Remember this? In 1994, a class-action lawsuit was filed against CitiBank, demanding loans be made.

[Contumacious]

Guess who led that lawsuit. You got it, barrack hussein obama.

In 1994, a class-action lawsuit was filed against CitiBank, demanding that loans be made to poor people, and others who could not show proof that they could pay the money back. The basis of the lawsuit was the 14th Amendment, which requires 'fair and equal' treatment for all citizens.

The legal theory was that failing to loan money to poor/indigent/unemployed people was, on it's face, a discriminatory act by lending institutions. Thousands of loans were processed, and of course many went into default, in part explaining why we're in the financial mess we're in.

Now, it's easy for some people to point the finger of blame at Pres. Geo. Bush for this crisis, because he's sitting in the hot seat.

What many people don't know is the suit was filed during the Clinton Administration.



"He wrote lots of substantial memos, but he didn't try any cases," said Judson Miner, a partner in the firm who was Obama's boss.

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.

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.

Fact Check Obama Had More to Do With 2008 Economic Meltdown Than Bush Ever Did The Gateway Pundit

Liberals folks. They are dangerous tools of the socialists. They are all liars. They are all ignorant as hell. They are all utter wastes of time.

They still think Booooosh lied about wmds, regardless of the fact that Clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act for wmds and Boooooooosh enforced that policy.

They are all morons. Especially the redean loser.

lol, fact check?

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

Mostly false.

Sorry to burst your bubble, its true.


Documents: Plaintiffs in 1995 Obama-led Citibank lawsuit submitted class action claims


We already knew that community organizer Obama was affiliated with ACORN.


.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Guess who led that lawsuit. You got it, barrack hussein obama.

In 1994, a class-action lawsuit was filed against CitiBank, demanding that loans be made to poor people, and others who could not show proof that they could pay the money back. The basis of the lawsuit was the 14th Amendment, which requires 'fair and equal' treatment for all citizens.

The legal theory was that failing to loan money to poor/indigent/unemployed people was, on it's face, a discriminatory act by lending institutions. Thousands of loans were processed, and of course many went into default, in part explaining why we're in the financial mess we're in.

Now, it's easy for some people to point the finger of blame at Pres. Geo. Bush for this crisis, because he's sitting in the hot seat.

What many people don't know is the suit was filed during the Clinton Administration.



"He wrote lots of substantial memos, but he didn't try any cases," said Judson Miner, a partner in the firm who was Obama's boss.

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.

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.

Fact Check Obama Had More to Do With 2008 Economic Meltdown Than Bush Ever Did The Gateway Pundit

Liberals folks. They are dangerous tools of the socialists. They are all liars. They are all ignorant as hell. They are all utter wastes of time.

They still think Booooosh lied about wmds, regardless of the fact that Clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act for wmds and Boooooooosh enforced that policy.

They are all morons. Especially the redean loser.

lol, fact check?

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

Mostly false.

Sure.....says lefty snopes supporting the liar in chief.

The OP sourced from the Daily Caller which is the most notorious liar of all the rightwing propaganda outlets.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The OP's myth is only believed by those within the cult of the Right.

 

[jknowgood]

The OP's myth is only believed by those within the cult of the Right.

It doesn't matter Obama could tell you he messed up and did it. You would come up with something to justify it.

 

[TooTall]

Th

Guess who led that lawsuit. You got it, barrack hussein obama.

In 1994, a class-action lawsuit was filed against CitiBank, demanding that loans be made to poor people, and others who could not show proof that they could pay the money back. The basis of the lawsuit was the 14th Amendment, which requires 'fair and equal' treatment for all citizens.

The legal theory was that failing to loan money to poor/indigent/unemployed people was, on it's face, a discriminatory act by lending institutions. Thousands of loans were processed, and of course many went into default, in part explaining why we're in the financial mess we're in.

Now, it's easy for some people to point the finger of blame at Pres. Geo. Bush for this crisis, because he's sitting in the hot seat.

What many people don't know is the suit was filed during the Clinton Administration.



"He wrote lots of substantial memos, but he didn't try any cases," said Judson Miner, a partner in the firm who was Obama's boss.

