NYcarbineer
Diamond Member
Name one bank that was forced against their will to make loans not in accordance with sound and safe banking practices.
ACORN/Obama forced toxic mortgages GUARANTEED BY U.S. Govt...!
- Thread starter healthmyths
- Start date
Name one bank that was forced against their will to make loans not in accordance with sound and safe banking practices.
NYcarbineer
Diamond Member
Community Reinvestment Act had nothing to do with subprime crisis - BusinessWeek[/COLOR][/SIZE][/B]
"...most subprime loans were made by firms that arenÂ’t subject to the CRA. University of Michigan law professor Michael Barr testified back in February before the House Committee on Financial Services that 50% of subprime loans were made by mortgage service companies not subject comprehensive federal supervision and another 30% were made by affiliates of banks or thrifts which are not subject to routine supervision or examinations."
"...most subprime loans were made by firms that arenÂ’t subject to the CRA. University of Michigan law professor Michael Barr testified back in February before the House Committee on Financial Services that 50% of subprime loans were made by mortgage service companies not subject comprehensive federal supervision and another 30% were made by affiliates of banks or thrifts which are not subject to routine supervision or examinations."
Full-Auto
Gold Member
- Jun 13, 2009
- 13,555
- 1,625
- 153
Damn you are slow.........................
EVIDENCE FOUND!!! Clinton administration's "BANK AFFIRMATIVE ACTION" They forced banks to make BAD LOANS and ACORN and Obama's tie to all of it!!! - YouTube
Andrew Cuomo: CRA Should be Abused to Force Banks to Give Risky Loans - YouTube
Pundits Agree: Andrew Cuomo caused the Sub Prime Crisis - YouTube
Truthmatters
Diamond Member
- May 10, 2007
- 80,182
- 2,276
- 1,283
- Banned
- #24
How can we solve the problems we face when these fools just REFUSE to stop lapping up the propaganda of the far right?
Why people repete these lies over and over as if they have not been distroyed by the facts over and over and over.
What a pack of fools
Why people repete these lies over and over as if they have not been distroyed by the facts over and over and over.
What a pack of fools
NYcarbineer
Diamond Member
I just want a list of the banks who have claimed that they were illegally forced to make loans to unqualified buyers, outside the realm of sound banking practices.
That's all. That should be easy.
healthmyths
Diamond Member
- Sep 19, 2011
- 30,375
- 11,939
- 1,400
- Thread starter
- #26
You copied: originated or purchased only six percent of the reported high cost loans made to lower-income borrowers within their CRA assessment areas."**"
The ratio of lower-quality subprime mortgages originated rose from the historical 8% or lower range to approximately 20% from 2004-2006,
However, when George W. Bush called for an investigation and more controls on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Congressman Barney Frank vocally objected, saying "These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis."
Subprime mortgage crisis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
20% of all mortgages were subprime and of course NOT all which is the hyperbolic purview of some liberals went south.. but the majority did and that was the tipping point.. again no one said it was the ONLY reason.. but logic would dictate that if a lending institution KNEW that toxic loans could be sold off because Fannie/Freddie Guarantees backed by U.S. government.. why NOT???
It was the simple fact Fannie/Freddie resold toxic mortgage bundles and buyers bought because of the guarantee!
The ratio of lower-quality subprime mortgages originated rose from the historical 8% or lower range to approximately 20% from 2004-2006,
However, when George W. Bush called for an investigation and more controls on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Congressman Barney Frank vocally objected, saying "These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis."
Subprime mortgage crisis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
20% of all mortgages were subprime and of course NOT all which is the hyperbolic purview of some liberals went south.. but the majority did and that was the tipping point.. again no one said it was the ONLY reason.. but logic would dictate that if a lending institution KNEW that toxic loans could be sold off because Fannie/Freddie Guarantees backed by U.S. government.. why NOT???
It was the simple fact Fannie/Freddie resold toxic mortgage bundles and buyers bought because of the guarantee!
healthmyths
Diamond Member
- Sep 19, 2011
- 30,375
- 11,939
- 1,400
- Thread starter
- #29
you wrote" in '95 Obama had the power to force all banks in the nation to loan monies? Another misleading statement with no facts."
