The Trump implosion

[jc456]

that isn't true. If someone will not present material requested voluntarily, subpoena are used to force the party to give up the documents. more nonsense from a leftist.

What isn't true? That Trump's folks met with Russians 18 different times that they didn't disclose? That's a fact. So why would a subpoena be issued to force the party to give up documents? Because the party refuses to give the documents themselves. And why would they refuse? Because the documents implicate them in a crime.

LISTEN TO YOURSELF.

so, why wouldn't they. See the thing is there is nothing illegal about what they did. And it isn't so just cause you point it out. It's why all of the intelligence agencies said there isn't anything there. so thanks. Congress did ask for Flynn's only because of his financial exchange with Turkey. so, you got nothing bubba. not a fking thing. And it doesn't matter anymore, there is a prosecutor that will investigate it all. wait till you see what that brings ya!!! hitlery and pedesta maybe? hmmmmm we will see eh?

 

[jc456]

Because the Grand Jury is made up of angry little progressives who can't accept that they lost an election

What should really concern everyone is that this fake American up there is doing precisely what it is that Putin wants; to undermine western democratic institutions like our Judicial System.

I'd call you a snowflake, but that's too nice. You're not a snowflake. You're a Russian tool.

you need to take another drag of the pipe there bubba. Russia is out. you're behind the times.

 

[jc456]

Dimwit...the pool for the Grand Jury is in Washington D.C. A heavily progressive population. You are a special kind of stupid.

LOL! Nah...this is just you doing Putin's bidding by trying to undermine confidence in western democracy. The irony is that confidence was already undermined the minute Conservatives turned to Russia to help them win elections they couldn't otherwise win based on the merits of their ideas.

it is? let's see the paperwork that validates that statement. queue the jeopardy music please.

 

[The Derp]

sure. cause you're orange county link which I pulled out the same info from

It's very obvious you didn't pull the info from it. You keep citing that same Op-Ed by the ex-Goldman Banker for some reason. Probably because you are too lazy or too stupid to come up with an argument on your own.

I give two shits who you think is a valid source or not.

The OC Register is a valid source. It's non-partisan (it actually is right-leaning). So explain to me why you cannot make an argument on this boards with just facts -why must you rely on Op-Eds?

I don't need your approvals for my beliefs and knowledge.

Which means you are going to believe what you want to believe, facts be damned. That doesn't make you a smart person, it makes you an ignoramus. Get over yourself.

 

[jc456]

sure. cause you're orange county link which I pulled out the same info from

It's very obvious you didn't pull the info from it. You keep citing that same Op-Ed by the ex-Goldman Banker for some reason. Probably because you are too lazy or too stupid to come up with an argument on your own.

I give two shits who you think is a valid source or not.

The OC Register is a valid source. It's non-partisan (it actually is right-leaning). So explain to me why you cannot make an argument on this boards with just facts -why must you rely on Op-Eds?

I don't need your approvals for my beliefs and knowledge.

Which means you are going to believe what you want to believe, facts be damned. That doesn't make you a smart person, it makes you an ignoramus. Get over yourself.

maybe you should actually read the link you posted. LOL. dude too funny.

 

[jc456]

sure. cause you're orange county link which I pulled out the same info from

It's very obvious you didn't pull the info from it. You keep citing that same Op-Ed by the ex-Goldman Banker for some reason. Probably because you are too lazy or too stupid to come up with an argument on your own.

I give two shits who you think is a valid source or not.

The OC Register is a valid source. It's non-partisan (it actually is right-leaning). So explain to me why you cannot make an argument on this boards with just facts -why must you rely on Op-Eds?

I don't need your approvals for my beliefs and knowledge.

Which means you are going to believe what you want to believe, facts be damned. That doesn't make you a smart person, it makes you an ignoramus. Get over yourself.

what facts? anything on the subject is full of opinions. Every fking one of them. there are no facts you fk. The only fact is that dodd-frank drew attention of cause because of their act and the bailout.

