«

»

You better believe this is plain Chicago style retaliation

The WSJ had an article the other day pointing out that the DOJ sued Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services late Monday under the idiotic pretense that S&P did something wrong during the social engineering induced housing crisis. From the short article:

The Justice Department sued Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services late Monday, alleging the firm ignored its own standards to rate mortgage bonds that imploded in the financial crisis and cost investors billions.

The civil charges by U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder against the New York company, one of the bond-rating industry’s three giants, are the first federal enforcement action against a credit-rating firm over the crisis. Several state attorneys general are likely to join.

S&P said in a statement earlier Monday that the government suit would be “entirely without factual or legal merit,” and denied wrongdoing.

Emphasis mine on that section where the DOJ claims this is about S&P not doing its job before the housing crisis. A crisis I remind all was created by assholes that wanted to social engineer utopia and thought giving loans to people with no fiscal discipline suddenly would result in the m becoming model citizens. PUH-LEEZE! This is move by the DOJ plain fucking bullshit. It is nothing but retaliation against S&P for having the balls to downgrade the US debt right when Team Blue and their media sycophants are trying to pretend their failed Keynesian policies are not wrecking the economy.

This is Chicago style payback. If you dare cross these scumbags in charge they will sick big government at you. If it is not the DOJ ignoring real crimes to punish those that do not follow the team Blue line, it is the IRS.

Be afraid people. Be very afraid.

17 comments

No ping yet

  1. TxAg94 says:

    And on top of it all they are firmly convinced that if they have to they have every right to put a Hellfire from a Predator drone right through your bedroom window.

    Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0

      
  2. Hal_10000 says:

    Bullshit, Alex. This lawsuit is long overdue. Standard and Poor did absolutely fucking do lots of wrong things. When the banks put together GSE-generated mortgage-backed securities into gigantic piles of B- rated crap, S&P (and Moody’s) gave them AAA ratings. That was fraud. it what free-market economy would fraud be legal? Cracking down on securities fraud is one of the reasons why we have government.

    S&P specifically instructed their employees not to look into the Collateralized Debt Obligations because the banks that pay them didn’t want anyone looking behind the curtain. Rating those financial vehicles was not some government plot. It was S&P’s damned job. And the fact is that they did not do their job and gleefully participated in the huge pile of fraud that was the CDO/CDS market. On what planet should that fraud not be a crime?

    You are confusing two different things here. You are confusing the mortgage market with the securities market. The mortgage market problem was, to a significant extent, caused by government policies and agents. But the securities market problem was all on the banks and rating agencies. The ratings agencies knew those loans were government-pushed crap. They had rated them B-. But they allowed the banks to move them around and slap them together for a AAA rating. People lost money on this. Real people with retirement funds and trusts. You’re OK with that?

    I have said this about six million times and I am going to keep saying it: ACORN did not invent credit default swaps; Barack Obama did not fraudulently rate piles of B- mortgages as AAA; the Democratic party did not create the opaque and fraudulent derivatives market. That was entirely separate issue from the CRA, Fannie and Freddie and all that. This was a market of people who took advantage of the government push for worse and worse mortgages to make tons and tons of money and leave the rest of us holding the bag.

    (Also, your theory about retaliation shows (a) that you have no idea what “Chicago politics” means; and (b) you’re conveniently ignoring that Moody’s downgraded the debt as well.)

    Hate to prick your ODS. But it is possible to walk and chew gum at the same time. It is possible to accept that our government was wrong when it pushed for more mortgages AND that it was wrong for the banks and the ratings agencies to knowingly pack these piece of shit mortgages into towers of AAA-rate garbage, make hundreds of billions of them, crash the economy and then be bailed out when it blew up in their faces.

    This is not Wall Street vs. 1600 PA. This is Wall Street and 1600 PA against the rest of us.

    Hot! Thumb up 6 Thumb down 8

      
  3. Argive says:

    Nicely done, Hal.

    One of the most messed up things about this whole debacle is how warped the incentive system is on Wall Street. In The Big Short, Michael Lewis interviewed plenty of Wall Streeters who all agreed on one thing: the ratings agencies were 100% worthless during the housing bubble and completely in the banks’ pockets. Banks were going to the ratings agencies and basically saying, “hey, if you rate this CDO as AAA without really looking at it (wink wink), we’ll pay you a lot of money. What’s more, all the analysts who signed off on that AAA rating can be assured of jobs at our bank down the road. But if you actually look at the CDO and rate it as junk, we’ll take our business elsewhere.”

