HAMP II: The $20 Billion Get Out of Jail Free Card

A day after the Case-Shiller Index confirmed that the housing market is in a double dip, the Powers that Be (a subsidiary of the Masters of the Universe, currently CEOed by one Barack Obama) have floated their proposal for a mortgage fraud settlement.

The settlement terms remain fluid, people familiar with the matter cautioned, and haven’t been presented to banks. Exact dollar amounts haven’t been agreed on by U.S. regulators and state attorneys general.

For the low, low price of $20 billion, the Administration proposes, banks could be excused for the abundant mortgage fraud they’ve committed.

Terms of the administration’s proposal include a commitment from mortgage servicers to reduce the loan balances of troubled borrowers who owe more than their homes are worth, people familiar with the matter said. The cost of those writedowns won’t be borne by investors who purchased mortgage-backed securities, these people said.

But basically, it sounds like HAMP II–a “plan” that still lets banks decide how to implement that “plan”–with the sole improvement on HAMP I that it requires 2nd Liens to be “reduced” (but not eliminated) in the process of modifying the first liens.

The deal wouldn’t create any new government programs to reduce principal. Instead, it would allow banks to devise their own modifications or use existing government programs, people familiar with the matter said. Banks would also have to reduce second-lien mortgages when first mortgages are modified.

In short, it includes bailout within bailout (since 2nd liens should be eliminated).

Over a quarter of mortgage holders are underwater on their homes. A big chunk of these people were sold houses at artificially inflated prices, courtesy of the bank and captured appraisers. Every single one of them is owed compensation for being cheated at the hands of the banks.

But $20 billion won’t even begin to compensate those victims of fraudulent appraisals for the fraud committed on them.

  1. orionATL says:

    double-dip, eh.


    that means more opportunity to buy small, old houses with large lots in semi-urban, urban counties and stockpile them until “prosperity” returns, gas prices are $5/gallon, and infill home building reigns.

    should i post a double-dip tip jar?

  2. orionATL says:

    what are the chances that the announcement of this massive rejection of the rule of local and state law over real estate transactions in their jurisdictions,

    was co-ordinated

    with the announcement the obama admin will not defend in court the ” defense of marriage” act


    with the announcement that rumsfeld, et al., would not be represented by the doj (just have their lawyers paid by the doj)?

    • prostratedragon says:

      I’d been wondering what all that was about. Seriously.

      And online wsj gets the coveted “Chump City Trebuchet” handle.

  3. bmull says:

    Am I understanding this correctly that not only homeowners who accept mods, but all homeowners, would lose their right to sue over fraudulent paperwork?

  4. PJEvans says:

    They first should explain to the public why it’s necessary to bail out the bankers again. And why people whose mortgages should have been eligible for restructuring were defrauded by those same banks.

    And then they can explain to us why we should not get out our pitchforks and torches.

    • emptywheel says:

      A big part of this story is the foundation on the OCC’s fraudulent assessment that only a few homeowners were inconvenienced by the massive mortgage fraud.

      It all builds from that lie.

  5. earlofhuntingdon says:

    The phrase, “The settlement terms remain fluid,” has such great utility. It can hide how tight the deal made already is or distract attention from a politician’s inability to get one that his supporters could support.

    Odds are, as with the public option, the deal’s been brokered. The issue is how to sell it so that politicians won’t get cold feet and change their minds.

    The truth, of course, is that there ought to be no deal, no global settlement, not in the sense of taking the banksters off the hook and “relieving negative influences” on the great and glorious market.

    We need investigations, prosecutions and where convictions are obtained, stern sentences. Send one Blankfein or Dimon to Sing Sing, to cohabit with Bubba in an ordinary cell for ten years, and you dissuade a hundred would be Blankfeins and Dimons from so savagely breaking the law. It’s a moving target; there will always be another Jeffrey Skilling who thinks he’s stronger, faster, smarter than the next prosecutor. Vigilance and a continued willingness to apply the law without fear or favor are essential, and so utterly lacking today under our constitutional lawyer president and his predecessor.