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.

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.

Fact Check Obama Had More to Do With 2008 Economic Meltdown Than Bush Ever Did The Gateway Pundit

Liberals folks. They are dangerous tools of the socialists. They are all liars. They are all ignorant as hell. They are all utter wastes of time.

They still think Booooosh lied about wmds, regardless of the fact that Clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act for wmds and Boooooooosh enforced that policy.

They are all morons. Especially the redean loser.

lol, fact check?

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

Mostly false.

That isn't what the OP claimed, moron.

Give Obama credit, he has been trying to destroy America since 1994.

Equality is destroying this nation....

Passing a law requiring banks to loan their depositors money to people who obviously do not have the means to repay it is not equality by any stretch of the imagination.

He posted that and then thanked leftofleft for his post, which is the exact opposite of what he posted.

Holy shit.

Point out where the exact opposite is between my post and leftofleft's post.

Passing a law requiring banks to loan their depositors money to people who obviously do not have the means to repay it is not equality by any stretch of the imagination.

Exactly. Debt can be broken out into short term + long term. Add them up and compare against income. At that point, affirmative action, race based quotas, fairness, are all secondary. The only time racial equality comes into play is if you have two people with the same financial scores, call it a range, and you see a trend where the whites are getting approved more than other races BUT there must be a proven baseline. You can't compare the loan approval rate of a white couple making $300K plus annually to a black family making $50K being denied loans.

 

[Theowl32]

Th

lol, fact check?

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

Mostly false.

That isn't what the OP claimed, moron.

Give Obama credit, he has been trying to destroy America since 1994.

Equality is destroying this nation....

Passing a law requiring banks to loan their depositors money to people who obviously do not have the means to repay it is not equality by any stretch of the imagination.

He posted that and then thanked leftofleft for his post, which is the exact opposite of what he posted.

Holy shit.

Point out where the exact opposite is between my post and leftofleft's post.

Passing a law requiring banks to loan their depositors money to people who obviously do not have the means to repay it is not equality by any stretch of the imagination.

Exactly. Debt can be broken out into short term + long term. Add them up and compare against income. At that point, affirmative action, race based quotas, fairness, are all secondary. The only time racial equality comes into play is if you have two people with the same financial scores, call it a range, and you see a trend where the whites are getting approved more than other races BUT there must be a proven baseline. You can't compare the loan approval rate of a white couple making $300K plus annually to a black family making $50K being denied loans.

Not your post. I was commenting on the moonglow moron. He states he wants "equal treatment" and he is backing the lawsuit brought on that barack hussein obama was apart, he then agreed or thanked what leftofleft wrote which all but totally contradicted the stance the moonglow moron took on.

Typical of left wing morons. Taking every and any side of ever issue, which proves again that they stand for nothing.

Take a look at post 10 where he is all sarcastic with Jknowgood and then agrees with leftofleft on post 11.

 

[Moonglow]

Th
That isn't what the OP claimed, moron.

Give Obama credit, he has been trying to destroy America since 1994.

Equality is destroying this nation....

Passing a law requiring banks to loan their depositors money to people who obviously do not have the means to repay it is not equality by any stretch of the imagination.

He posted that and then thanked leftofleft for his post, which is the exact opposite of what he posted.

Holy shit.

Point out where the exact opposite is between my post and leftofleft's post.

Passing a law requiring banks to loan their depositors money to people who obviously do not have the means to repay it is not equality by any stretch of the imagination.

Exactly. Debt can be broken out into short term + long term. Add them up and compare against income. At that point, affirmative action, race based quotas, fairness, are all secondary. The only time racial equality comes into play is if you have two people with the same financial scores, call it a range, and you see a trend where the whites are getting approved more than other races BUT there must be a proven baseline. You can't compare the loan approval rate of a white couple making $300K plus annually to a black family making $50K being denied loans.

Not your post. I was commenting on the moonglow moron. He states he wants "equal treatment" and he is backing the lawsuit brought on that barack hussein obama was apart, he then agreed or thanked what leftofleft wrote which all but totally contradicted the stance the moonglow moron took on.