    That sounds like fraud to me. It’s like if you found some dogshit on the ground, put it in a box, and asked someone to make the box look as if it had Cream of Wheat inside it rather than dogshit.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3

      
  4. Hal_10000 says:

    Argive, the Big Short should be required reading. It really lays out the Wall Street side of the crisis very clearly.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  5. AlexInCT says:

    Bullshit, Alex. This lawsuit is long overdue. Standard and Poor did absolutely fucking do lots of wrong things. When the banks put together GSE-generated mortgage-backed securities into gigantic piles of B- rated crap, S&P (and Moody’s) gave them AAA ratings. That was fraud. it what free-market economy would fraud be legal? Cracking down on securities fraud is one of the reasons why we have government.

    This lawsuit is a combination of punishment and coercion, and nothing else. The WH is punishing S&P for daring to downgrade them and to warn them not to do it again since they are doing more of the same that led to the last 2 downgrades, and because they could not extort a billion dollars from them. If you can’t see this then you head is too far up Obama’s ass, but when is that not so.

    S&P, and for that matter every god damned other rating agency, did exactly what practically EVERY-FUCKING-BODY-ELSE was doing at that time, which was to pretend the house of cards was sound. And they did this because to say otherwise would have caused them to be crucified. There were only a few people that spoke up, McCain and your love interest GWB are the more prominent ones, and demanded changes, only to be hammered by democrats – with Dodd & Frank leading the pack – as racists for daring to demand changes to the socio-engineering bullshit. Economists that pointed out the market was about to implode where hammered and ridiculed.

    S&P specifically instructed their employees not to look into the Collateralized Debt Obligations because the banks that pay them didn’t want anyone looking behind the curtain. Rating those financial vehicles was not some government plot. It was S&P’s damned job. And the fact is that they did not do their job and gleefully participated in the huge pile of fraud that was the CDO/CDS market. On what planet should that fraud not be a crime?

    The two biggest banks behind this where Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. Who owns those lock, stock and barrel? Who was running these laudable institutions at the time? And more importantly, point out for me in that 2K page monstrosity written by Frank & Dodd where they addressed this problem.

    You are confusing two different things here. You are confusing the mortgage market with the securities market. The mortgage market problem was, to a significant extent, caused by government policies and agents. But the securities market problem was all on the banks and rating agencies.

    What a pile of bullshit. I am confusing nothing. When the left could no longer deny their policies caused the problems they decided to pretend that there was no link between government forcing mortgage loans that where insanely bad risks and the securities that where created to make the bad loans palatable. It’s bullshit politics so they can still blame the banks for doing exactly what government made them do. The securities market turned into the shitfest it was BECAUSE of pressure from the government to make horribly shitty mortgages palatable.

    The ratings agencies knew those loans were government-pushed crap. They had rated them B-. But they allowed the banks to move them around and slap them together for a AAA rating. People lost money on this. Real people with retirement funds and trusts. You’re OK with that?

    Again, Freddie & Fannie where the prime players behind the whole shuffle and the biggest packagers. The questions I asked before still apply.

    I have said this about six million times and I am going to keep saying it: ACORN did not invent credit default swaps; Barack Obama did not fraudulently rate piles of B- mortgages as AAA; the Democratic party did not create the opaque and fraudulent derivatives market. That was entirely separate issue from the CRA, Fannie and Freddie and all that. This was a market of people who took advantage of the government push for worse and worse mortgages to make tons and tons of money and leave the rest of us holding the bag.

    Nice strawman. I am impressed how you then knocked it down. You are correct though. The default swaps and the whole Freddie and Fannie involvement however was driven by congress’ banking department. I give you three guesses who the two top dogs in that organization were, and the first 2 don’t count. But you can keep pretending that this was all the banks doing bad things, in collusion with S&P, while the good government guys got fooled. Sure.

    (Also, your theory about retaliation shows (a) that you have no idea what “Chicago politics” means;

    Chicago politics means exactly what it means: dirty and despicable politics that make criminal enterprises or the mafia look like saints.

    and (b) you’re conveniently ignoring that Moody’s downgraded the debt as well.)

    Are you really this dumb or do you think I am? Moody is next on the lest of their targets. But if the shakedown works well like they hope it will, they will need to do absolutely nothing about Moody’s. That’s because the message will have been sent and Moody’s will make sure to not downgrade them this time. You do understand how blackmail and coercion work right?

