Ha! Today's Obama/sub-prime Story turns out to be Lie of the Day.

[NYcarbineer]

That's true, or ... They could have given less loans to white people.

They should have given a lot less loans in generally. They must certainly should not have been pressured to give loans to people they knew would fail.

As few as 19 of those 186 clients still own homes with clean credit ratings.

That's a preposterous stretch.

Citibank was already in the sub-prime business and was so of its own volition and motives. In fact I posted yesterday the article where Citi paid something like a 200 million dollar penalty for unethical subprime practices, in 2002,

where they were bilking people out of money connected to their loans, unnecessary insurance for example.

The Daily Caller article starts as this:

President Barack Obama was a pioneering contributor to the national subprime real estate bubble....

That is absurd.

 

[Truthseeker420]

Twenty threads by resident 'nuts over a years old spam email story that was thoroughly debunked long ago:

The rightwing internet tabloid Daily Caller revives this beauty:

snopes.com: Obama Required Banks to Lend Money to Poor People

and the Right goes wild...

...people, please, it's just an election. No need to let your hysteria become an embarassment.

yep. I knew about this

 

[IHBF]

The Daily Caller article starts as this:

President Barack Obama was a pioneering contributor to the national subprime real estate bubble....

That is absurd.

But he did contribute, right?

He did in fact work on a lawsuit that pressured citibank to loan to people they otherwise would not have.

 

[8537]

Did Barack Obama push banks to give subprime loans to Chicago’s African-Americans?

No, a lawsuit he was part of asked Citibank to stop discriminating in housing decisions based on race, in violation of the 1968 Fair Housing act.

 

[Freewill]

Twenty threads by resident 'nuts over a years old spam email story that was thoroughly debunked long ago:

The rightwing internet tabloid Daily Caller revives this beauty:

snopes.com: Obama Required Banks to Lend Money to Poor People

and the Right goes wild...

...people, please, it's just an election. No need to let your hysteria become an embarassment.

So there was a law suit, Obama was involved and you say that isn't true yet the source you provided said it was true? What I read is that the details may not be true. Beside I question any lawyer backing up another.

 

[paperview]

The Daily Caller article starts as this:

President Barack Obama was a pioneering contributor to the national subprime real estate bubble....

That is absurd.

But he did contribute, right?

He did in fact work on a lawsuit that pressured citibank to loan to people they otherwise would not have.

The reason they "would not have" was only because of their color.

Not their credit worthiness. They were approving people with the exact same credit worthiness - but tada! They were white.

 

[8537]

The Daily Caller article starts as this:

President Barack Obama was a pioneering contributor to the national subprime real estate bubble....

That is absurd.

But he did contribute, right?

He did in fact work on a lawsuit that pressured citibank to loan to people they otherwise would not have.

no, he participated in a lawsuit that required Citibank to stop making loan decisions based on race in violation of the Fair Housing Act.

 

[IHBF]

Did Barack Obama push banks to give subprime loans to Chicago’s African-Americans?

No, a lawsuit he was part of asked Citibank to stop discriminating in housing decisions based on race, in violation of the 1968 Fair Housing act.

By Neal Boortz

One of Obama’s primary talking points on the campaign trail is that the evil Republican’s solutions to our sluggish economy are the very policies that got us into this mess in the first place. Now … how do I put this delicately? That, my friends, is a trainload of Bolshoi.

The primary cause of what we’re calling The Great Recession was our suicidal rush to make sure that anyone in America, no matter how financially unqualified, could own a home. This policy was shared by Democrats and Republicans. But .. .there was one big difference. Somewhere along the way the Republicans figured out that this effort to increase home ownership at any cost was suicidal. Republicans soon figured out that some of these people ---- MANY of these people --- needed to be renters.

Early in the 1st term of George W. Bush the signs of trouble were surfacing. There were literally tens of millions of bad mortgages out there .. variable rate mortgages that would soon be in trouble as borrowers found themselves unprepared to make the higher payments. Since many of these borrowers had no skin in the game --- no actual equity in their homes – they would simply walk away. As these mortgages --- promoted, supported and backed by federal mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie mac --- started to fail President Bush made several – at least three – unsuccessful attempts to reform the practices of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Every single time Bush tried to gain control of this impending financial disaster two men, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, stepped in to block him. In the meantime large banks and financial institutions were investing trillions of dollars in these mortgages – encouraged to do so by suggestions that the mortgages were guaranteed by the government of the United States.

As I said … some people saw it coming. Ron Paul, George Bush, John McCain .. these are just a hand full of people who predicted the collapse and tried to do something about it. While these many, and I’m sure many others, saw what was heading our way. I’ve already mentioned that Barney Frank and Chris Dodd blocked reform attempts .. but there was someone else out there helping them. That man was Barack Obama.

