refute them.
But like many voters she believed him at some point. I remember the pic that went out the day O announced that he was choosing someone else. I don’t know everything but she looked livid and degraded. Now that she is running, it seems like the perfect pay back saying “I am valid and I won’t be dismissed so lightly”.
My understanding of economics is just deep enough to have crossed (ZOMG HYPERINFLATIION) Austrians off the list through watching them ALWAYS be wrong, see neoliberal just like homeopathy in pure wtf? lol! stupid, and see that Baker and Krugman have been making reasonably accurate predictions for many years.
A little more than that, but not a lot.
Haven’t read Yves book yet. I know the story if not the theory, tho. (Neoliberal pseudoscience blew up the world?)
Greenspan worked hard to remove Glass-Stegall. Yes, he is very much at fault.
I am so sorry to hear about Mary. She was one of the most committed people I knew to Constitutional rights and personal freedoms. I will miss her.
She’s also running as a Uniparty member. One of the “good ones”.
By capitalists. But you’re being pedantic because the point is, and you know it, that the system they claimed to be operating is no longer tenable. Now why do you get so hepped up about the CAPITALISM when my point stands, hmm?
The designers of the policies/theories were probably laughing their asses off. Students believe what they’re taught. See: theology.
The benefit of the doubt doesn’t work when the knife is coming at you.
Do you know Glen Keane? Alan Moore, Glen Keane, Disney V, me a fly on the wall. I dream.
So you think that Warren had not recognized O’s pattern as late as last year. Gosh, if that were accurate, it would lower my opinion of her a lot.
It doesn’t matter when the knife is coming at you.
BEV another excellent Book Salon!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
People can be in denial, too.
Also, “we” might slightly suffer from echo chamber effect here sometimes.
*ducks*
If you don’t see the knife it does.
P.S. to Jane, o/t: I saw your diary on Katie. Thought of this song, you might like to think of things that way, sometime. My heart goes out to you and Katie.
The knife is coming at us.
Thanks Hugh, so much, for stating it.
Oh, I’m way too paranoid to not see the knife. lol.
Yes, I know. Here’s my urgent plotting and planning to escape it in the most effective way possible.
Ok. Paranoid and giving the benefit of the doubt. Talk about cognitive dissonance, comrade!
I hate being wrong in retrospect, so I try to keep all my bases covered. :)
My extended train of thought on stuff like this usually goes something like:
These elites are either operating under, or just pretending to operate under, a series of assumptions that are going to result in my early death. While I want to assume they’re simply deluded, that also sounds naive. But I can also see how this is all part of some plot hatched 80 years ago when the original Business Coup failed. But that sounds kinda paranoid. Either way, the result is the same, so I”m just not going to try to know for sure without excellent evidence.
LOL
Well Warren is standing up to the banksters and they seem to genuinely hate her guts…. a good sign.
The excellent evidence you have is that you are well and truly fucked if you allow your future to be determined by EITHER those who are deluded OR those who are out to get you by design. The question I would ask is, “Why should their future be assured, while yours is not, and what if we just reverse that set of assumptions for awhile?”
And the right pretends to hate Obama for being a socialist, while he gives them everything they could dream of, including a stock market that doubled in value. Just sayin’ . . .
A common illness, that.
Let’s roll this back a bit. By deluded you mean that capitalists believe in capitalism but don’t practice it. That, comrade, is not delusion.
Wasn’t that an off the charts, in you face act of despotism? really, the truth is the failed upward rich turds have no need of voters. I think that is apparent. The turnout for Obama’s first presidential race was a nationwide protest averted and he shows now that banksters aka Wall Street are all he needs, freaking amazing disregard and disrespect to the entire American belief system which is obviously a crumbling facade at best. Starring Obama who is not even really challenged next election. No surprise.
exactly and that the story coming from both sides of this con. Well I’ll keep my eye on Warren but if not her , who?
Still believe that state banks is the Netflix solution. don’t mess with them just move on to a better paradigm.
I almost made it back in time.
A most excellent Salon.
DW
Well said.
You missed out on the funnest part.
yall might enjoy.
What if we could do something about this? The question at hand, because playing our dictated role in this charade isn’t even worth the gas.
What if we could do something about this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOLWMABtEVM&feature=youtube_gdata_player
I can see that, rats!!!!
Got ta say that some terrifical good ideas were spread around, rc, and I note that you are responsible for a more than goodly number of them.
;~DW
Well, that sucks. I recommend that everyone listen to that video. He was the only Fox employee worth a damn. He was right-wing, but at least he understood that civil liberties matter.
Mr. Black is probably the best public figure around right now, but he walked up to the ledge that his own logic led him to, and refused to jump off into the truth. Part of the problem. His position means more to him now than his principles, it would appear. How do you lay out how clearly you understand that there is no rule of law, and then tell people to trust in the system?
Wouldn’t harm anyone at FDL to view that video, I reckon, textynn.
DW
Yep, that IS the fundamental disconnect, rc.
DW
Good rant!
WRT demanding state AGs release their settlement documents, I started “publicly” calling for it today. In CT, the state Speaker (D) is coincidentally running for the open CT-5. In other words, he’s on the hot seat (if the state level media care to make it hot).
A weekly columnist in the Hartford Courant mentioned the speaker in his column today, so I asked a few questionsabout the ability of the Speaker to compel the AG (D) to release the documents.
Here’s to hoping that some in the CT MSM can recognize the significance of — and act upon — the issue…
William Black for President.
If you run as an Independent [not affiliated with any political party] I will vote for you.
Disney V? (Mildred?)
Okay, I’ve thought some more about what I tried to say yesterday, and I’m not crazy! Or maybe crazy as in we’re never gonna survive unless we go a little. Just want to put this down.
It’s what do you do with the building, now that it’s become a symbol of disease?
V blows it up, Disney sparkles it back to health. Either way, monster (Beast and V both describe themselves that way) days over, country restored, dark spell ends.
I put Glen Keane in my room @324 not just because he was the guy behind the Beast the way Alan Moore was the guy behind V, but because he also was big in Tangled. I don’t know if he’s responsible for the two things I want to credit now — the pub scene and the lanterns — but close enough. In the pub scene, Rapunzel, out in the world for the first time in her life, finds herself in a pub surrounded by thugs about to beat up Flynn, her guide to the lanterns. And she doesn’t cave to fear or despair, she rises up to them and says, “Find your humanity! Haven’t any of you ever had a dream?” And it turns out the thugs she has been brought up to totally fear have dreams too. The other scene is the lantern scene. Rapunzel’s been drawn to go out to see the lanterns up close that show up in the sky every year on her birthday. The first lantern was sent up by the king and queen to celebrate her birth, and then after she was stolen as a baby, every year thereafter they’re sent up, kind of like a national light burning in the window for her. So that’s what I want you to see: The lanterns, and a country being led by and with light and humanity and hope — because when you see it, you get it. It is BEAUTIFUL. In 2008 that was Obama and us, and hope and change and yes we can. But it turned out he’s about snuffing every light out, keeping us dark, and in the dark, hopeless and helpless. What an idiot!!
V was about waking people up to their own light too. Enlightenment. Empowerment. Justice. Humanity. The lantern scene is like the Trafalgar Square scene in V.
Okay, now introducing to my room: John Lennon. In my heaven. Since we’re talking about what to do with the building, now that law and governance has failed and we say we want a revolution.
Well, that’s as far as I get today. I’m chasing my light. The thing I get is that people are in place everywhere, here and now, inside the building and out, it’s just waking them up to their light and their power and their place in a world of other people just like themselves.
(Even if they’re monsters.)