    Normal legislative and regulatory fixes would save millions of householders and the communities that depend on them. Reintroduce cram down. Regulate deceptive lending and administrative practices; break the business model that depends on inducing usurious penalty fees and charges that banks now depend on for the profit streams Wall Street demands. Make settlements obligatory for certain troubled debtors, a circumstance that might call for reimbursing responsible lenders (if you can find any). Revise absurd accounting practices that allow debt to be treated as non-existent. Enforce disclosure and fair dealing rules already on the books.

    Organizing a global settlement for banksters is the last thing Mr. Obama should be organizing. It leaves homeowners in the cold, rewards the banksters and assures us all that they will continue to engage in outsized risks, in the knowledge that damage from them will never be their problem.

    Oh, but Mr. Obama, ever pragmatic, understands that he has to give a little to get a little. He feels he must agree to a global settlement with the banks in exchange for a tiny sliver of help for homeowners. His sense of proportion and fairness are constipated. His behavior abuses the law, responsible government and his supporters’ goodwill, because he never gets, he only gives.

    • Mauimom says:

      Oh, but Mr. Obama, ever pragmatic, understands that he has to give a little to get a little

      Tonight my husband proposed that we should start calling Obama the “Capitulator in Chief” sort of a play on “Commander in Chief,” and a way of encapsulating an awful lot of what’s wrong with Obama.

      A “Commander in Chief” decides which battles are to be fought, and what resources are to be deployed to fight them. A “Capitulator in Chief” won’t fight for ANYTHING, and once his technique becomes known, opponents know they can roll him on every issue.

      I dunno, I find this idea attractive. Was thinking of expanding and writing a diary on it.

      And to respond to yours @ 8:

      Eric Alterman might say that Mr. Obama is being pragmatic.

      Oh, so you were at the book salon too? Sheesh!! Snicker.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        Yep, Mr. Alterman was too prickly by half; wasted a lot of effort that would have been better spent advocating his views.

  6. bmaz says:

    What about all the county recorders’ offices that have been defrauded out of all the recording fees over the last six or seven years?

    What about people whose first mortgage is still below the value of the house, but with the second they are upside down? The above sounds like the second can only be crammed in conjunction with the first, but the first would never be considered for modification in this scenario.

    What about everybody else who has been reamed and decimated by these assholes trashing of the entire economy?

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Precisely. Those interests need to be included in any global “settlement”.

      Besides, I fail to see what legal basis there is for ignoring, for overriding the real estate and contract laws of fifty states. A “settlement” framed as an organized refusal to prosecute simply enshrines the notorious practice of exempting the wealthy and the MOTU from complying with the ordinary and every day law and rules that everyone else is held to. It’s the sort of pragmatism that should make even Harvard rescind his law degree.

      This fraud and the legions it has harmed goes far beyond the 1980’s S&L scandal; it is bigger and more complex than the tobacco settlements. It should be approached as if it were as complex and harrowing as it really is, not as if it were a minor hiccup on the road to re-election.

    • prostratedragon says:

      What about all the county recorders’ offices that have been defrauded out of all the recording fees over the last six or seven years?

      We could see a race to the finish. The link is to a story of just one of 000s of irate county officials, who alledges 000,000s in defrauded fees through MERS.

      Aside from the huge potential payout if enough of these cases coalesce (I’m assuming that most of them would lead to pretty easy judgements for the plaintiffs), wouldn’t the banksters want to avoid scrutiny of the deliberation and forethought that went into creating MERS? Especially since the case for them probably looks better there than for many of the other amazingly widespread coincidences of this ruination.

    • thatvisionthing says:

      What about all the county recorders’ offices that have been defrauded out of all the recording fees over the last six or seven years?

      bmaz, there was a qui tam case filed last May for lost fees for it looks like every county in California — see description below. I googled — the case filing is here, and I see a motion to remand was denied in July. Do you know how to check on the status of this case — is it still alive?

