I don't even care if he gets recalled or re-elected, he needs to recuse himself from the banking committee.

Seriously, you can't lecture people in this current environment unless you fully disclose the VIP Countrywide loan thing.

He might be innocent, but he has not disclosed everything. Until he does and the entire committee promises not to accept ANYTHING from people they regulate, they are in disrepute.

They're politicians, Newport. They are practically the definition of disrepute.

I hope that the silver lining to all this is that people will have their eyes opened to just how disreputable their legislators are and just how much control businesses have over them. And then, somehow, things get ugly enough that they have to change.

A girl can dream...

Benevolent Misanthrope: I hope that the silver lining to all this is that people will have their eyes opened to just how disreputable their legislators are and just how much control businesses have over them. And then, somehow, things get ugly enough that they have to change.

You're more deluded than me. heh... I just want him to step off this committee. I KNOW they will get re-elected. He's giving the opposition ammunition by not coming clean or stepping down.

Wanna hear how many of my friends have been sexually solicited by Patrick Kennedy (D-UI)? I vote against him every two years, he's still there!

NewportBarGuy: Benevolent Misanthrope: I hope that the silver lining to all this is that people will have their eyes opened to just how disreputable their legislators are and just how much control businesses have over them. And then, somehow, things get ugly enough that they have to change.

You're more deluded than me. heh... I just want him to step off this committee. I KNOW they will get re-elected. He's giving the opposition ammunition by not coming clean or stepping down.

Wanna hear how many of my friends have been sexually solicited by Patrick Kennedy (D-UI)? I vote against him every two years, he's still there!

Nah, I just have a very vivid fantasy life. I agree with you - he should recuse himself, as should anyone who got money from them. But it would be nice if alot of those sweetheart deals were at least brought out of the closet so to speak.

I agree that anyone who has received a sweet deal from banks shouldn't be regulating the banks. My question, though, is how can we prevent regulators from dealing in business with the companies they regulate? Senators and congressmen need home loans too. We can't just trust them to do the right thing because even when they do someone will accuse them of inappropriate behavior. As with many other things, it's the appearance of impropriety that causes problems. This goes for other sorts of regulated industries too. How can the politicians avoid even the appearance of impropriety when anything they do or don't do will be considered wrong by the talking heads on the other side?

He should be forced to testify (There should be no 5th amendment for high ranking government officials- but obviously that doesn't exist). If he truly wasn't involved, he can keep his job in Congress, but not on the banking committee. If he is guilty, death. That should be the price for screwing up at that level.

Wow...six posts in, and so far a rather reasonable discussion about the topic at hand, and not one batshiat diatribe about the misspelled word in the headline? What's next...people addressing the meat of someone's post rather than dismissing it entirely based upon an errant apostrophe?

Civility, in my Fark? It's more likel....ah the hell it is

Of course, that could just be my eyes.

sloppy shoes: He should be forced to testify (There should be no 5th amendment for high ranking government officials- but obviously that doesn't exist). If he truly wasn't involved, he can keep his job in Congress, but not on the banking committee. If he is guilty, death. That should be the price for screwing up at that level.

Wow. There's so much blatant disregard for the Constitution that I sincerely don't know where to start. Dodd could be guilty and still a bigger patriot than you.

sloppy shoes: He should be forced to testify (There should be no 5th amendment for high ranking government officials- but obviously that doesn't exist). If he truly wasn't involved, he can keep his job in Congress, but not on the banking committee. If he is guilty, death. That should be the price for screwing up at that level.

OK, can't exactly agree with you on all of that, but I will go this far: anyone who takes an oath of office (elected or not) should be considered "under oath" as in a courtroom when addressing any other government body in an official capacity. And penalties for bribery,malfeasance, and violating the public trust should be merciless and severe.

Argh2: sloppy shoes: He should be forced to testify (There should be no 5th amendment for high ranking government officials- but obviously that doesn't exist). If he truly wasn't involved, he can keep his job in Congress, but not on the banking committee. If he is guilty, death. That should be the price for screwing up at that level.

OK, can't exactly agree with you on all of that, but I will go this far: anyone who takes an oath of office (elected or not) should be considered "under oath" as in a courtroom when addressing any other government body in an official capacity. And penalties for bribery,malfeasance, and violating the public trust should be merciless and severe.

That I can agree with.

Stay Cool Babylon: Wow...six posts in, and so far a rather reasonable discussion about the topic at hand, and not one batshiat diatribe about the misspelled word in the headline? What's next...people addressing the meat of someone's post rather than dismissing it entirely based upon an errant apostrophe?

Civility, in my Fark? It's more likel....ah the hell it is.

You forgot the period, jackass. God, you're worse than those mouthbreathers on Capital Hill.



/hopefully doing it right

sloppy shoes: If he truly wasn't involved, he can keep his job in Congress, but not on the banking committee.