    Hate to prick your ODS.

    Oh, that’s also priceless coming from you man.

    But it is possible to walk and chew gum at the same time. It is possible to accept that our government was wrong when it pushed for more mortgages AND that it was wrong for the banks and the ratings agencies to knowingly pack these piece of shit mortgages into towers of AAA-rate garbage, make hundreds of billions of them, crash the economy and then be bailed out when it blew up in their faces.

    The difference between you and me is that I understand that the problem was caused and continues to exist because of government, and specifically the idiots that thing they can legislate utopia. The banks are nothing but two bit players dancing to the tunes the politicians set for them. Their error was to sell their soul and go along with these scumbags, instead of simply folding up and quitting the game when they where coerced into doing stupid things. Contrary to the fantasy, nobody in this country can do anything without the politicians encouraging and letting it happen. Like they did.

    But you can pretend the problem is the banks and that this isn’t more dirty politics by the most corrupt WH ever.

    Hot! Thumb up 8 Thumb down 9

      
  6. Hal_10000 says:

    There were only a few people that spoke up, McCain and your love interest GWB are the more prominent ones,

    Briefly calling for changes in Fannie/Freddie with the same enthusiasm with which they renamed post offices falls a little short of what was necessary.

    Chicago politics means exactly what it means: dirty and despicable politics that make criminal enterprises or the mafia look like saints.

    No. Chicago politics specifically refers to patronage. Pressure and dirty politics are what everyone does.

    The two biggest banks behind this where Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. Who owns those lock, stock and barrel? Who was running these laudable institutions at the time?

    Alex, please do some research before you launch into your next rant. Fannie and Freddie did not issue CDO’s and CDS’s. Those were proprietary and unregulated private investment vehicles. When the FM’s went into receivership, that triggered $1.4 trillion in *private* CDS’s — essentially bets against or for Fannie and Freddie’s debt.

    Everything else you say is based on that faulty ignorance. You are railing against Fannie for something the private banks did. Talk about straw men. You’re whacking an army of them!

    But you can pretend the problem is the banks and that this isn’t more dirty politics by the most corrupt WH ever.

    Or we can acknowledge that it’s both.

    So, in your view, the banks did absolutely nothing wrong? The ratings agencies, too? Everyone was so wonderful and giving and tripping down the utopian lane together until the Evil Barney Frank cast his dark spell over BankTown and forced them to buy $62 trillion in credit default swaps. The ratings agencies were good and nobel people until Barack Obama forced them to rate piles of B- shit as though it were AAA.

    The CDO’s and CDS’s were not the same thing as mortgage-based securities (which FF did sell). They were bets on those securities. And the agency that was supposed to look into how risky those bets were failed to do so. That. Is. Fraud.

    This will be my last comment because it’s pretty clear you have no idea what the ratings agencies are, what they do, who funds them, what CDS’s are, what CDO’s are, who created them, who funded them, who bought them, who got bailed out for them or how they worked. All you know is that you hate Obama so … something.

    Hot! Thumb up 6 Thumb down 8

      
  7. Argive says:

    The WH is punishing S&P for daring to downgrade them and to warn them not to do it again since they are doing more of the same that led to the last 2 downgrades, and because they could not extort a billion dollars from them.

    Proof?

    S&P, and for that matter every god damned other rating agency, did exactly what practically EVERY-FUCKING-BODY-ELSE was doing at that time, which was to pretend the house of cards was sound. And they did this because to say otherwise would have caused them to be crucified.

    Once again: the ratings agencies’ business model is based on the banks paying them fees for rating securities. If the ratings agencies did not rate CDOs the way the banks wanted them to, they would lose money. The government wasn’t intimidating them to rate the CDOs the way they did, it was perverse market forces.

    When the left could no longer deny their policies caused the problems they decided to pretend that there was no link between government forcing mortgage loans that where insanely bad risks and the securities that where created to make the bad loans palatable. It’s bullshit politics so they can still blame the banks for doing exactly what government made them do.

    So the government forced Goldman Sachs to lie to its clients in order to sell CDOs and short the mortgage market? The government forced Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers to accumulate so much toxic debt on their books that the banks went under? The government forced Washington Mutual to do stuff like this?:

    SAN DIEGO — As a supervisor at a Washington Mutual mortgage processing center, John D. Parsons was accustomed to seeing baby sitters claiming salaries worthy of college presidents, and schoolteachers with incomes rivaling stockbrokers’. He rarely questioned them. A real estate frenzy was under way and WaMu, as his bank was known, was all about saying yes.