Typical of left wing morons. Taking every and any side of ever issue, which proves again that they stand for nothing.

Take a look at post 10 where he is all sarcastic with Jknowgood and then agrees with leftofleft on post 11.

I see you job here is not only interpreter but jack ass as well...

 

[Theowl32]

Equality is destroying this nation....

Passing a law requiring banks to loan their depositors money to people who obviously do not have the means to repay it is not equality by any stretch of the imagination.

He posted that and then thanked leftofleft for his post, which is the exact opposite of what he posted.

Holy shit.

Point out where the exact opposite is between my post and leftofleft's post.

Passing a law requiring banks to loan their depositors money to people who obviously do not have the means to repay it is not equality by any stretch of the imagination.

Exactly. Debt can be broken out into short term + long term. Add them up and compare against income. At that point, affirmative action, race based quotas, fairness, are all secondary. The only time racial equality comes into play is if you have two people with the same financial scores, call it a range, and you see a trend where the whites are getting approved more than other races BUT there must be a proven baseline. You can't compare the loan approval rate of a white couple making $300K plus annually to a black family making $50K being denied loans.

Not your post. I was commenting on the moonglow moron. He states he wants "equal treatment" and he is backing the lawsuit brought on that barack hussein obama was apart, he then agreed or thanked what leftofleft wrote which all but totally contradicted the stance the moonglow moron took on.

Typical of left wing morons. Taking every and any side of ever issue, which proves again that they stand for nothing.

Take a look at post 10 where he is all sarcastic with Jknowgood and then agrees with leftofleft on post 11.

I see you job here is not only interpreter but jack ass as well...

Hi moron. Let us know what your actual position is. Do you believe or support your beloved president was involved in, in regards to "fair housing" where the lawsuit forced CitiBank to ease its lending practices?

Let us know. Do you support that lawsuit that was actually won?

Do you 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…

…Obama has pursued the same top-down mortgage lending policies in the White House.

Obama’s lawsuit was one element of a national “anti-redlining” campaign led by Chicago’s progressive groups, who argued that banks unfairly refused to lend money to people living within so-called “redlines” around African-American communities. The campaign was powered by progressives’ moral claim that their expertise could boost home ownership among the United States’ most disadvantaged minority, African-Americans.

Or, do you support this?

Lesson Learned: Regardless of race, color, or creed, If people's financial scores don't meet the criteria for a bank to make a loan and avoid risk, NO LOAN. You can't affirmative action financial credit.

Leftofleft post that moonglow agreed with.


Well, which one do you support. The fair housing lawsuit that your pathetic socialist asshole was involved in which reduced lending standards for poor black people, or do you support what leftofleft said?

Cause one contradicts the other. You, support both, in typical fucking left wing ignorant fashion.

 

[kaz]

Remember this? In 1994, a class-action lawsuit was filed against CitiBank, demanding loans be made.

Well, that was clearly W's fault...

 

[kaz]

[Passing a law requiring banks to loan their depositors money to people who obviously do not have the means to repay it is not equality by any stretch of the imagination.

Not loaning money to black people is racist, it doesn't matter if they can pay it back. Seriously, you don't know about slavery?

 

[kaz]

Do NOT bring facts and accuracy into this Forum.

You will be mocked incessantly for doing so

Yes like linking WMD's to a lawsuit about equal housing lending..what a stretch..

Democrats are never responsible for what they do according to you, are they Moonbeam?

So when Obama blames bush for a policy he supported and clinton initiated, you still don't move past blaming W, do you?

And Obama blaming W? For a policy he supported? Anything? Do you have any integrity? Any at all?

 

[zeke]

Well, that was clearly W's fault...

You didn't get the memo I take it? The one that said that nothing that occurred during the eight years of the George Bush Presidency was his fault. George has been shown to be incompetent so nothing could be blamed on him.

Now Obama on the other hand. Obama can be and has been blamed for everything. Every right winger knows that Obama CAUSED the housing crisis with the lawsuit you are speaking of. End of story. Non refutable.

George Bush is blameless for anything and Obama is guilty of everything.

