There is a long 20^th century history of Wall Street protests in America.  After all, Wall Street is the financial center of the country. Today, we’re in a financial crisis so Wall Street (or its financial center equivalent in other cities) is the logical place to protest, right?

Actually, we think it’s a poor second to Lafayette Park across from the White House — where the current crisis was hatched and nurtured.  No, this isn’t an anti Obama screed.  His predecessors (several of them) are far more to blame for the current economic disarray in which we find ourselves, although we think his proposed remedies are anything but remedial.

“Occupy Wall Street” and “Wall Street Greed” are great memes.  They are highly memorable and easily passed on as a rallying cry. Unsurprisingly, President Obama and the left has sought to adopt them.  Of course, the protestors are an outgrowth of the wider sense of entitlement many young people have developed (including quotas disguised under the term “diversity”).  As George Will stated in his column in The Washington Post on October 13, 2011:

“Demands posted in [Occupy Wall Street’s] name include a ‘guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment’; a $20‑an‑hour minimum wage (above the $16.00 entry wage the UAW just negotiated with GM); ending ‘the fossil fuel economy’; ‘open borders’ so ‘anyone can travel anywhere to work and live’; $1 trillion dollars for infrastructure; $1 trillion dollars for ‘ecological restoration’; ‘free college education’, and forgiveness of ‘all debt on the entire planet.”

But abuses by Wall Street are an affect, not the cause of the current economic disarray. As anyone who has read our essays knows, we carry no brief for Wall Street excesses or those of the various Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSE’s) that are the real culprits. But Wall Street was simply the vehicle by which the White House, Congress, the Fed and the Washington bureaucracy carried out very ill advised objectives. As is well known by now, the seeds of our current discontent were sowed a quarter century ago when President Jimmy Carter signed the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA).  This legislation and the regulatory policies that it set in motion may have been well intentioned, but as history teaches, roads paved merely with good intentions often lead where no one wants to go.

(more…)

The great Charlie Gasparino in today’s New York Post:

The notion of “housing” as a God-given right had been promoted by people like Barney Frank for nearly two decades. Their vehicles to expand homeownership for all were “government-sponsored enterprises” Fannie and Freddie — which, starting in the mid 90s, began buying up and placing guarantees on mortgages taken out by people with lower incomes and lousy credit histories.

Giving low-income people access to the housing market sounds nice enough — but the reality was far different. Housing prices were bid up to levels that made repaying mortgages nearly impossible. When the bubble burst, the government “sponsored” agencies were in hock for billions — and so was their “sponsor,” the US taxpayer.

And once Fannie and Freddie stopped making loans to anyone with a hearbeat (and many people without jobs), housing prices began to deflate, taking the banking system and the rest of the economy with it.

(more…)

From The Hill:

ShoreBank, a Chicago-area community lender praised by Democrats, was taken over by the government Friday and its assets sold.

Chicago-area Democrats pushed hard for regulators to extend bailout money to the bank from the government’s $700 billion aid program. The bank was praised by President Clinton and numerous other lawmakers and industry players. The bank was started in the 1970s.

In a statement late Friday, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) said it had taken receivership of the failed bank. Urban Partnership Bank, also in Chicago, will take over the deposits and the 15 branches.

ShoreBank had roughly $2.2 billion in total assets and $1.5 billion in deposits, according to the FDIC.

(more…)

Can you teach an old dog new tricks? In politics, the answer is usually no. Most elected officials cling to their ideological biases, despite the real-world facts that disprove their theories time and again. Most have no common sense, and most never acknowledge that they were wrong.

But one huge exception to this rule is Democrat Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.

For years, Frank was a staunch supporter of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the giant government housing agencies that played such an enormous role in the financial meltdown that thrust the economy into the Great Recession. But in a recent CNBC interview, Frank told me that he was ready to say goodbye to Fannie and Freddie.

“I hope by next year we’ll have abolished Fannie and Freddie,” he said. Remarkable. And he went on to say that “it was a great mistake to push lower-income people into housing they couldn’t afford and couldn’t really handle once they had it.” He then added, “I had been too sanguine about Fannie and Freddie.”

When I asked Frank about a long-term phase-out plan that would shrink Fannie and Freddie portfolios and mortgage-purchase limits, and merge the agencies into the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) for a separate low-income program that would get government out of middle-income housing subsidies, he replied: “Larry, that, I think, is exactly what we should be doing.”

(more…)

From the Boston Globe:

Fannie and Freddie were once the most powerful forces in the US housing industry. They pumped liquidity into the sector by buying up mortgages written by banks and mortgage companies. That kept the cost of capital low and increased the volume of mortgages. Government backing allowed the two to borrow money at lower rates than anyone else in the housing financing market.

While Fannie and Freddie operated under some form of congressional oversight, they ultimately answered to their stockholders. Their business was making money. They joined Wall Street firms in making record profits — and hauling in record bonuses — by buying, securitizing, and reselling subprime mortgages that never should have been written in the first place.

