cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
dagwud
Senior Contributor

Re: On this matter particularly??

I admit I have not watched much of the debates.  But if you are right in that Repub candidates are not even talking about these crimes then I am even more confused.    What better issue for Repubs to use against Obama and to try to show they are different from him and on the side of the people not Wall Street banks.  One would think it would help them win over voters of all political persuasion although I'm not sure if it would help their campaign donations.

 

I'm curious if there is a statue of of limitations concerning these crimes that we need to worry about?  By the time any new presidential administration takes over with a new DOJ in place many of these crimes will be several years old. 

GreaTOne_65
Senior Contributor

Re: On this matter particularly??

You really don't get it, do you, dagwud? Haven't you been paying attention, to all the caterwalling the right has been doing about the 99% v the 1%? The right is PROTECTING THE 1%! The 1% are their (gop's) candy shop, their ONLY candy shop. They won't upset their base.

bruce MN
Advisor

Re: On this matter particularly??

GTO is right.  The various GOP caucuses, for various reasons. Require that it is all to be blamed on evil individual borrowers who maliciously took advantage of the righteous players in the financial segment.  With the help and encouragement  of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac which they paint as wholly owned agencies of the government.

 

Any backsliding on that would be heresy.

 

And, yes, there are quite short statutes of limitations on financial crime.  That's what makes it urgent, and also what makes the administration lag and allows the opposition to remain silent.  The only way it could turn out right is for this administration to.  The only possiblity for it to happpen would be for the administration to change course,,,and staff,,, and I hold little hope for that as it isn't going to be a political liability because the opposition isn't going to mention it. 

sw363535
Honored Advisor

Re: On this matter particularly??

not sure what the answer will be,  but the original issue is a fact.  Holder is an embarassment and doing very little in a time period when his office should be very active.

kraft-t
Senior Advisor

Re:You're kidding right?

Any attempt to reform the financial centers met with strong opposition from the right. Where do you think the right gets it money?

GreaTOne_65
Senior Contributor

Re: On this matter particularly??

I suggest YOU read ALL of this, then get back to us, about who is siding with who! Like I said, the people browbeating the 99% are the ones who need to be booted, and the majority aren't Democrats.

 

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2011/11/goldman-sachs-congress-investors.html

dagwud
Senior Contributor

Re: On this matter particularly??

GTO: "The right is PROTECTING THE 1%! The 1% are their (gop's) candy shop, their ONLY candy shop. They won't upset their base."

 

Once again GTO you see everything through your rose colored glasses and believe only Repubs have rich Congressmen and only the Repubs invest in Goldman Sachs and help protect the rich fat cats.  I myself don't see much difference between the two parties.   Obama has already raised over $86 million for his re-election which is about the total raised by all Repub candidates together.  Before you claim all Obama's money comes from small donations you might want to check Open Secrets which shows that several of the Repub presidential candidates have a similar percentage of the donations coming from small donors.

 

I'm sure you will ignore the fact that Obama's biggest donors in 08 were Wall Street banks.  In 2008 seven of Obama's top 20 campaign contributors were Wall Street banks including four of his top eight.  Yes, these same Wall Street banks that Obama now refuses to prosecute even though, "The Justice Department hasn't brought any criminal cases against big banks or other companies involved in mortgage servicing, even though copious evidence has surfaced of apparent criminal violations in foreclosure cases."

 

So while I agree that Repubs can be just as greedy and will also protect special interest groups, I find it silly for one to try and claim that only Repubs are protecting the 1%.  The one person in this country that is best suited and equipped to go after the dirty greedy bankers, President Obama,  refuses to do so in spite of the obvious crimes committed by them.  It is beginning to look like Obama's legacy will be that he as POTUS  protected the very people that broke laws which resulted in one of our country's biggest financial crisis in which most Americans lost large amounts of money.

 

By the way you probably don't want to mention the two Senators that got special deals on loans from Countrywide Financial commonly refereed to as a "“Friend of Angelo” loan .  Both just happened to Dems.   You might also want to note that at the time one of the Senators, Dodd was chairman of the Banking Committee while the other, Conrad was a member of the Senate Finance Committee.   I'm sure you will claim these two Senators did nothing wrong but your president might not agree with you.  Obama insiders have said that after the Countrywide scandal broke Obama took Dodd off his short list of people to be his VP.

 

 

bruce MN
Advisor

Re: On this matter particularly??

Lost in all of this discussion that has moved form "who caused it?" to "who is keeping it from being fixed?" is the fact that the housing finance situation is as completely shot to hell as it is  And fixing to get considerably worse..  And recieves no mention in the political world.

 

If not fixed, and fixed as good as can be may only mean merely stabalzed and defined.....cleared and marked to market if nothing else....with all of the "beezle" wrung out of it in order to imporve in a sustainable manner.  That sounded like a presposerously radical proposal back in the Fall of 2008 but is beginning to look like the only practical approach,

 

It's become the norm in economic reporting to call any one step forward after two recent steps back big, encourging news.  Probably why people can't get their heads around the true magnitude of  this residential financne disaster and where it leads us. 

GreaTOne_65
Senior Contributor

Re: On this matter particularly??

Yes sir, my rose colored glasses, are only good as your blinders. 3 out 25, humm. Get the fokkin republicans out of the way, then we can say, yep that d amned Obama, all he did look the other way. On the other hand, if he does go after them, it will prove my point, the republicans have been nothing but obsructionists, and have no business in government. They were hired, to help the American people, not themselves, same for the Democrats. If all they are concerned with is lining their own pockets, ie, insider trading, I want them out! They wanted to be in Public service, so let's see some of it, put the public first, before their own greed.

dagwud
Senior Contributor

Re: On this matter particularly??

GTO, as I have said before, I think both Dems and Repubs have members that for a price put special interest first ahead of the American people.  Both parties have members that will use their power and influence to try and benefit themselves financially.  You on the other hand are like Ollie and think all the bad apples reside in only one party and it is always the other guys.

 

It comes down to a couple of very simple questions you need to ask yourself.  Was our recent financial crisis caused in part by banks that were deemed  "to big to fail" when their officers lied about the quality of their loans and falsified statements to help them receive larger bonuses and compensation?   In doing so did these banking officials breaking any federal laws? 

Now if you believe these banking officials broke federal laws while trying to line their pockets you must then ask yourself is our federal government, the D.O.J. doing its job of prosecuting these crooked bankers that helped cost American's billions of dollars in investments and savings? 

 

"The United States Department of Justice (often referred to as the Justice Department or DOJ), is the United States federal executive department responsible for the enforcement of the law and administration of justice.  The Department is led by the Attorney General, who is nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate and is a member of the Cabinet."

 

 Eric Holder is our A.G. and was chosen by Obama and you can bet answers to Obama on important issues concerning the D.O.J.   Both Obama and Holder seem to have no intention of prosecuting these crooks   I can only hope that the various state's A.G.'s that have gone after these crooks can get some justice.   If they do and Obama and Holder continue to protect the bad guys then Obama will be remembered as the POTUS that sided with and helped protect crooked rich Wall Street bankers.   Ask yourself if that helps Dems win future elections?  To add to the embarrassment, one of the state AG's doing the right thing and  pursuing these crooks is the VP's own son Beau Biden.