More Evidence that Freddie and Fannie knew about the Riskiness of the Loans
The Washington Post has this:
In a memo to former Freddie chief executive Richard F. Syron and other top executives, former Freddie chief enterprise risk officer David Andrukonis wrote that the company was buying mortgages that appear "to target borrowers who would have trouble qualifying for a mortgage if their financial position were adequately disclosed."
Andrukonis warned that these mortgages could be particularly harmful for Hispanic borrowers, and they could lead to loans being made to people who would be unlikely to pay them off. "The potential for the perception and the reality of predatory lending with this product is great," Andrukonis wrote.
The documents, which the committee has not yet released but were obtained by The Washington Post, show that Fannie and Freddie, two linchpins of the nation's mortgage market, continued to push into new, risky markets despite internal debate over whether the efforts were prudent. . . .
Labels: bailout, mortgagecrisis
posted by John Lott at 5:12 AM
2 Comments:
Hmmm, typical of the WaPo, to little to late with their info...
Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis
The following is going to be slightly off topic, but I ask all here to bear with me.
If it was not for the dedicated efforts of 1, I would never know about the video, and it's proof of the current debacle that the mainstream media completely ignores.
Just like roaches, politicians scramble to avoid the light. Within the context of the aforementioned, how long is it going to take those whom 'we' elected to regulate Internet content?
As far as I am concerned, it is a proven fact that the Dems created this mess, and engage in the typical management philosphy of 'it's not who is to blame, but how one can assign the blame.'
Firearms and the internet do have one thing in common. They are both tools. One tool is heavily regulated while the other is not. At least yet. Both tools are are incapable of being regulated by the Government, according to the Highest Law of the land, yet the feds seek to completely block one tool, because it is proven dangerous? Is not the truth dangerous to those whom wish to enslave? Where do we get the truth? The internet perhaps? Surely not mainstream media.
If the media is in the bag for some, while ignoring opposing viewpoints, when will that occur to the internet, and how will it be done? What excuses will be used to achieve that goal?
How would the Fairness Doctrine apply to the Internet? It is not a far stretch of the imagination to see that rule applied here. Not to mention the regulation of 'Dangerous Content'.
I'll stop for now, and I wish to thank '1' for providing solid evidence that supports Dr. Lott's post.
The Madman says to the Clown: "I tell you Clown, this place is dark!" The Clown replies: "There is no darkness. There is only ignorance."
Post a Comment
<< Home