So if he's innocent, he should be fired anyways because he was accused?

whereisian:

So if he's innocent, he should be fired anyways because he was accused?



If he is innocent of these charges, he should then be fired for sheer incompetence.




"I am an asshole"

So the

CULTURE OF Curruption

continues?

Dodd survived making a waitress sandwich with Ted Kennedy, he'll waltz home on the strength of leftover anti-Lieberman wharrgarble.

It's OK, he's a Democrat.

7of7: I agree that anyone who has received a sweet deal from banks shouldn't be regulating the banks. My question, though, is how can we prevent regulators from dealing in business with the companies they regulate? Senators and congressmen need home loans too. We can't just trust them to do the right thing because even when they do someone will accuse them of inappropriate behavior. As with many other things, it's the appearance of impropriety that causes problems. This goes for other sorts of regulated industries too. How can the politicians avoid even the appearance of impropriety when anything they do or don't do will be considered wrong by the talking heads on the other side?

Easiest solution would be for Government backed loans of the average of say the top 10 lenders. Send out blind applications for the loan to all the lenders, take the average interest rate/conditions, back it with government dollars instead of financial institution dollars.

If the regulator is in the form of say Energy regulation, they should not be allowed to sit on the boards or hold stock in that sector. They absolve all right to be active in the industry they are regulating.

Conflicts of Interest are obviously OK in the Democratic partay.

7of7: I agree that anyone who has received a sweet deal from banks shouldn't be regulating the banks. My question, though, is how can we prevent regulators from dealing in business with the companies they regulate? Senators and congressmen need home loans too. We can't just trust them to do the right thing because even when they do someone will accuse them of inappropriate behavior. As with many other things, it's the appearance of impropriety that causes problems. This goes for other sorts of regulated industries too. How can the politicians avoid even the appearance of impropriety when anything they do or don't do will be considered wrong by the talking heads on the other side?

I'll answer your question (even though I detest your leftist scumsucking posts), and the nice thing is, my simple solution would ALSO discourage CEO types and Madoff types from dicking around as well:

Change the criminal and federal justice laws to draconian levels, and imprison offenders with normal prisoners. No more white-collar prisons. These motherfarkers ruin lots of lives. I don't see why they shouldn't endure what a guy that ruined one life does.

I'm sure he'll still get re-elected. What a cawk.

Instead of getting a sweetheart loan for the full value of the property, Dodd should've just gotten a felon to buy part of the real estate and sell it back to him at a discount. That seems to be perfectly acceptable.

whereisian: So if he's innocent, he should be fired anyways because he was accused?

No, he should be fired from the banking committee anyways because how can you help make banking legislation and not know you are in a VIP program? He clearly has a limited capacity for what he's doing.


WFern: Wow. There's so much blatant disregard for the Constitution that I sincerely don't know where to start. Dodd could be guilty and still a bigger patriot than you.

1. If you read my post, you'd realize I said this isn't currently possible.

But,

Argh2: OK, can't exactly agree with you on all of that, but I will go this far: anyone who takes an oath of office (elected or not) should be considered "under oath" as in a courtroom when addressing any other government body in an official capacity. And penalties for bribery,malfeasance, and violating the public trust should be merciless and severe.


2. NO. NO. NO. IT is time we took back our country. If you are a high ranking public official, you should have limited to no rights. If the public wants an answer to a question- you better god damn answer. (If it's classified, it can be answered in a private court to an appointed person to rectify whether or not you've harmed the public).

The serve the people= they belong to us. IF they are considered the protectors of the constitution, among our glorifying titles in deference to our liberty, than they should be crucified for their failures, or we are not free at all.

Being a Senator, President, or high ranking Judge commands almost immediate respect. And it should. However, there is a necessary cost for such respect.

My understanding is that Countrywide gave him the discount without him actually knowing about it. That is, he did a refi and got a good, but not exceptionally great, deal, not knowing the reason was because Countrywide management flagged his loan as a VIP loan and gave him a discount.

FTA: 'Last week Dodd allowed reporters to see all of the documents tied to the loans'.

Actually, this ISN'T the case.

He let certain people in the press see SOME documents of which they were NOT allowed to copy or take notes.

ALSO: Dodd announced at THIS meeting some CPAs from Chicago had reviewed the loan docs back on July 22 or 23 (dont remember exactly) but THREE DAYS LATER - the 25th or 26th he said in a press conference that he had NOT been able to get the docs from Countrywide. (This is from an editorial at the Courant published this week)

So Dodd, which is it? Your CPAs saw the docs BEFORE you said you couldnt get CW to respond or AFTER?

He is either stupid or corrupt and either way needs to frog-marched out of office.

Hat Madder: should've just gotten a felon to buy part of the real estate and sell it back to him at a discount.


