Dear Andrew,

Please keep on this one. There are others who may not have been quite so blatant, but who also made a mint hurting the public/doing dirty business.

Thanks.

From almost the beginning of "Angelo Mozilo," the Wall Street Journal's Paul Gigot was on his case, and the dysfunctional, unholy union between Mozilo and Democrats who pushed greater funding for, and the autonomy of, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

There have been few occasions in American journalism where a news organization so thoroughly and completely called out an organizational catastophe before it happened, as in the case of the Journal's harassment of Mozilo, Fannie and Freddie.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121677050160675397.html

Quite possibly, the most brilliant political column of the last year.

Create a government entity in America and I swear, by the time the ink has dried there's a "businessperson" lined up to take advantage of it.

That aside, rationally, I cannot justify where Fanny and Freddie fit into this story on the SEC going after Angelo. At the very least it is possibly the most tangential thing written, not directly referenced in the writing, and simply used as an opportunity to bring up a tired, beaten right-wing talking point. However, I suspect, it is simply another smokescreen, obfuscation technique employed by would-be swiftboaters.

The proprer response to bringing up Fannie and Freddie, when discussing Angelo, is to remind everyone that George was in power, so let us blame him. (Let's bring up Angelo, in regards to the SEC, but since he sold his product to Fannie and Freddie, the big, bad, business tycoon CANNOT be prosecuted by those dirty, low-life muckrakers, because FANNY and FREDDIE, FANNY and FREDDIE.) Makes me want to scream ABU GHARIB anytime anyone mentions George is human.

Did this person even read Paul Gigot's July '08 column? Because it's hard to even make sense out of this jibberish:

I HOPE POSTERS WONT TRY TO BRING UP FANNY AND FREDDIE, BECAUSE GWB WAS PREZNIT

Create a government entity in America and I swear, by the time the ink has dried there's a "businessperson" lined up to take advantage of it.

That aside, rationally, I cannot justify where Fanny and Freddie fit into this story on the SEC going after Angelo. At the very least it is possibly the most tangential thing written, not directly referenced in the writing, and simply used as an opportunity to bring up a tired, beaten right-wing talking point. However, I suspect, it is simply another smokescreen, obfuscation technique employed by would-be swiftboaters.

The proprer response to bringing up Fannie and Freddie, when discussing Angelo, is to remind everyone that George was in power, so let us blame him. (Let's bring up Angelo, in regards to the SEC, but since he sold his product to Fannie and Freddie, the big, bad, business tycoon CANNOT be prosecuted by those dirty, low-life muckrakers, because FANNY and FREDDIE, FANNY and FREDDIE.) Makes me want to scream ABU GHARIB anytime anyone mentions George is human.

-- Agillious

From the WSJ editorial:

"The abiding lesson here is what happens when you combine private profit with government power. You create political monsters that are protected both by journalists on the left and pseudo-capitalists on Wall Street, by liberal Democrats and country-club Republicans."

Surely you meant to include the country-club Republicans. Musta just been an oversight.

and Double DUH

I for one would love to see how much money he contributed to politicians while he was stealing all he could stuff in his pockets. I do not believe that he operated this classic robbery in broad daylight and nobody witnessed these crimes. He and his buddies deserve to be incarcerated. To take advantage of people just because they are not very bright is the same as child abuse. Business people, especially Lawyers do this all the time. You are supposedly paying them for what they know, instead they are milking you for what you don’t know. Pathetic! Is this what the Republicans define as the “free market enterprise”? Sounds more like the wild, wild west, to me.

Remember that TV show where the aliens were among us, and the way you could tell they were aliens is that their pinkies stuck out, because they only has eight fingers or something? Just saying.

-

They Warned Us About the Mortgage Crisis

State whistleblowers tried to curtail greedy lending—and were thwarted by the Bush Administration and the financial industry

State enforcers and legislators tried to contain the greed and foolishness. They were thwarted in many cases by Washington officials hostile to regulation and a financial industry adept at exploiting this ideology.The Bush Administration and many banks clung to what is known as "preemption." It is a legal doctrine that can be invoked in court and at the rulemaking table to assert that, when federal and state authority over business conflict, the feds prevail—even if it means little or no regulation.

http://tinyurl.com/422gtg

I for one would love to see how much money he contributed to politicians while he was stealing all he could stuff in his pockets.

In light of the news we are discussing, I can offer a partial answer: Not enough.

"In 1006 alone, it made half a billion dollars from such sales. (In 2007, that number fell to $14.9 million!)"

I'm thinking "1006" isn't correct.

Rusty nails. This guy. To the wall.

Anybody who believes that a multi trillion dollar economy could be brought to its knees by poor people is an idiot.

Although older and mortgage-free, I've great sympathy for young mortgagees, whose salaries are invariably less, even as their family expenses are greater.

The pernicious charge that subprime borrowers brought down our economy made no sense, considering their homes constitute real collateral, unlike trillions of dollars lost on derivatives, the collateral for which proved to be mere paper.

I'm therefore thrilled to learn of evidence exonerating borrowers. I only wish it'd stem the scapegoating. Unfortunately, those who cling to trickle-down theories have no choice but to blame workers and borrowers for the bankruptcy of deregulated lenders and corporations, the alternative being to abandon their discredited ideas.