      Homeowners’ Rebellion: Could 62 Million Homes Be Foreclosure-Proof?

      Local governments deprived of filing fees may also be getting into the act, at least through representatives suing on their behalf. Qui tam actions allow for a private party or “whistle blower” to bring suit on behalf of the government for a past or present fraud on it. In State of California ex rel. Barrett R. Bates (PDF), filed May 10, 2010, the plaintiff qui tam sued on behalf of a long list of local governments in California against MERS and a number of lenders, including Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo, for “wrongfully bypass[ing] the counties’ recording requirements; divest[ing] the borrowers of the right to know who owned the promissory note . . .; and record[ing] false documents to initiate and pursue non-judicial foreclosures, and to otherwise decrease or avoid payment of fees to the Counties and the Cities where the real estate is located.” The complaint notes that “MERS claims to have ‘saved’ at least $2.4 billion dollars in recording costs,” meaning it has helped avoid billions of dollars in fees otherwise accruing to local governments. The plaintiff sues for treble damages for all recording fees not paid during the past ten years, and for civil penalties of between $5,000 and $10,000 for each unpaid or underpaid recording fee and each false document recorded during that period, potentially a hefty sum. Similar suits have been filed by the same plaintiff qui tam in Nevada and Tennessee.

  7. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Eric Alterman might say that Mr. Obama is being pragmatic. The system he operates within prohibits enforcing the law against the banksters because he needs their contributions to pay for his re-election. Moreover, anything requiring full legislative authorization would fail in the Republican-controlled House.

    An opposing view is that if Mr. Obama’s actions simply fuel the power he claims to want to fight, he’s manning the bellows for the fire that is melting his constituent’s lives and fortunes. That makes him an opponent, not a would be supporter. He should rethink his oath of office and another one that ought to apply here; it starts, “First, do no harm.”

  8. earlofhuntingdon says:

    You have to move the decimal point on that $20 billion at least one position to the right, if the object is to generate a pool of funds that will make whole the millions of actors harmed by the banksters mortgage fraud. That’s still only one side of the coin; there is the programmatic wrongdoing on the bankers’ part to deal with, not just the losses it caused others.

    A better framing would avoid emotion-releasing terms like “settlement”, though I’m sure that’s exactly what all parties but homeowners are seeking. A more accurate framing, would be “campaign” or “program”, because like the S&L fraud in the 1980’s, this debacle will take a decade to sort out.

    The learned Mr. Obama ought to have learned by now that self-regulation is a contradiction in terms. If he truly wants banks to accept settlements with borrowers in which the principal and/or interest is lowered to market, he will have to make it mandatory. Nothing could be clearer. He can do that several ways, but strenuous and rude arm-twisting will be involved in all of them. He can’t pretend to be above the fray; he and a large team need to get down like Bobby Kennedy and rap knuckles on cement.

    Equally obvious is that once the terms of a program or “settlement” are agreed, the banks will begin devising ways to get out of it, just as credit card companies and health insurers are doing with his weak attempts to re-regulate them. Any effort to regulate these MOTU will be a guerrilla war, not a game of bridge.

    • emptywheel says:

      I agree on the figure: this is an order of magnitude too small to be realistic.

      Also, one of the reasons I called this HAMP II is that it seems to give the banks control over the mods. Again. Particularly given the ridiculous claims in the article that principle mods don’t work, I think this sets up more false mods designed to fail so the banks still get to foreclose.

      • klynn says:

        This has gone beyond the narrative. This has to be organized crime.

        EW your comments at 5 and 18 (along with incorporation of EOH’s at 10) would make a really good follow-up post.

        We have Big Ten states’ citizens working for collective bargaining protection while their govs will never face the real culprit downing their states budgets — the banks & their buddies committing fraud on the people. Followed by bank bailouts. This also has an appearance of hidden usury.