    On a financial landscape littered with wreckage, WaMu, a Seattle-based bank that opened branches at a clip worthy of a fast-food chain, stands out as a singularly brazen case of lax lending. By the first half of this year, the value of its bad loans had reached $11.5 billion, nearly tripling from $4.2 billion a year earlier.

    … pressure to keep lending emanated from the top, where executives profited from the swift expansion — not least, Kerry K. Killinger, who was WaMu’s chief executive from 1990 until he was forced out in September.

    For WaMu, variable-rate loans — option ARMs, in particular — were especially attractive because they carried higher fees than other loans, and allowed WaMu to book profits on interest payments that borrowers deferred. Because WaMu was selling many of its loans to investors, it did not worry about defaults: by the time loans went bad, they were often in other hands.

    I don’t see the problem with saying that everyone was at fault here.

    Again, Freddie & Fannie where the prime players behind the whole shuffle and the biggest packagers.

    I absolutely don’t want to minimize Fannie and Freddie’s role in the crisis. But the SEC went after six Fannie and Freddie execs for fraud in 2011. So, were they the fall guys or something?

    But you can keep pretending that this was all the banks doing bad things, in collusion with S&P, while the good government guys got fooled. Sure.

    Except he didn’t say that. Hal said that the banks and the government did bad things that led to the crisis.

    Contrary to the fantasy, nobody in this country can do anything without the politicians encouraging and letting it happen. Like they did.

    I don’t understand this line of reasoning (which I also saw coming from the left during the Bush years). On the one hand, the government is totally incompetent and staffed by people who can barely tie their own shoes. On the other hand it’s run by a bunch of Machivellian geniuses. Which is it? This isn’t The X-Files.

    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5

      
  8. Aussiesmurf says:

    I would strongly recommend that Alex watch the doco ‘Inside Job’ and read Taibbi’s ‘Griftopia’ before commenting further.

    And can we retire the phrase ‘Chicago-style’. Its this vague shorthand for political hardball that is rivalling comparisons to Neville Chamberlain for overuse.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4

      
  9. AlexInCT says:

    Briefly calling for changes in Fannie/Freddie with the same enthusiasm with which they renamed post offices falls a little short of what was necessary.

    I know, McCain & Bush should have sacrificed themselves on the altar of the PC crowd because that would have actually made a difference. Being accused of harboring racist motivations carried some serious weight back then, and, as anyone that dared to point out the scam was going to implode found out, was horribly effective. But you can pretend that the resistance from the left was much ado about nothing and that the problem was those that didn’t push hard enough. Fortunately there are an ample number of other examples of things that are falling apart that the left retaliates against with their full fury. From Social Security, to Medicare, Obamacare, to the new 2K page long Dodd-Franks bill, every single time someone points out these things are disastrously broke,it triggers a firestorm. I am sure that when they implode you will dismiss anyone that didn’t commit suicide trying to stop the tide of not being enthusiastic enough.

    No. Chicago politics specifically refers to patronage. Pressure and dirty politics are what everyone does.

    That’s what you would and the idiot at Slate that tried to rewrite the historical facts would like it to be, but you both have it reversed. Politics in general are about patronage, but Chicago politics is about being so crooked it makes the criminal organizations like the mob look tame. Chicago politics is about corruption at a level that it borders on evil. At least that is the reality of what Chicago style politics is all about.

    Alex, please do some research before you launch into your next rant. Fannie and Freddie did not issue CDO’s and CDS’s. Those were proprietary and unregulated private investment vehicles.

    Everything else you say is based on that faulty ignorance. You are railing against Fannie for something the private banks did. Talk about straw men. You’re whacking an army of them!

    Did I stutter? I said that Fannie & Freddie where behind the packaged mortgages that the derivatives where issues against. But hey, pretend I said something I did not so you can avoid the obvious. Without Fannie & Freddie doing this dirty work the derivatives market would NEVER have gotten off the ground.

    Or we can acknowledge that it’s both.

    Sure you can. But then your royal we would be complicit in promoting the stupidity that guarantees it will happen yet again. The difference between you and I is that I am not stupid enough to let the politicians pretend that they are not the drivers behind these things, and intelligent enough to know that everyone else is just along for the ride and making the best of whatever the politicians force them to do. Its obvious that if you want to fix the problem you focus SOLELY on the socio-engineering politicians, whom are the cause, not the banks, which are one of the symptoms.