 

[The Derp]

you need to take another drag of the pipe there bubba. Russia is out. you're behind the times.

You know who says dismissive stuff like that? Guilty people. I think you feel massive amounts of shame and guilt for buying into the Trump shit, and this is just your way of having an outburst.

What are you gonna do if Trump is actually brought up on charges, or is forced to resign? Will Putin send you to a gulag for ******* up his plan to undermine western democracy?

 

[jc456]

you need to take another drag of the pipe there bubba. Russia is out. you're behind the times.

You know who says dismissive stuff like that? Guilty people. I think you feel massive amounts of shame and guilt for buying into the Trump shit, and this is just your way of having an outburst.

What are you gonna do if Trump is actually brought up on charges, or is forced to resign? Will Putin send you to a gulag for ******* up his plan to undermine western democracy?

sure poindexter sure. you just post up that there share of nothing that is available while I listen to jeopardy music.

charges for what?

 

[The Derp]

maybe you should actually read the link you posted. LOL. dude too funny.

I did, did you? The link said that 3 out of every 4 subprime loans issued from 2004-7 weren't subject to CRA rules, and those that were defaulted at rates below 5% even during the bubble and subsequent collapse.

 

[jc456]

maybe you should actually read the link you posted. LOL. dude too funny.

I did, did you? The link said that 3 out of every 4 subprime loans issued from 2004-7 weren't subject to CRA rules, and those that were defaulted at rates below 5% even during the bubble and subsequent collapse.

and so was the quote I put up. so? you said it wasn't there. well poindexter, it is there. I copied and pasted from your link. doh!!!!

here so you can back and actually read the article you linkeda;

"In a Sept. 22 editorial, The Wall Street Journal said that the law “compels banks to make loans to poor borrowers who often cannot repay them. Banks that failed to make enough of these loans were often held hostage by activists when they next sought some regulatory approval.”

In a Sept. 15 editorial, Investors Business Daily wrote that by strengthening the reinvestment law in the late 1990s, President Clinton “helped create the market for the risky subprime loans that he and Democrats now decry as not only greedy but ‘predatory.’ “

In a Sept. 18 appearance on MSNBC, conservative economist Larry Kudlow said, “The Community Reinvestment Act literally pushed these lenders to make low-income loans. … Liberal, guilt(y) consciences forced banks and lenders to make lousy, substandard loans.”"

bTW, FACT!!!!!!

right now you're going....fk, I didn't read the whole thing I posted. fk.

 

[The Derp]

what facts? anything on the subject is full of opinions.

No, it's not. Facts and opinions are two different things.

For example:

FACT: 3 out of every 4 subprime loans issued from 2004-7 were not subject to CRA rules
OPINION: Banks were forced by the CRA to hand out loans to people who couldn't afford them
FACT: GSE and CRA-subjected subprime loans consistently had default rates below 5%, before, during, and after the bubble
OPINION: Glass-Steagall repeal in 1999 was responsible for the subprime loan bubble that suddenly appeared 4 years later
FACT: Glass-Steagall contained no provisions regarding lending standards, practices, or mandates

FACT: You are a piece of shit Russian troll employing Russian Active Measures in order to undermine confidence in western democracy.

 

[jc456]

what facts? anything on the subject is full of opinions.

No, it's not. Facts and opinions are two different things.

For example:

FACT: 3 out of every 4 subprime loans issued from 2004-7 were not subject to CRA rules
OPINION: Banks were forced by the CRA to hand out loans to people who couldn't afford them
FACT: GSE and CRA-subjected subprime loans consistently had default rates below 5%, before, during, and after the bubble
OPINION: Glass-Steagall repeal in 1999 was responsible for the subprime loan bubble that suddenly appeared 4 years later
FACT: Glass-Steagall contained no provisions regarding lending standards, practices, or mandates

FACT: You are a piece of shit Russian troll employing Russian Active Measures in order to undermine confidence in western democracy.

sorry bubba, you don't get to make up facts. those are not facts. sorry, there is no data to support it. all of charts and shit are all manipulated.