  9. orionATL says:

    so, boys,

    what do you think that that iowa attorney general who is leading the 50-states’ wolf pack,

    and who says publicly that he has developed a great relationship with u.s. treasury officials,

    is going to do to “right this impending wrong”?

  10. sybille says:

    From the following post on Naked Capitalism today, it seems that MERS is confident that some such deal is in the bag for them. The post tells of a phone call between Richard Anderson, from the MERS legal team, and Daniel Pennell, a systems expert who has testified before the Virginia House of Representatives on MERS:

    Daniel Pennell: MERS Counsel Calls Me

    Mr. Anderson said that he could not comment on the OCC investigation or actions but then went on to say that no administration would allow, nor would it allow a judge’s ruling, to threaten the legal standing of a MERS member to take a home. He pointed out that MERS has some relationship with 60% of the mortgages in the country worth in the trillions of dollars. In other words, in his opinion, regardless of the law or the findings of the OCC, MERS is too important because of the dollars associated with its operation to be allowed to be found to be acting illegally.

    In short, this man, who from his position as legal counsel for the party under investigation has inside knowledge of the OCC investigation, is confident that the government will do all it can in its power, regardless of the evidence, to assure that MERS and its members are allowed to proceed as they wish because of the potential financial costs.
    (emphasis added)

    It is truly reminiscent of the public option fiasco, and I would guess that yesterday’s DOMA announcement is supposed to function as cover.

  11. jdmckay0 says:

    Well, this is not good.

    Which is why we need to squeeze the fat out of teacher’s salaries in Wisconsin, and cut Soc. Sec. outlays so that Ponzi Scheme piggy bank, (along w/everything else) dilapidated by TBTF bailouts and off-the-book IRAQ Liberation in the $trillions (can u say fuzzy math?) does not fulfill secret Teacher’s Union plan to break the US economy state by state, …

    Sheesh, not only can’t we afford teachers any more, we can’t afford the excesses of EPA

    (…) back-door attempts by the administration to bypass Congress and circumvent the will of the American people,” said Poe in a statement after the amendment’s passage. “The era of EPA overstepping its authority by imposing over-burdensome and unnecessary regulations at the expense of American businesses is over.”

    Thank gawd we got these guys looking out for “the American people”.

    This freedom train has left the station on auto pilot, and looks to me like it’s just gathering speed unimpeded by… anything. A marvel to behold. Almost like the whole society is being run by Blagojevich clones, w/a little bit of Palin DNA thrown in and consecrated w/holy water.


    • bmaz says:

      Keep in mind how many more people will have to leave their homes, both now and when they retire and have no pension anymore, because of the decimation of unions and the percentage chunks of pay they are losing in their salary from these actions. Remember the teachers in Wisconsin who said they cannot afford to teach anymore? There are no other jobs for them either though. Those people are in trouble.

      • jdmckay0 says:

        Those people are in trouble.

        Dude, the entire bottom 99.xxx% of US worker bees are in trouble.

        The economy is a media portrayed mirage. The $USD is running on fumes, in no way reflecting underlying economy which currency purportedly reflects.

        US institutions… DOJ, EPA, SEC, U name it… plundered and/or refitted to assist few remaining plunderable assets.

        The sheer scope of this taking, executed in full view of everyone yet passed on in various high-minded patriotic assuaging empty messages… it’s of collapsing black hole proportions. For any admirer of full scale ganst’a plunderings, this gathering and unimpeded event is impressive indeed.

        • jdmckay0 says:

          Dude, the entire bottom 99.xxx% of US worker bees are in trouble.

          BTW, anyone else notice the various US financials, opining in masse the last few days, that the recovery has really taken hold now and in full force of it’s own momentum?

          Almost makes you want to out and and lard up on your neighbor’s foreclosed home(s?), as it seems return of prosperity is upon us.