    Hot! Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4

      
  10. Seattle Outcast says:

    Why isn’t Holder in a federal PMITA prison already?

    Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0

      
  11. AlexInCT says:

    Proof?

    You can pretend there is no precedent for this sort of behavior from Team Blue and especially from Obama, but then you are the one that is full of it. This WH has had an enemies list and several campaigns to go after their enemies. From Fox News to Rush Limbaugh to various Romney donors, they have gone after those that pissed them off with gusto. Obama told his serfs to hit back twice as hard. Nixon got impeached for a lot less than these crooks have been doing.

    But yeah, ask for proof and pretend that these hacks mean well.

    Once again: the ratings agencies’ business model is based on the banks paying them fees for rating securities. If the ratings agencies did not rate CDOs the way the banks wanted them to, they would lose money. The government wasn’t intimidating them to rate the CDOs the way they did, it was perverse market forces.

    We seem to have a disconnect here since you want to remain focused on the rating of CDOs but completely ignore the downgrading of the debt, which is what really pissed off the Obama WH. Team Obama isn’t going after S&P because of how they rated CDOs, even though that’s the excuse: they are going after S&P because of the downgraded debt that made them look bad. Team Obama tried to extort money from S&P, demanding so much they knew S&P would not settle, so they could make an example of them. It is a warning to all rating agencies so they really think hard about downgrading us again as the debt keeps spiraling out of control.

    So the government forced Goldman Sachs to lie to its clients in order to sell CDOs and short the mortgage market?

    Nice strawman. Let me rehash what really happened again since you seem to be uninformed. I don’t blame you. The LSM has done a bang up job of making sure as few people as possible understand what really went down. Here it goes.

    Our government wanted to socio-engineer and decided homeownership would do the trick. So they forced lenders to give loans to people that would never have qualified if the laws of economics and business where followed, and then under threat of losing their ability to operate. When government realized even the threats were not enough to force the lenders to hang themselves, they made back room deals to guarantee their security with tax payer money (that’s why they paid TARP instead of letting these fuckers just go belly up).The lenders, now with their trump card in their pocket, went along with the scam, inventing whatever vehicles they needed to mitigate the risk. The government then used Freddie & Fannie to package shitty mortgages and sell them, while the banks issued CDOs against these shitty packages. Trillions where moved around in a shell game for product that was not worth a fraction of the value they pretended it was. Everyone thought they could keep circle jerking into perpetuity, but then reality set in and the house of cards imploded.

    The government recently fixed the problem by creating a 2K page monstrosity that supposedly will regulate lenders this time around. The socio-engineering and the corrupt practices of Freddie & Fannie, whom remain exempt, were left intact. I am sure this time nothing will go wrong.

    I don’t see the problem with saying that everyone was at fault here.

    I do. Because that allowed the people that where responsible for this problem – the socio-engineering politicians – to shift blame to others. Lt me be crystal clear: I fucking hate the banks. Witha passion. I am NOT defending them in this. I wish the ons that had overleveraged had been allowed to go bankrupt and been pcikd clean by the survivors. It would have been just punishment for going along with the fucking idiot lefitsts and their stupid policies. But when you allow the left to spread the blame, instead of focusing on the core group that is the source of the problematic behavior, it only serves to let the politicians get a pass.

    So we ended up with a massive fucking new pile of laws that not only doesn’t address the underlying problem, but all but guarantees a repeat. The ONLY way we get a fix is if we blame the people that keep fucking us over, and that’s the politicians, and demand they no longer be allowed to do this stupid shit. Instead, people that want to spread the blame got us set to be fucked over all over again.

    I absolutely don’t want to minimize Fannie and Freddie’s role in the crisis. But the SEC went after six Fannie and Freddie execs for fraud in 2011. So, were they the fall guys or something?

    How many of them got convicted? And do you know how much we tax payers paid to defend them? This was nothing but smoke & mirrors.

    Except he didn’t say that. Hal said that the banks and the government did bad things that led to the crisis.

    And because of thinking like this we end up with more regulation that micromanages & punishes the banks, but enhances the power and the need to bribe the politicians going forward. But hey, fair is fair.