The Daily Caller has done a review of previously unpublished court information on a case Obama championed. Here’s what they report:

President Barack Obama was a pioneering contributor to the national subprime real estate bubble, and roughly half of the 186 African-American clients in his landmark 1995 mortgage discrimination lawsuit against Citibank have since gone bankrupt or received foreclosure notices.

As few as 19 of those 186 clients still own homes with clean credit ratings, following a decade in which Obama and other progressives pushed banks to provide mortgages to poor African Americans.

Our Dear Ruler contributed to the problem then, and he continues to contribute to the problem now. Now, his “recovery” is based on bigger government, more spending and redistribution of wealth. That’s no way to grow an economy … assuming that’s his goal, which I’m not entirely sure it is.

So .. are the Republicans proposing that we go back to the same economic policies that got us in this mess? Hardly! In fact, that needs to be pinned on Democrats. It’s the Democrats who are once again pushing for a relaxation of mortgage underwriting standards so that Democrat voters can buy homes they simply cannot afford. Don’t expect the ObamaMedia to explain this to you, however. There’s a media icon to reelect.

Obama's America | Nealz Nuze | www.boortz.com

 

[8537]

Did Barack Obama push banks to give subprime loans to Chicago’s African-Americans?

No, a lawsuit he was part of asked Citibank to stop discriminating in housing decisions based on race, in violation of the 1968 Fair Housing act.

By Neal Boortz

One of Obama’s primary talking points on the campaign trail is that the evil Republican’s solutions to our sluggish economy are the very policies that got us into this mess in the first place. Now … how do I put this delicately? That, my friends, is a trainload of Bolshoi.

The primary cause of what we’re calling The Great Recession was our suicidal rush to make sure that anyone in America, no matter how financially unqualified, could own a home. This policy was shared by Democrats and Republicans. But .. .there was one big difference. Somewhere along the way the Republicans figured out that this effort to increase home ownership at any cost was suicidal. Republicans soon figured out that some of these people ---- MANY of these people --- needed to be renters.

Early in the 1st term of George W. Bush the signs of trouble were surfacing. There were literally tens of millions of bad mortgages out there .. variable rate mortgages that would soon be in trouble as borrowers found themselves unprepared to make the higher payments. Since many of these borrowers had no skin in the game --- no actual equity in their homes – they would simply walk away. As these mortgages --- promoted, supported and backed by federal mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie mac --- started to fail President Bush made several – at least three – unsuccessful attempts to reform the practices of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Every single time Bush tried to gain control of this impending financial disaster two men, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, stepped in to block him. In the meantime large banks and financial institutions were investing trillions of dollars in these mortgages – encouraged to do so by suggestions that the mortgages were guaranteed by the government of the United States.

As I said … some people saw it coming. Ron Paul, George Bush, John McCain .. these are just a hand full of people who predicted the collapse and tried to do something about it. While these many, and I’m sure many others, saw what was heading our way. I’ve already mentioned that Barney Frank and Chris Dodd blocked reform attempts .. but there was someone else out there helping them. That man was Barack Obama.

The Daily Caller has done a review of previously unpublished court information on a case Obama championed. Here’s what they report:

President Barack Obama was a pioneering contributor to the national subprime real estate bubble, and roughly half of the 186 African-American clients in his landmark 1995 mortgage discrimination lawsuit against Citibank have since gone bankrupt or received foreclosure notices.

As few as 19 of those 186 clients still own homes with clean credit ratings, following a decade in which Obama and other progressives pushed banks to provide mortgages to poor African Americans.

Our Dear Ruler contributed to the problem then, and he continues to contribute to the problem now. Now, his “recovery” is based on bigger government, more spending and redistribution of wealth. That’s no way to grow an economy … assuming that’s his goal, which I’m not entirely sure it is.

So .. are the Republicans proposing that we go back to the same economic policies that got us in this mess? Hardly! In fact, that needs to be pinned on Democrats. It’s the Democrats who are once again pushing for a relaxation of mortgage underwriting standards so that Democrat voters can buy homes they simply cannot afford. Don’t expect the ObamaMedia to explain this to you, however. There’s a media icon to reelect.

Obama's America | Nealz Nuze | www.boortz.com

You didn't really just try to make a point by quoting Boortz, did you?

Really?

Why don't you answer my question instead of quoting Boortz? Here, I'll ask again:

Two people with equal credit scores, resources and credit history apply for a loan. Person (1) is white. Person (2) is black.

Is (2) more risky than (1)?

 

[IHBF]

no, he participated in a lawsuit that required Citibank to stop making loan decisions based on race in violation of the Fair Housing Act.

Their decision wasn't based on race. Here's the plaintiff's claim again:

"the percentage of loan applications approved by Citibank was far lower in areas where the racial composition of the neighborhood was predominantly African-American than it was in areas where the composition of the neighborhood was predominantly White."

The loans were approved at a lower rate in areas where more Black people happened to live.

Obama pressured citibank to approve loans to these people. As few as 19 of those 186 clients still own homes.

 

[paperview]

Citing Boortz.