HERE IS THE TITLE of the thread in case YOU DIDN"T UNDERSTAND!!!
"ACORN/Obama forced toxic mortgages GUARANTEED by U.S. Govt...!
A) Acorn/Obama won out of court against Citibank 1995 to start lending to unqualified borrowers represented by Acorn/Obama! That is a FACT!
1) All persons who are: African-American; and who applied for a first mortgage or refinance loan with Citibank for property located in Cook, DuPage, Lake or McHenry County, IL; and whose loan request was turned down between 7/6/92 and 12/31/95
9 attorneys including Obama ...
B) As a result of the out of court settlement Citibank HAD TO make loans!
C) FDIC auditors reviewing subprime loans at lenders like CitiBank require corrections
D) Lenders confronted with CRA forcing 20% more subprime loans, sell loans to fannie/freddie.
E) FANNIE/Freddie as a GSE agency using "full faith and credit" of U.S. Govt. package and sell to investors that KNOW there are toxic assets BACKED by U.S.!
Even as the White House continues to try to expand the role the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) have in home lending, central banks and sovereign wealth funds across Asia and the Middle East are beginning to sell off their Fannie and Freddie holdings, according to a report from the Financial Times.
Fannie, Freddie Threaten Taxpayers Again - Investors.com
HERE IS THE TITLE of the thread in case YOU DIDN"T UNDERSTAND!!!
"ACORN/Obama forced toxic mortgages GUARANTEED by U.S. Govt...!
A) Acorn/Obama won out of court against Citibank 1995 to start lending to unqualified borrowers represented by Acorn/Obama! That is a FACT!
1) All persons who are: African-American; and who applied for a first mortgage or refinance loan with Citibank for property located in Cook, DuPage, Lake or McHenry County, IL; and whose loan request was turned down between 7/6/92 and 12/31/95
9 attorneys including Obama ...
B) As a result of the out of court settlement Citibank HAD TO make loans!
C) FDIC auditors reviewing subprime loans at lenders like CitiBank require corrections
D) Lenders confronted with CRA forcing 20% more subprime loans, sell loans to fannie/freddie.
E) FANNIE/Freddie as a GSE agency using "full faith and credit" of U.S. Govt. package and sell to investors that KNOW there are toxic assets BACKED by U.S.!
Even as the White House continues to try to expand the role the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) have in home lending, central banks and sovereign wealth funds across Asia and the Middle East are beginning to sell off their Fannie and Freddie holdings, according to a report from the Financial Times.
Fannie, Freddie Threaten Taxpayers Again - Investors.com
BlindBoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2010
- 58,771
- 17,675
- 2,250
Mostly untrue. Yes there was a class action suit file against Citibank but did not force them to lend to unqualified people period. Claiming it did is an outright lie. The suit was filed because a black women was turned down for a loan who had the same qualification as a white person who did recieve a loan from Citibank.
snopes.com: Obama Required Banks to Lend Money to Poor People
NYcarbineer
Diamond Member
No list? Hmmm...well, could you at least provide us with an estimate of how long it will be before you have that list ready?
EriktheRed
Eh...
What is it with you and the class warfare???
You some kind of anti-American Commie or somethin'?
healthmyths
Diamond Member
- Sep 19, 2011
- 30,375
- 11,939
- 1,400
- Thread starter
- #33
Here is a list of 17 major banks that as part of their defense against the U.S. government lawsuit for billions over financial crisis mortgage sales THAT will show as part of their defense the CRA requirements to make subprime loans.
Among those targeted by the lawsuits were Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc., JP Morgan Chase & Co., and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Large European banks including The Royal Bank of Scotland, Barclays Bank and Credit Suisse were also sued.
The total price tag for the mortgage-backed securities sold to Fannie and Freddie by the firms named in the lawsuits: $196 billion.
Fannie and Freddie invested heavily in the mortgage-backed securities even after their regulator said they didn't have the needed risk-management capabilities, the bank said. 'Despite this, (Fannie and Freddie) are now seeking to hold other market participants responsible for their losses,' it said.
