Reply With Quote
You gotta be ugly...are you ugly?
Yeah, I do say ...I see the similarity now.
Now I just have to nail down the whole "17th century poetry" references, and I'll have his job in the bag.
, I am on my way!
You gotta be ugly...are you ugly?
Oh yeah, silly ugly. Half bald and under 30 ugly.
You've clinched it then...Leno is probably calling.
Pictures? I would love to see what $4000 a night girl looks like.
wow. can i borrow some money?
myspace profile views: 314926
My wife would kill me, not because of the infidelity, but because I blew $80K in the process . . .
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?nav=hcmodule
Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime
How the Bush Administration Stopped the States From Stepping In to Help Consumers
By Eliot Spitzer
Thursday, February 14, 2008; Page A25
Several years ago, state attorneys general and others involved in consumer protection began to notice a marked increase in a range of predatory lending practices by mortgage lenders. Some were misrepresenting the terms of loans, making loans without regard to consumers' ability to repay, making loans with deceptive "teaser" rates that later ballooned astronomically, packing loans with undisclosed charges and fees, or even paying illegal kickbacks. These and other practices, we noticed, were having a devastating effect on home buyers. In addition, the widespread nature of these practices, if left unchecked, threatened our financial markets.
Even though predatory lending was becoming a national problem, the Bush administration looked the other way and did nothing to protect American homeowners. In fact, the government chose instead to align itself with the banks that were victimizing consumers.
Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis. This threat was so clear that as New York attorney general, I joined with colleagues in the other 49 states in attempting to fill the void left by the federal government. Individually, and together, state attorneys general of both parties brought litigation or entered into settlements with many subprime lenders that were engaged in predatory lending practices. Several state legislatures, including New York's, enacted laws aimed at curbing such practices.
What did the Bush administration do in response? Did it reverse course and decide to take action to halt this burgeoning scourge? As Americans are now painfully aware, with hundreds of thousands of homeowners facing foreclosure and our markets reeling, the answer is a resounding no.
Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye.
Let me explain: The administration accomplished this feat through an obscure federal agency called the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). The OCC has been in existence since the Civil War. Its mission is to ensure the fiscal soundness of national banks. For 140 years, the OCC examined the books of national banks to make sure they were balanced, an important but uncontroversial function. But a few years ago, for the first time in its history, the OCC was used as a tool against consumers.
In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative. The OCC also promulgated new rules that prevented states from enforcing any of their own consumer protection laws against national banks. The federal government's actions were so egregious and so unprecedented that all 50 state attorneys general, and all 50 state banking superintendents, actively fought the new rules.
But the unanimous opposition of the 50 states did not deter, or even slow, the Bush administration in its goal of protecting the banks. In fact, when my office opened an investigation of possible discrimination in mortgage lending by a number of banks, the OCC filed a federal lawsuit to stop the investigation.
Throughout our battles with the OCC and the banks, the mantra of the banks and their defenders was that efforts to curb predatory lending would deny access to credit to the very consumers the states were trying to protect. But the curbs we sought on predatory and unfair lending would have in no way jeopardized access to the legitimate credit market for appropriately priced loans. Instead, they would have stopped the scourge of predatory lending practices that have resulted in countless thousands of consumers losing their homes and put our economy in a precarious position.
When history tells the story of the subprime lending crisis and recounts its devastating effects on the lives of so many innocent homeowners, the Bush administration will not be judged favorably. The tale is still unfolding, but when the dust settles, it will be judged as a willing accomplice to the lenders who went to any lengths in their quest for profits. So willing, in fact, that it used the power of the federal government in an unprecedented assault on state legislatures, as well as on state attorneys general and anyone else on the side of consumers.
The writer is governor of New York.
My boss suggested that the top dawgs used the Patriot Act to spy on Spitzer after he kept spouting off about predatory lending.
Last edited by Cant_Be_Faded; 03-13-2008 at 08:30 PM.
My..my...my...look who has their fingers all over the Spitzer revelations...
Breaking News Exclusive: Roger Stone's revenge?
Link
PoliticsNY.Net has learned from impecable sources close to former Nixon/Reagan operative, pundit Roger Stone ... Stone & his wife Nydia became friendly with a "high priced call girl" .. Her name "Kristin" ...This relationship began at a high end club in New York City some 7-8 months ago.
Our impeccable sources continued, "Kristin" confided to Stone & his wife she was in the business. She subsequently told them that one of her clients was NYS Governor Eliot Spitzer." According to "Kristin" Spitzer engaged her at least 7-8 times over the course of the last year or more; the numbers are well over $30,000.00.
"Stone then convinced "Kristin" to go to the FBI with her story. Stone actually made the arrangements for "Kristin" to tell her story to Federal authorities."
Roger Stone is s ...he should be on a 24-7 FBI watchlist....In September 1996, the National Enquirer wrote that Stone, then a volunteer spokesman for Sen. Bob Dole, had placed ads and photos seeking sexual partners for himself and his wife, Nydia...
Last edited by Nbadan; 03-13-2008 at 09:23 PM.
What's your point?
More Republican family values showing
NY TimesALBANY, Aug. 22 — The Senate majority leader, Joseph L. Bruno, forced one of his top political consultants to resign on Wednesday after allegations that he left a threatening telephone message at the office of Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s father.
The consultant, Roger J. Stone Jr., continued to insist that the recorded message — which was made public by lawyers representing the governor’s 83-year-old father, Bernard Spitzer — was not authentic. He said allies of the governor had plotted against him, though an alibi he offered in a statement on his Web site appeared to be problematic.