Just save time and type the above over and over. Bush blameless for anything, Obama guilty of everything.
That about sum it up?

 

[Theowl32]

[Passing a law requiring banks to loan their depositors money to people who obviously do not have the means to repay it is not equality by any stretch of the imagination.

Not loaning money to black people is racist, it doesn't matter if they can pay it back. Seriously, you don't know about slavery?

And then when the banks loaned the money to THOSE PEOPLE and they could not pay, the same racism profiteers who argued and sued to lower lending standards did an about face and of course called those banks racist that did, what they were obligated to do under the law.

No matter what happens, the grievance INDUSTRY is alive and well. Of course it is all entirely dependent on the moronic double talking ignorant brainwashed left for that industry to thrive.

 

[Theowl32]

Well, that was clearly W's fault...

You didn't get the memo I take it? The one that said that nothing that occurred during the eight years of the George Bush Presidency was his fault. George has been shown to be incompetent so nothing could be blamed on him.

Now Obama on the other hand. Obama can be and has been blamed for everything. Every right winger knows that Obama CAUSED the housing crisis with the lawsuit you are speaking of. End of story. Non refutable.

George Bush is blameless for anything and Obama is guilty of everything.

Just save time and type the above over and over. Bush blameless for anything, Obama guilty of everything.
That about sum it up?

 

[Care4all]

Jebus, you guys are messed up...

What is red-lining?

refuse (a loan or insurance) to someone because they live in an area deemed to be a poor financial risk.

The banks were redlining areas, and preventing people from being able to get a loan BASED ON WHAT AREA they lived in, NOT based on the individual's credit or ability to pay for that mortgage or insurance.

THAT is what is ILLEGAL....

As it SHOULD be.

 

[TooTall]

Well, that was clearly W's fault...

You didn't get the memo I take it? The one that said that nothing that occurred during the eight years of the George Bush Presidency was his fault. George has been shown to be incompetent so nothing could be blamed on him.

Now Obama on the other hand. Obama can be and has been blamed for everything. Every right winger knows that Obama CAUSED the housing crisis with the lawsuit you are speaking of. End of story. Non refutable.

George Bush is blameless for anything and Obama is guilty of everything.

Just save time and type the above over and over. Bush blameless for anything, Obama guilty of everything.
That about sum it up?

I blame Bush for continuing the incompetent Clinton policy of forcing banks to loan money to every one that applied for a loan, even if they couldn't afford to pay it back smartass!

 

[GWV5903]

Jebus, you guys are messed up...

What is red-lining?

refuse (a loan or insurance) to someone because they live in an area deemed to be a poor financial risk.

The banks were redlining areas, and preventing people from being able to get a loan BASED ON WHAT AREA they lived in, NOT based on the individual's credit or ability to pay for that mortgage or insurance.

THAT is what is ILLEGAL....

As it SHOULD be.

It should be illegal to redline, but it is nothing short of stupid to allow someone to purchase a home that they cannot afford...

Guess what, that is what this accomplished...

 

[SAYIT]

Give Obama credit, he has been trying to destroy America since 1994.

He was trained by the "Good Rev" Wright starting in the late 1980s and did not repudiate Wright until 2008 when the "Good Rev" and his racist, anti-American views became a political liability. Oops.

 

[Care4all]

Jebus, you guys are messed up...

What is red-lining?

refuse (a loan or insurance) to someone because they live in an area deemed to be a poor financial risk.

The banks were redlining areas, and preventing people from being able to get a loan BASED ON WHAT AREA they lived in, NOT based on the individual's credit or ability to pay for that mortgage or insurance.

THAT is what is ILLEGAL....

As it SHOULD be.

It should be illegal to redline, but it is nothing short of stupid to allow someone to purchase a home that they cannot afford...

Guess what, that is what this accomplished...

This is what the BANKS CHOSE TO DO, and NOT what the government forced them to do.

 

[Care4all]

The Banks did this...

and less than 10% of all the loans that went bad in the crash, were from people in Red line (CRA)areas, the other 90% of who the banks loaned to that could not afford their loans or did not qualify for loans under any normal circumstance, were the 90%...YES, white as snow people.