                  • PJEvans says:

                    No, I’m living on a paycheck. I don’t own real estate. I’m not going to play with stuff I don’t understand and can’t recover from.

                    • jdmckay0 says:

                      Just a FYI (or anyone) generally…

                      When you say “not going to play w/stuff I don’t understand and can’t recover from”, I’d suggest to you that’s foolish… an assumption that puts you (or whoever) at risk. It assumes a safety in a given stats quo (USD). It also suggests/implies you undertand functioning of USD, but do not foreign currencies.

                      The problem with that: $USD has lost +/- 40% of it’s value agaist “basket” (most commonly measured foreign currencies) over last decade. This means that, simply by having everything you (or anyone) owns in $USD’s, say $1000 as of year 2k: against same currencies it’s worth is $600 today.

                      Conversely, $1000 in 2k value moved to avg. performer in basket would have netted you plus $400 over same period of time… w/out interest added. EG. just having your wealth as currency in a sound one makes a hell of a lot of difference wrt how much you have left, especially after major fraud cycles such as we have endured.

                      So, I would suggest to anyone w/some savings to manage that understanding currency, what drives them up/down, and the functioning of underlying economies and laws which these given currencies purport to represent… it is most certainly in your interest to divine this stuff. I will also tell you if you set out doing so to *really understand*, not just be told how it is by a few pundits… but to really understand, you will find that if you’re pains taking you will have an aha moment where it all gets clear.

                      There’s no safety whatsoever in *thinking* keeping your bucks in $USD, just because you’re here… I suggest that’s not a good way to decide.

                      Just my $0.02 worth (and falling fast), please don’t take offense.

  12. jdmckay0 says:

    The settlement terms remain fluid,

    Translation: financial lobbyists haven’t yet completed language of “settlement” ensuring their hard fought thefts gains profits pile of everyone else’s $$ remains theirs, so that the recovery can continue unimpeded.

    And they need a little more time to get their proof of concept media campaign finalized, ready to flood America’s LR’s w/explanations why this is being done w/mom & pop’s best interests at heart.

  13. PeasantParty says:

    “But $20 billion won’t even begin to compensate those victims of fraudulent appraisals for the fraud committed on them.”

    Exactly! Now please keep in mind that buyers had to pay revenue tax based on whatever the occupying state fees were per $1,000. Also, not only appraisal fraud, but also mortgage fraud as per preditory lending, and bank fraud for not accepting monthly payments at time of receipt, therefore charging late fees. I’m telling you the entire thing is a racket and if this settlement is agreed upon the citizens, homebuyers, and home owners will not be able to get redress for crimes!

  14. bobschacht says:

    Isn’t it interesting that Mark-to-market is the standard when a home buyer goes house hunting, and when he tries to sell, but banks are immune to Mark-to-market when it comes to valuing their mortgages, and Mark-to-market is simply not available to most home-owners seeking adjustment of their mortgages. For the lenders, its “Heads I win, tails you lose!”

    Bob in AZ

    • MarkH says:

      Well, now it’s been discovered they didn’t put in their ante, so their winnings may have to be forfeited. Trouble is the game is large and it’s massively disruptive, so smoothing-over must be considered. HAMP was to help them do that, but they thought keeping their illegally gained winnings was better than letting the gov’t fix things. So, as time goes on the mess may clear up a little, but slowly and politicians must neaten things up before the next election.

      They do have us all by the …

      But, because of their lack of paperwork we have them too.

      Maybe the added possibility of jail time for some would help speed things, but some of those responsible are not still in charge.

      • thatvisionthing says:

        But, because of their lack of paperwork we have them too.

        If you have a lawyer. Good luck with that one, you millions of defrauded homeowners.