US government 'to sue' banks over financial crisis mortgage sales | Mail Online
The forcing by CRA/fear of redline lawsuits will BE part of these banks defense as they will show how if they didn't make the loans protests, boycotts orchestrated by ACORN/Obama's backers, Alinsky, Soros.. all would have through economic and legal pressures forced these bad loans.
Knowing the banks were forced to make bad loans, sold them to Fannie/freddie and due to this glaring damning statement.. investors bought them!
Please refute this statement:
Oct. 23,2008 (Bloomberg) --
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have an "effective'' federal guarantee, not the
"full faith and credit'' of the U.S. government, Federal Housing Finance Agency Director James Lockhart said after the hearing.
That does give them effectively a guarantee of the U.S. government.''
Lockhart's Fannie, Freddie Guarantee Remarks Stir Up Confusion - Bloomberg
Among those targeted by the lawsuits were Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc., JP Morgan Chase & Co., and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Large European banks including The Royal Bank of Scotland, Barclays Bank and Credit Suisse were also sued.
The total price tag for the mortgage-backed securities sold to Fannie and Freddie by the firms named in the lawsuits: $196 billion.
Fannie and Freddie invested heavily in the mortgage-backed securities even after their regulator said they didn't have the needed risk-management capabilities, the bank said. 'Despite this, (Fannie and Freddie) are now seeking to hold other market participants responsible for their losses,' it said.
US government 'to sue' banks over financial crisis mortgage sales | Mail Online
The forcing by CRA/fear of redline lawsuits will BE part of these banks defense as they will show how if they didn't make the loans protests, boycotts orchestrated by ACORN/Obama's backers, Alinsky, Soros.. all would have through economic and legal pressures forced these bad loans.
Knowing the banks were forced to make bad loans, sold them to Fannie/freddie and due to this glaring damning statement.. investors bought them!
Please refute this statement:
Oct. 23,2008 (Bloomberg) --
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have an "effective'' federal guarantee, not the
"full faith and credit'' of the U.S. government, Federal Housing Finance Agency Director James Lockhart said after the hearing.
That does give them effectively a guarantee of the U.S. government.''
Lockhart's Fannie, Freddie Guarantee Remarks Stir Up Confusion - Bloomberg
It STARTED it in motion ... whos brain child was it?
The BIG MONEY then saw an opportunity and jumped on it and when it crashed the government had to throw someone under the bus!
healthmyths
Diamond Member
- Sep 19, 2011
- 30,375
- 11,939
- 1,400
- Thread starter
- #35
And why shouldn't the banks "profit" from the bad loans?
After all the Democrats denied Fannie/Freddie were in trouble and I've not had ANYONE refute the following comments:
Oct. 23,2008 (Bloomberg) --
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have an ``effective'' federal guarantee, not the
"full faith and credit'' of the U.S. government, Federal Housing Finance Agency Director James Lockhart said after the hearing. That does give them effectively a guarantee of the U.S. government.''
Lockhart's Fannie, Freddie Guarantee Remarks Stir Up Confusion - Bloomberg
And this happened:
The near economic collapse on Thursday (Sept 18,2008), at 11am the Federal Reserve noticed a tremendous draw-down of money market accounts in the U.S., to the tune of $550 billion was being drawn out in the matter of an hour or two. The Treasury opened up its window to help and pumped a $105 billion in the system and quickly realized that they could not stem the tide. We were having an electronic run on the banks. They decided to close the operation, close down the money accounts and announce a guarantee of $250,000 per account so there wouldn’t be further panic out there. If they had not done that, their estimation is that by 2pm that afternoon, $5.5 trillion would have been drawn out of the money market system of the U.S., would have collapsed the entire economy of the U.S., and within 24 hours the world economy would have collapsed.
It would have been the end of our economic system and our political system as we know it.
Zero Hedge: How The World Almost Came To An End At 2PM On September 18
The article neglects to acknowledge that political contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac overwhelmingly supported Democratic officials - in particular members of Democratic leadership:
* Since 1989, Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) has received $165,400 from Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac.