"Whut?"

The democrats caused the entire economic downturn "crisis" in order to slip back into power. It is all based on lies and manipulation. Starting with housing legislation passed by Carter, then Clinton passing legislation forcing banks to loan to the "unqualified" and penalizing banks who refused to loan to unqualified borrowers then democrats refusing to pass Bush's attempts to stop the impending crisis several years ago when legislation was attempted to thwart subprime loans. Fannie and Freddie, Countrywide and all the other bank crooks profited heavily, giving kick-backs along the way to Chris Dodd, Rahm Emmanuel and so many other democrats who knew a crash would be inevitable but also took great pains to time it for the 2008 presidential elections (George Soros). Once the time came, banking stocks were dropped in huge clumps, setting off the automatic "sell" machines on every Tom, Dick and Harry's accounts causing the devastating drops. I think the democrats thought they could fix things once they got back in power, but the democrats lost control of their own planned "crisis". Now we are left with the reality that we have a bunch of criminal, shat brains leading our country who have no clue what to do. Most of them should be in jail. At least we need to impeach people like Chris Dodd and start really cleaning up.

modestlivinglegend: The democrats caused the entire economic downturn "crisis" in order to slip back into power. It is all based on lies and manipulation. Starting with housing legislation passed by Carter, then Clinton passing legislation forcing banks to loan to the "unqualified" and penalizing banks who refused to loan to unqualified borrowers then democrats refusing to pass Bush's attempts to stop the impending crisis several years ago when legislation was attempted to thwart subprime loans. Fannie and Freddie, Countrywide and all the other bank crooks profited heavily, giving kick-backs along the way to Chris Dodd, Rahm Emmanuel and so many other democrats who knew a crash would be inevitable but also took great pains to time it for the 2008 presidential elections (George Soros). Once the time came, banking stocks were dropped in huge clumps, setting off the automatic "sell" machines on every Tom, Dick and Harry's accounts causing the devastating drops. I think the democrats thought they could fix things once they got back in power, but the democrats lost control of their own planned "crisis". Now we are left with the reality that we have a bunch of criminal, shat brains leading our country who have no clue what to do. Most of them should be in jail. At least we need to impeach people like Chris Dodd and start really cleaning up.

And for years Bush and the republican controlled congress were unable to stop them.

The Entire Fricking Democratic Party just got a 789 Billion dollar sweet heart deal from Big Daddy Bo-Rama.

And what did the little people get in exchange for agreeing to pay off $2700 each?

13 bucks a paycheck till January, then 8 bucks a check after that for a year.

Welcome to the Suck.

Only 29 comments? 250 at the mention of a Reagan success? Hmmm...

Unless this is referring to something else, isn't the loan he received pretty much in-line with market rates for a wealthy guy with good credit?

I remember a lot of Farkers saying they got similar deals when this first came up a few months ago and I don't think of any of them were in charge of regulating Countrywide.

Or am I missing something?

archichris: And what did the little people get in exchange for agreeing to pay off $2700 each?

13 bucks a paycheck till January, then 8 bucks a check after that for a year.

I'm pretty pissed about that, though if you have kids or are paying for college or buying a house you get a shiat ton more money than $13 a paycheck. I personally liked the idea of an income tax holiday for the first $50k of income; unfortunately, it just wasn't to be. However, while $13 a paycheck doesn't seem like a big deal to the average middle-class guy earning over a grand a week, but to your average gas station worker that represents 2 hours of pay. So take it as you will...

Shaggy_C: archichris: And what did the little people get in exchange for agreeing to pay off $2700 each?

13 bucks a paycheck till January, then 8 bucks a check after that for a year.

I'm pretty pissed about that, though if you have kids or are paying for college or buying a house you get a shiat ton more money than $13 a paycheck. I personally liked the idea of an income tax holiday for the first $50k of income; unfortunately, it just wasn't to be. However, while $13 a paycheck doesn't seem like a big deal to the average middle-class guy earning over a grand a week, but to your average gas station worker that represents 2 hours of pay. So take it as you will...

I would prefer free lap dances for a year.

monoski: I would prefer free lap dances for a year.

Date a stripper, they're always desperate for attention.

Aexia: Unless this is referring to something else, isn't the loan he received pretty much in-line with market rates for a wealthy guy with good credit?

I remember a lot of Farkers saying they got similar deals when this first came up a few months ago and I don't think of any of them were in charge of regulating Countrywide.

Or am I missing something?

Your missing the part where its corrupt to call the president of the company and say im the guy in charge of regulating you and I want a loan, and then he answers with sure we have a VIP program you will get your money.

No underwriters, no public scrutiny, nadda, just a back room phone call to get a premium rate.

You should go read about the house banking scandal to see what sort of financial goofery these guys can come up with.