    I don’t understand this line of reasoning (which I also saw coming from the left during the Bush years). On the one hand, the government is totally incompetent and staffed by people who can barely tie their own shoes. On the other hand it’s run by a bunch of Machivellian geniuses. Which is it? This isn’t The X-Files.

    Government is inept at most things, but the politicians are really good at a few. Fleecing the people is one that they are masterful at. It’s not an accident that the 1%, to borrow a leftist term, are over represented – with numbers between 50-75% – in government. Maybe the reason they suck at everything else is because their priority is to line their and their friends pockets, first and foremost, and thus the people get mediocre at best.

    Hot! Thumb up 7 Thumb down 7

      
  12. AlexInCT says:

    I would strongly recommend that Alex watch the doco ‘Inside Job’ and read Taibbi’s ‘Griftopia’ before commenting further.

    Fucking left wing propaganda. Please. And I see you are back to make a fool out of yourself Assie.

    Hot! Thumb up 7 Thumb down 5

      
  13. Aussiesmurf says:

    ‘Griftopia’ = left wing propaganda?? Have you read Griftopia? Do you understand that the majority of the last third of the book slams President Obama for the Affordable Care Act?

    And you state in an off-handed manner that “Nixon got impeached for less than what [President Obama] has been doing”. Please expand upon this. What has this administration done that you consider deserves impeachment?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5

      
  14. Mook says:

    I am not stupid enough to let the politicians pretend that they are not the drivers behind these things, and intelligent enough to know that everyone else is just along for the ride and making the best of whatever the politicians force them to do. Its obvious that if you want to fix the problem you focus SOLELY on the socio-engineering politicians, whom are the cause, not the banks, which are one of the symptoms.

    Bingo!! The socio-engineering politicians were the drivers behind the mortgage fiasco and reckless bank lending was a symptom. Hey, Freddie and Fannie say these loans are good, why not package them as another investment vehicle? Before the Clinton administration muscled Fannie to drop loan standards even further, Democrat politicians for years before that were accusing banks of racist “red lining” in making loans, threatening the banks to yank their FDIC backing if they didn’t do sufficient socio-engineering to make mortgage loans to un-creditworthy individuals who were at high risk to default.. all in the name of social justice, of course.

    The hearings involving Congressmen and Congressional aides who got “VIP” loans during the runup to the mortgage blowup resulted in zilch.. just show hearings with no teeth. Taxpayers ended up bailing out Freddie and Fannie at a massive loss with taxpayer guaranteed backstops in the trillions.

    The SOURCE of the problem was leftist politicians ramming social engineering down our throats using taxpayer money as the backstop. That’s also the “solution” these same politicians are pushing now.

    That S&P made some bad calls on packaged mortgage loans (hindsight is 20-20 because back then, you “couldn’t lose” with real estate) doesn’t mean that they were wrong in downgrading US govt. credit, which now has a total cumulative debt more than our annual GDP, with even more debt “off the books” as unfunded liabilities for often-lavish govt. pensions SSecurity and Medicare. It’s unsustainable and irresponsible. S&P should be applauded for stating the obvious about the US credit risk situation, regardless as to whether or not they missed improprieties in the past. It’s obvious hardball Chicago-style retaliation for telling the truth about our current govt. situation.

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

      
  15. Mook says:

    What has this administration done that you consider deserves impeachment

    Operation Fast & Furious.. sending weapons to Mexican drug gangs on the border resulting in the deaths of hundreds of Mexicans, and at least one dead US border agent and then used executive order to block congressional inquiry. Nixon was ejected from office for less.

    Obama’s ordering immigration officers to stop enforcing the laws deporting illegal aliens

    Obama’s direct orders to kill US citizens in drone attacks without due process. The left SCREAMED that Bush was guilty of “war crimes” for waterboarding Khalid Sheikh Mohammed yet they are silent with this.

    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0

      
  16. balthazar says:

    I would strongly recommend that Alex watch the doco ‘Inside Job’ and read Taibbi’s ‘Griftopia’ before commenting further.

    Why would anyone read anything by that tool?

    Hes a bigoted fucko.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

      
  17. balthazar says:

    BTW, this lawsuit is an attempt to extort money from S&P via a settlement, if it does go to court it will get slammed down as all the ratings agencies provide disclaimers as to the rating being an OPINION. This alone makes it a 1st amendment issue.

    Unless they have CONCRETE evidence of people at S&P KNOWINGLY misleading people, the suit will go nowhere.

    Its like the administration is an ambulance chaser.

    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1

      

Comments have been disabled.