 

[paperview]

Twenty threads by resident 'nuts over a years old spam email story that was thoroughly debunked long ago:

The rightwing internet tabloid Daily Caller revives this beauty:

snopes.com: Obama Required Banks to Lend Money to Poor People

and the Right goes wild...

...people, please, it's just an election. No need to let your hysteria become an embarassment.

So there was a law suit, Obama was involved and you say that isn't true yet the source you provided said it was true? What I read is that the details may not be true. Beside I question any lawyer backing up another.

From the archives of the Chicago Times:

Fought red-lining
Obama represented Calvin Roberson in a 1994 lawsuit against Citibank, charging the bank systematically denied mortgages to African-American applicants and others from minority neighborhoods.


"I don't recall him ever standing up and giving an impassioned speech -- it was a lot of behind-the-scenes stuff," said Fay Clayton, the lead lawyer on the case.
"He was the very junior lawyer in that case," said attorney Robert Kriss. "He had just graduated from law school. I don't recall him being in court at any time I was there. I was the lead lawyer for Citibank and he was not very visible to me."
Kriss, Clayton and every other co-counsel and opposing counsel interviewed for this story praised Obama's legal ability, temperament and everything about his courtroom demeanor, even though, they agree, he didn't say much in the courtroom. Many are now donors to his campaign.


On Feb. 23, 1995, Obama billed 2 hours and 50 minutes for an appearance before Judge Ruben Castillo on behalf of his client, and also for reviewing some documents in advance of a deposition. That cost Citibank -- which ultimately had to pay the winning side's fees -- $467 at Obama's hourly rate of $165.


Miner commanded the higher rate of $285 an hour. During his appearance before the judge, Obama said he would need more time to file a response to a motion, and the judge agreed. That was all Obama said during the half-hour hearing.

As lawyer, Obama was strong, silent type :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Barack Obama

 

[IHBF]

Citing Boortz.

I thought it was a good summary of the situation. Attack the source all you want, but the fact remains that Obama was a contributor to the economic collapse he blames on Bush.

You have to live with that.

 

[paperview]

Citing Boortz.

I thought it was a good summary of the situation. Attack the source all you want, but the fact remains that Obama was a contributor to the economic collapse he blames on Bush.

You have to live with that.

Read up: Redlining - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[AmyNation]

Citing Boortz.

I thought it was a good summary of the situation. Attack the source all you want, but the fact remains that Obama was a contributor to the economic collapse he blames on Bush.

You have to live with that.

If you feel Citibank was right to deny loans based on the color of someone skin, then that's your right, but don't try to twist the facts to make it seem like you feel differently.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Snopes?

No thanks.

As usual House has nothing to offer (we need a "no thanks" button for fools like House and Warrior who post nothing of substance).

 

[Freewill]

Citing Boortz.

I thought it was a good summary of the situation. Attack the source all you want, but the fact remains that Obama was a contributor to the economic collapse he blames on Bush.

You have to live with that.

Read up: Redlining - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If I read properly redlining had to do with the area someone lives then the color of their skin, just so happened more blacks lived in the redlined districts. That was the real complaint not that blacks were denied for being black, of course that is what the community organizer would want people to believe. Now after 3 1/3 years blacks are doing worse then they were 4 years ago, I suppose that too you will blame on someone other then the leader of the free world.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Daily Caller article starts as this:

President Barack Obama was a pioneering contributor to the national subprime real estate bubble....

That is absurd.

But he did contribute, right?

He did in fact work on a lawsuit that pressured citibank to loan to people they otherwise would not have.

So the headline should be:

If home loan lenders had been allowed to discriminate on the basis of race, the housing crisis wouldn't have been so bad...

Why are you trying to defend something that is indefensible? What do you gain from that?

 

[IHBF]

Citing Boortz.

I thought it was a good summary of the situation. Attack the source all you want, but the fact remains that Obama was a contributor to the economic collapse he blames on Bush.

You have to live with that.

If you feel Citibank was right to deny loans based on the color of someone skin, then that's your right, but don't try to twist the facts to make it seem like you feel differently.

I'm not twisting facts. Obama was involved in a case to try to get Citibank to stop redlining. This pressure on Citibank resulted in more risky loans and foreclosures. That contributed to the economic collapse. Obama was part of the problem that he blames on Bush. Bush tried to fix it but his efforts were blocked by democrats.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Sounds like he was involved to me:

"Although Barack Obama was involved with the Buycks-Roberson case, he did not file the lawsuit, nor was he the lead attorney in the matter. He was a junior member of an eight-lawyer team that worked on the case:
Obama represented Calvin Roberson in a 1994 lawsuit against Citibank, charging the bank systematically denied mortgages to African-American applicants and others from minority neighborhoods."

This also proves that banks were forced to loan money to people who couldn't pay the loans.

No.

It proves that if the banks chose to make sub-prime loans, they were not going to be allowed to discriminate against black people who were comparably qualified for the loans as were the white people.