Shaggy_C: archichris: And what did the little people get in exchange for agreeing to pay off $2700 each?

13 bucks a paycheck till January, then 8 bucks a check after that for a year.

I'm pretty pissed about that, though if you have kids or are paying for college or buying a house you get a shiat ton more money than $13 a paycheck. I personally liked the idea of an income tax holiday for the first $50k of income; unfortunately, it just wasn't to be. However, while $13 a paycheck doesn't seem like a big deal to the average middle-class guy earning over a grand a week, but to your average gas station worker that represents 2 hours of pay. So take it as you will...

Except for that part where this spending bill doesnt cut your taxes enough to offset how much they will go up when he allows Bushes tax cuts to expire. So whatever he is giving you on the front end in terms of college tuition....(effects how many tax payers? they dont have jobs that pay enough to pay taxes yet) and first time home buyers...(IOW if your a family with a home your shiat out of luck) and child tax credits you will lose in 2010 when the Bush cuts expire. then in 2011 or 2012 when Obamas spending bill is over your taxes will go up again for a net loss.

But at least Pelosis marsh mice will be safe and we will have a brand new ice breaker to plow through all the melted sea ice at the pole. Oh and congress will have thousands of brand new electric cars to drive around and not let you drive.

What is considered a sweetheart deal loan? Could someone explain it to me. A reasonable fixed rate with a 1 point charge?

I am not trying to defend the guy, but there are details in the article I am missing. Or I can't think straight right now, because I have a slight hangover, waiting for my coffee to brew.

Politicians don't believe there are any "conflicts" to their interests.

archichris: Oh and congress will have thousands of brand new electric cars to drive around and not let you drive.

They deserve better things because they are better people.

Alpha children wear grey. They work much harder than we do, because they're so frightfully clever. I'm awfully glad I'm a Beta, because I don't work so hard. And then we are much better than the Gammas and Deltas. Gammas are stupid. They all wear green, and Delta children wear khaki. Oh no, I don't want to play with Delta children. And Epsilons are still worse. They're too stupid to be able to read or write. Besides they wear black, which is such a beastly color. I'm so glad I'm a Beta

modestlivinglegend: Now we are left with the reality that we have a bunch of criminal, shat brains leading our country who have no clue what to do. Most of them should be in jail. At least we need to impeach people like Chris Dodd and start really cleaning up.

As long as we do the republicans too then this sounds good.

Dodd, who is obviously a Republikkkan as he is whoring himself to teh ebil kapitalist kompanies, should be shot with a creme pie, or something.

Geotpf: My understanding is that Countrywide gave him the discount without him actually knowing about it. That is, he did a refi and got a good, but not exceptionally great, deal, not knowing the reason was because Countrywide management flagged his loan as a VIP loan and gave him a discount.

So we have someone running this committee who is too stupid to realize how sweetheart a deal he really got?

If you call up a business and offer your role in public policy as your credential for getting a certain service, that is not an ethical practice.

While a CEO or baseball player or some celebrity might use their status to get a sweetheart deal, a public servant with power over an institution might be seen as inappropriately using his or her powers (as granted by the people) to arrange for things that the people cannot get themselves.

Yes, public servants can and do get home loans, even those servants who regulate banks. However, there are many rules that outline what is and what is not appropriate conduct in a business transaction.

Parleying your governmental authority into an extra deal is inappropriate. Walking in to a bank and getting the market rate like any other citizen is what is expected.

modestlivinglegend 2009-02-12 10:13:15 AM

(after careful distillation)

Cataholic: Geotpf: My understanding is that Countrywide gave him the discount without him actually knowing about it. That is, he did a refi and got a good, but not exceptionally great, deal, not knowing the reason was because Countrywide management flagged his loan as a VIP loan and gave him a discount.

So we have someone running this committee who is too stupid to realize how sweetheart a deal he really got?

I believe the level of discount was minor enough that it wasn't obvious. There's always a certain amount of case-by-case basis in what interest rate, how much money you qualify for, etc.

Catran: What is considered a sweetheart deal loan? Could someone explain it to me. A reasonable fixed rate with a 1 point charge?

I am not trying to defend the guy, but there are details in the article I am missing. Or I can't think straight right now, because I have a slight hangover, waiting for my coffee to brew.

Its a loan that you cant get, but Chris Dodd can.

He can get it with a phone call, no paperwork, usually no points or money up front.

It requires the President of Countrywide to violate his fiduciary responsibility to protect his investors money.

In essence, the man who is supposed to protect you from irresponsible lending is engaging in that very activity and looking the other way when country wide starts playing around with numbers and goes broke.

Every major player in the Banking Regulation scheme got a sweetheart deal. We already know that Democratic and Republican politicians don't pay their taxes, just pick up a newspaper. This is all business as usual. Why the big fuss? Was there someone left(no pun intended)in the country that didn't know?