        To repeat a comment by Mary, who was replying to a commenter who provided a news story about a bank prosecution to say that the DOJ was going after banksters:

        Mary October 24th, 2010 at 11:18 am 25

        In response to georgeofwashington @ 8 (show text)

        Your link is to a story about a whole different area of fraud. This piece and EW’s pieces referenced have to do with fraud in the foreclosure process – banks misrepresenting their paperwork to the courts in foreclosure proceedings against one on one residential property holders. The DOJ is looking at the residential property owners and saying, “screw you, how can we make sure the banks don’t get hurt by their illegality and fraud in foreclosing on your homes.”

        Your link is to a story about a bank defrauding other banks. It’s a case of con artists using a bank, Colonial Bank, to launder bad loans and non-existant loans/assets and sell them on to Deutsche Bank and BNP Paribas bank for a huge profit. DOJ has looked at the transaction and said, “ach, the poor wee Deutsche Bank, they arena like those powerful $100,000 home owners, wee Deutsche Bank canna protect itself so we must divert government assets to criminal proseuctions of the fraudsters who hurt the wee small Deutsche Bank. IOW, what you linked to is all pretty much the same ol, same ol. DOJ is going to protect big banks. There is not one iota of anything involved with DOJ protecting homeowners in your linked story.

        • thatvisionthing says:

          Florida set up a special court, the rocket docket, to speed home foreclosures through (Invasion of the Home-Snatchers), and the kingpin Daniel J. Stern, who ran over 70,000 foreclosures a year through it, was foreclosing on behalf of his client Fannie Mae. Now that it’s become apparent that MERS was never legal, anywhere, is there any effort afoot to run a rocket docket the other way, so homeowners with MERS on their titles could just go to court and clear title?

          William K. Black and L. Randall Wray

          Huffington Post, October 24, 2010

          What to do? We suggest an immediate moratorium on foreclosures and a requirement that all notes be produced by purported holders of mortgages within a reasonable length of time. If they cannot be found, the mortgages — as well as the securities that pool them — are no longer valid. That means that the homeowners are not indebted, and that the homes are owned free and clear. And that, dear bankers, is a big, big problem. It is also the law — without evidence of debt, there is no debtor and no creditor.

          What if — what if! — the $20 billion was spent on providing lawyers to underwater homeowners? What if the president’s energies were directed toward faithfully executing the existing laws of the land (rather than making up new ones to excuse bank fraud), and what if the government actually helped homeowners to achieve the 14th amendment’s ideal of equal representation in court?

          …nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

          It’s kind of useless if you can’t afford to get there.

  15. barne says:

    Before unions won wage and benefit gains, doctors were paid peanuts. Break the unions and see what happens to doctor and dentist wages. You guys, too, are a dime a dozen. Medicine and dentistry aren’t that hard, and medicine is getting more automated all the time. And you farmers who think that union busting attacks on the working class don’t affect you, better think again. The oligarchy pulling the strings will want your votes for a while, but that doesn’t mean they can’t start squeezing you financially. They’ll find a way. The entire wealth of Russia was handed to “the people” in Yeltsin’s time. Then, within 10 years, all that wealth — ALL — had been “legally” siphoned off into the hands of about 50 oligarchs. Draw the line now, or the royals will be back in charge, calling themselves financiers and philanthropists instead of princes and earls.

  16. earlofhuntingdon says:

    From Nakedcapitalisim (emphasis mine):

    [T]he mortgage “settlement” trial balloon floated in the Wall Street Journal this evening is an offense to common sense and decency. Notice how the word “fraud” is pretty much verboten in the MSM; the latest code word for what went awry is “breakdown”. This implies a benign sort of neglect, simply of not doing sufficient maintenance which led fussy machinery to quit working. It is mean to avoid contemplating, let along uncovering, Pinto-type decisions of weighing the costs of making the vehicle safer versus the litigation losses resulting from incineration by exploding gas tanks.