* Since 1989, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has received $77,000
from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (Lindsay Renick Mayer, "Fannie Mae And
* Since 1989, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has received $56,250 from Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac. 9/11/08)
(Lindsay Renick Mayer, "Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac Invest In Lawmakers," Center For Responsive Politics' "Capital Eye" Blog, OpenSecrets.org: Money in Politics -- See Who's Giving & Who's Getting, 9/11/08)
Warned by Bush Administration warned about Fannie/Freddie once in ’01, once in ’02, six times in ’03, three times in ’04, once in ’05, five times in ’07, and 17 times in ’08. Congress didn’t listen especially Democrats LAUGH!!!!
Since 2003...
"When warned about Fannie Mae in (House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) "these two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis.... The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." (New York Times, 9/11/03)
And then Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd also ignored the President's warnings and called on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position. . Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis... (New York Times, 9/11/03.
So where are those that care to refute the above????
After all the Democrats denied Fannie/Freddie were in trouble and I've not had ANYONE refute the following comments:
Oct. 23,2008 (Bloomberg) --
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have an ``effective'' federal guarantee, not the
"full faith and credit'' of the U.S. government, Federal Housing Finance Agency Director James Lockhart said after the hearing. That does give them effectively a guarantee of the U.S. government.''
Lockhart's Fannie, Freddie Guarantee Remarks Stir Up Confusion - Bloomberg
And this happened:
The near economic collapse on Thursday (Sept 18,2008), at 11am the Federal Reserve noticed a tremendous draw-down of money market accounts in the U.S., to the tune of $550 billion was being drawn out in the matter of an hour or two. The Treasury opened up its window to help and pumped a $105 billion in the system and quickly realized that they could not stem the tide. We were having an electronic run on the banks. They decided to close the operation, close down the money accounts and announce a guarantee of $250,000 per account so there wouldn’t be further panic out there. If they had not done that, their estimation is that by 2pm that afternoon, $5.5 trillion would have been drawn out of the money market system of the U.S., would have collapsed the entire economy of the U.S., and within 24 hours the world economy would have collapsed.
It would have been the end of our economic system and our political system as we know it.
Zero Hedge: How The World Almost Came To An End At 2PM On September 18
The article neglects to acknowledge that political contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac overwhelmingly supported Democratic officials - in particular members of Democratic leadership:
* Since 1989, Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) has received $165,400 from Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac.
* Since 1989, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has received $77,000
from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (Lindsay Renick Mayer, "Fannie Mae And
* Since 1989, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has received $56,250 from Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac. 9/11/08)
(Lindsay Renick Mayer, "Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac Invest In Lawmakers," Center For Responsive Politics' "Capital Eye" Blog, OpenSecrets.org: Money in Politics -- See Who's Giving & Who's Getting, 9/11/08)
Warned by Bush Administration warned about Fannie/Freddie once in ’01, once in ’02, six times in ’03, three times in ’04, once in ’05, five times in ’07, and 17 times in ’08. Congress didn’t listen especially Democrats LAUGH!!!!
Since 2003...
"When warned about Fannie Mae in (House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) "these two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis.... The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." (New York Times, 9/11/03)
And then Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd also ignored the President's warnings and called on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position. . Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis... (New York Times, 9/11/03.
So where are those that care to refute the above????
CrusaderFrank
Diamond Member
- May 20, 2009
- 161,067
- 87,519
- 2,645
Soggy in NOLA
Diamond Member
- Jul 31, 2009
- 40,565
- 5,360
- 1,830
Better go brush up on The Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 and it's effects.... while the CRA itself did not force banks to make risky loans, the enforcement of the CRA most certainly did.
Last edited:
Big Fitz
User Quit *****
- Nov 23, 2009
- 16,917
- 2,522
- 48
That's like saying dust had very little to do with a grain elevator exploding. Abjectly stupid.
Mr. Shaman
Senior Member
- May 4, 2010
- 23,892
- 822
- 48
It's always soooooooooooooooo much fun, SMACKIN' AROUND you conspiracy-theorists.
Similar threads
- Poll
New Topics
-
-
RepLuna has invited a member of the Moscow Bolshevik (communist party), Vladimir Isakov, to visit US congress.- Started by Litwin
- Replies: 0
-
Putin asks oligarchs to donate to budget as cost of Ukraine war soars
- Started by Litwin
- Replies: 1
-
-
Trump getting on coins and now his signature on bills- Started by frigidweirdo
- Replies: 45