fact:

"It is certainly possible to find prime mortgages among borrowers below the median income, but when half or more of the mortgages the GSEs bought had to be made to people below that income level, it was inevitable that underwriting standards had to decline. And they did. By 2000, Fannie was offering no-downpayment loans. By 2002, Fannie and Freddie had bought well over $1 trillion of subprime and other low quality loans. Fannie and Freddie were by far the largest part of this effort, but the FHA, Federal Home Loan Banks, Veterans Administration and other agencies--all under congressional and HUD pressure--followed suit. This continued through the 1990s and 2000s until the housing bubble--created by all this government-backed spending--collapsed in 2007. As a result, in 2008, before the mortgage meltdown that triggered the crisis, there were 27 million subprime and other low quality mortgages in the US financial system. That was half of all mortgages. Of these, over 70% (19.2 million) were on the books of government agencies like Fannie and Freddie, so there is no doubt that the government created the demand for these weak loans; less than 30% (7.8 million) were held or distributed by the banks, which profited from the opportunity created by the government. When these mortgages failed in unprecedented numbers in 2008, driving down housing prices throughout the U.S., they weakened all financial institutions and caused the financial crisis."

 

[The Derp]

sure poindexter sure. you just post up that there share of nothing that is available while I listen to jeopardy music.charges for what?

You know what's sad is that the more you post, the more your posts resemble something run through an internet Google translator.

 

[radical right]

Or that you're a Russian troll.

A lot of them are posting just like they were on Putin's payroll.

 

[jc456]

sure poindexter sure. you just post up that there share of nothing that is available while I listen to jeopardy music.charges for what?

You know what's sad is that the more you post, the more your posts resemble something run through an internet Google translator.

in other words I'm still listening to jeopardy music. yeah, come on poindexter, post up that nothing.

 

[Snouter]

Why all the sudden interest in my personal life?

Why is where and if you graduated high school an issue? Why are you too embarrassed and ashamed to discuss your education? You ridiculously retarded douchebag?

 

[radical right]

\
sorry bubba, you don't get to make up facts. those are not facts. sorry, there is no data to support it. all of charts and shit are all manipulated.

Funny from someone who tried to counter charts, graphics and numbers, with an editorial from a conservative economist.

 

[The Derp]

and so was the quote I put up. so? you said it wasn't there. well poindexter, it is there. I copied and pasted from your link. doh!!!!

OMFG...so you did the Conservative Russian Active Measure of copying-and-pasting out of context. So here's what the OPC register article said after the shit you copied and pasted:

The criticisms of the reinvestment act don’t make sense to Glenn Hayes.

“Institutions that are subject to CRA – that is, banks and savings asociations – were largely not involved in subprime lending,” Davis said. “The bulk of the loans came through a channel that was not subject to CRA.”​

What you have failed to do is connect the dots from the snippets you stole from, to your main argument.

Let's look at what you quoted vs. what I quoted:

What I quoted: verifiable, sourced facts

What you quoted: Op-Eds from people who didn't even know there was a mortgage bubble happening, then removed the context surrounding those quotes...particularly the part where the quotes of yours get smacked the **** down in most epic fashion. Not unlike what I'm doing here.

So the OC register set Conservatives up by quoting their opinions and Op-Eds, then proceeded to smack that shit down with actual, verifiable facts.

You see the difference? Of course not. It's hard to see anything with your head firmly planted up your ass.

 

[The Derp]

Why is where and if you graduated high school an issue? Why are you too embarrassed and ashamed to discuss your education? You ridiculously retarded douchebag?

I'm not embarrassed at all. I just don't see how it is relevant to this.

 

[The Derp]

Funny from someone who tried to counter charts, graphics and numbers, with an editorial from a conservative economist.

Yeah...that's what they do. You can even see it in how they responded to my post. They cut and pasted the quotes from the OC register article as somehow proof of what they're saying, though they didn't read the article. Because if they had, they would have seen the OC register was teeing up those Conservative opinions for experts, math, and stats to smack off the tee.