    The magic number across the industry is a mere $20 billion in civil fines or payments to fund loan mods. We know from BP not to have a great deal of confidence in settlement funds. It is not yet clear what scope of activities get a free pass (fraudulent servicer charges and impermissible compounding fees? failure to convey notes to mortgage trusts as stipulated in the PSA? foreclosing on home where HAMP mods had been promised?) but the industry will want any waiver to be as broad as possible. But in any kind of settlement of fraud, like securities fraud charges, various responsible parties are also barred from working in the industry, sometimes for life. None of that is on the table.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      And this, from the same comment, which gave Marcy a nice shout out:

      The officialdom is taking the stance that only a small number of borrowers suffered wrongful foreclosures. The HAMP fiasco alone makes that patently untrue. And the regulators’ failure to compare servicer records with borrower records (the short time frame of the task force effort guarantees that did not take place) makes this a garbage in, garbage out exercise. And that’s before you get to the question of fraudulent servicer charges, which foreclosure defense lawyers say represent 50% to 70% of the cases they handle (it’s easier to win based on standing so court records do not reflect the borrower reason for choosing to fight the foreclosure). Without an audit of servicer software, this regulatory assessment was a simple “see no evil” exercise.

      Nor do I see any mention of imposing new servicing standards on banks, another massive oversight.

  17. earlofhuntingdon says:

    As the title of Marcy’s post suggests, it seems clear that this is another attempt at a massive bail-out for the top four TBTF banks, without enforcing any changes on bank practices or revenue, without credibly compensating those harmed, and without telling the public what Mr. Obama is doing with the tax dollars overwhelmingly paid not by corporations or the wealthy, but by middle and working class Americans – those most harmed by these predatory banking practices.

    It makes one wonder whether Martha Stewart and Bernie Madoff were just convenient, outlier scapegoats that could be sacrificed without fear of causing the voracious Wall Street money machine to go “tilt”.

    If nakedcapitalism is correct and this is a kind of trial balloon, the cited comment suggests ways bloggers can send some constituent heat to their Congressritters.

  18. wavpeac says:

    We have to fight this…we have to send out a loud refusal that causes enough press that it scares the banks that their secret might get out. The balances on these loans are bogus…made up pay offs…for titles that might not be transferrable if you do pay off the bogus pay offs. What is to stop these mortgage companies from just putting an extra 500 on the end of every loan just for the hell of it?? Right now, if they do this there is NO recourse. We have made it okay for them to steal, lie, and cheat. There is no consequence. This scares the crap out of me…if they can get away with what they have over the last 10 years…imagine what is coming?

  19. spanishinquisition says:

    For the low, low price of $20 billion, the Administration proposes, banks could be excused for the abundant mortgage fraud they’ve committed.

    That number has a familiar ring to it…remember BP?

  20. jdmckay0 says:

    BTW, WSJ had front page article yesteday: MORTGAGE DEAL TAKES SHAPE.

    Takeaway was BO is working for…

    a) bondholders stay whole
    b) banks must slice down underwater mortgages

    attribution was ubiquitous “Administration source”.

  21. tremoluxman says:

    Oh, goody. The Banksters get another nice, sloppy blow-job from the Administration. Paid for by…wait for it…wait for it…the Taxpayers! How do the taxpayers pay for this ‘fine’? Because they get essentially nothing out of the deal and the banks get to set the rules. Any ‘fine’ will be spread out between the banks so as to be meaningless and they’ll be ‘incentivised’ to possibly-maybe-kinda write down principle. If they feel like it.

    More Bullshit. I gotta stop reading this shit. It’s to much even for Prevacid to handle.

  22. EternalVigilance says:

    This proposal is just the banksters’ version of the FISA whitewash.

    And we should all remember on whose side Obama ended up in that one.

  23. netwonc says:

    Obama will never be referred to at “the decider”, he is afraid to make a decision that favors or protects the american working people. All of his decisions have favored the ruling class and Mitchell is successful in making Oboma a ONE TERM PRESIDENT. , Thanks goodness for that,