The episode has inflamed the already poisonous political atmosphere here, just weeks after Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo issued a report that found the Spitzer administration had misused the State Police as part of an attempt to discredit Mr. Bruno.
Mr. Bruno, a Republican, cut short questions during a news conference after vowing that the allegations against Mr. Stone would not divert attention from efforts by Senate Republicans to investigate the Spitzer administration. Democrats called for a new investigation into the phone call and chided Mr. Bruno for not apologizing.
“I don’t know what Roger Stone did,” Mr. Bruno said. “Roger no longer has a relationship with the Senate, based on the allegations.”
Here are his swinger pics...
I wouldn't be surprised if Stone disappears soon....
Again, your point?
Anyone remember Lucy Ramirez?
Washington TimesLucy Ramirez is Nydia Stone (Cuban) and Roger Stone is the guy with the envelope (probably wearing sunglasses and a hat). Burkett could identify him and her voice--because this is wire fraud and a felony, as William Safire so helpfully pointed out in the New York Times.
Since Stone grew up with Rove in the Dirty Tricks Department, the whole thing becomes clear.
It's the old Rove trick as they did with Hatfield and planting the cocaine stories. Burkett has a history of mental illness and so became Patsy #1. And only Rove could have gotten Stone the original memos to copy!
Now fetch me my pipe!
Burkett's story--in which he is virtuous to the lady and dutifully burns the originals as she requested:
-snip-
The story begins in March, when Mr. Burkett, who had just been on MSNBC's "Hardball" discussing Mr. Bush's Guard service, received a call from a mysterious woman he calls Lucy Ramirez. Previously, Mr. Burkett had identified the source of the memos as one George Conn, another former Texas National Guard officer, conveniently abroad in Europe. In an e-mail to USA Today, Mr. Conn denied any involvement with the Killian memos. Mr. Burkett himself admits that he had lied about his source as a way of protecting her.
In their conversation, Lucy Ramirez explained how she had in her custody damaging do ents to Mr. Bush and scheduled a meeting with Mr. Burkett to hand them over. That meeting occurred on or around March 3 at a livestock show in Houston. But, according to Mr. Burkett, Lucy Ramirez didn't show up. Instead, as he told USA Today, an unknown "man handed him an envelope and quickly left." After receiving the memos, Mr. Burkett said he stopped off at a Kinko's store in Waco and made copies. In the parking lot outside, Mr. Burkett said he then burned the originals, pursuant to Lucy Ramirez's wishes. Over the next few days, Mr. Burkett said he hid the copies "in cold storage" at an undisclosed location 100 miles from his home in Baird.
Yep, Roger Stone was behind the dirty tricks on CBS News and Dan Rather, which was supposed to trap the Kerry campaign but misfired, that coincidentally, was the incident that most affected the start of this forum!
daaamn their sexual ad said she's 40DD-24-34
I'd hit that
fo' sho'
Huh? Dan Rather and that idiot producer, Maples wasn't it?, were behind the CBS News fiasco. Should have done some fact-checking before they went off all half- ed. I think they were just a bit too eager to force the evidence to fit their narrative.
Besides, what does any of this have to do with Eliot Spitzer?
Let's look at this one paragraph which, by the way, you saw no need to highlight.
Subprime mortgages were in response to a demand that lenders start helping people who couldn't ordinarily afford a home buy one. So on the one hand, liberals demanded banks start throwing money at an economic demographic that couldn't afford to pay it back and then, when the inevitable occurred, liberals start screaming about predatory lending practices.
There was no way for the banks to win on this one. I say screw 'em all. Those than lent and those that borrowed are idiots...I only wish to point out that one of the parties was pressured into these arrangements and it wasn't the borrowers.
Your boss is an idiot.
Currency transaction reporting requirements were enacted in the Bank Secrecy Act of 1970, and money laundering was made a crime in overhaul of the federal narcotics laws that took place in 1986. Believe it or not, Karl Rove did not diabolically dream these provisions up to trap unwary Democrats, nor are they part of George W. Bush's post-9/11 Politics of Fear.
Long before we had an international terrorism problem, these laws were developed to target domestic criminal enterprises (especially organized crime and drug trafficking). The biggest problem many of these syndicates have is hiding the mountains of cash they generate — unexplained wealth being among the best indicators of criminal activity, especially when it comes to the highest-ranking, most insulated crooks.
Spitzer's cash transactions exceeded these threshholds and his Bank was forced, under the BSA to report them.
To the extent these laws (and the Treasury Department's implementing regulations) have been beefed up significantly, a lot of that happened during the Clinton administration. (This Treasury Department publication lays out much of the history.)
So basically everything the republicans did was right, and everything the liberals did was wrong? Wow, how original of you yonivore.
I love how nutless neocons turn administration bashing into a liberals vs neocon thing
I suspect the lenders span the political spectrum but, those demanding lax lending practices were liberals.
No they didn't....Spitzer did much bigger transactions, $5k is chump change...Spitzer's cash transactions exceeded these threshholds and his Bank was forced, under the BSA to report them.
The obvious (to everyone but you, apparently) problem with your presumption is that he didn't just move funds per , he moved amounts, across accounts, in quan ies sufficient trigger reporting requirements.
SAR- su ious activity report
EVERYONE in a bank/wirehouse/etc is trained to alert someone about SARs.
btw... i'm looking at these emoticons on the side. i can't find the pic of a happy face talking out of its ass. i need it for dan.
So what? If he was moving funds for what he stated were legitimate purposes and then diverting them to the emperors club then that's accounting fraud....but...why evoke secret wire taps, claims of violating national security laws and the FEDS to go after a guy who is commiting a white-collar crime? those laws are supposed to be for hunting down terra-ists
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