The housing market’s collapse sowed destruction and put the nation’s biggest banks on a government lifeline. No lifeline has been bigger than the rope the feds threw Fannie and Freddie, though. In September 2008, the two firms received a bottomless line of credit. So far, their tab stands around $148 billion — more than AIG, the company that insured all of Wall Street’s worst housing bets, is in hock for.

In January, the Congressional Budget Office said the total cost to taxpayers could reach $373 billion.

(more…)

From AFP:

Troubled US mortgage firm Freddie Mac reported Monday a second quarter net loss of six billion dollars and sought another 1.8 billion dollars from the Treasury to contain the red ink.

The government-backed company said its strategies to boost business and “sustainable homeownership” were taking hold but cited high unemployment posing “very real challenges” for the already embattled housing market.

Freddie Mac suffered a 6.009 billion dollar net loss attributable to common stockholders in the April-June period from a loss of 7.980 billion dollars in the first quarter and 840 million dollars in the year ago period.

(more…)

On April 22nd we published an article entitled IndyMac Attack: Did Schumer, Paulson, Soros, and the CRL Kill the Bank and Profit From Its Collapse? We summarized the story as follows:

At the end of 2007, hedge fund billionaire John Paulson invested $15 million in the leftist non-profit, Center for Responsible Lending, their largest single donation ever. Around the same time, Paulson and his employees contributed over $100,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, headed, at the time, by Sen. Chuck Schumer. Roughly six months later, CRL and Sen. Schumer both launched a highly public attack on the California-based mortgage lender, Indymac. The lender failed, wiping out the investment of thousands of people. Roughly six months after that, John Paulson, in partnership with George Soros, bought up the remnants of Indymac for pennies on the dollar.

…a top executive of CRL when this deal went down, Eric Stein, is now working at the Treasury Department, heading up the proposed Consumer Financial Protection Agency. Mr. Stein will be the chief federal official designing regulations to protect consumers. Right.

At the time, we asked if this could all be coincidence.  Today, we are getting closer to answering this question.

As reported by hedge fund blog AbsoluteReturn+Alpha, Congressman Darrell Issa (R-CA), ranking member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is probing John Paulson on his relationship with the Center for Responsible Lending.

(more…)

Yesterday we brought you “As Tea Party Activists Protest Dodd’s Big Brother Bill, Bank of America Deploys Security Forces,” the story of a group of  Tea Party and 912 Project protesters in Charlotte, North Carolina who showed up at the Bank of America headquarters to protest the bank’s sweetheart deal with Senator Kay Hagan on the financial reform bill currently moving through the Senate.  As protesters arrived with the intention of standing peacefully while holding signs that read things like  “No More Bailouts” and “CFPA = Big Brother”, they were met by several local police officers, a number of Bank of America paid security guards, and a few hired security extras from Wackenhut.

No one knows how the police or Bank of America were informed of the protest, as the event coordinators had not sent such a notification, nor had they filed for a permit with such a small number of attendees.  Further, the event was only scheduled the prior day.  Nonetheless, the bank was obviously prepared enough to have beefed up their security staff and hired the extra guards.

All that, for this peaceful bunch of patriotic citizens, there only to exercise their 1st amendment rights and express their discontent with the out of control bailouts and Big Brother environment created by the marriage of Big Government and Big Banks.  The financial reform bill only makes that environment even worse.  So they had something to say about it.

Sure, officers and security guards have every right to direct citizens away from private property and onto the public property boundaries.  Standing there in a line however, and hovering in the corner  in numbers that outweigh that of the protesters themselves only creates a chilling effect on 1st amendment rights like free speech and the right of the people to peaceably assemble.

(more…)

In Charlotte, North Carolina, there’s apparently a growing deadly threat to worry about.  It seems that protesters there are getting unruly these days – so unruly that local businesses have brought on extra security detail to help out the local police.

That’s what happened when one such group of protesters descended upon the Bank of America headquarters on Saturday, May 8th.  The group showed up around lunchtime, eager to protest the financial reform bill currently making its way through the Senate.  Upon their arrival, not only were they met by three Charlotte police cars and a couple of local officers, but evidently Bank of America had somehow caught wind of the event and sent out another six or so Bank of America paid security staff. As an extra precaution, the bank had also hired at least two Wackenhut security officers to augment their usual staff.  Apparently, Bank of America felt it necessary to prepare for some sort of pending siege – these are Tea Party protesters we’re talking about here.  According to our own members of Congress and their allies, they’ve deemed Tea Partiers, the very constituents they are supposed to represent, a violent, racist bunch of potentially unstable people.

Well, when I heard about the incident, I couldn’t wait to get a look at these dangerous rabble-rousers.

So this is the riot mob that Bank of America sent out its security force, including extras from Wackenhut, to aggressively resist.

Meanwhile, these protesters showed up simply to draw attention to Bank of America’s role in trying to influence the current financial reform legislation.  In North Carolina, Bank of America has a special place in the heart of Democratic Senator Kay Hagan, who has been pushing an amendment to the bill on behalf of the giant bank.  (Coincidentally, it also benefits another of the Senator’s AND Bank of America’s favorites, the Center for Responsible Lending…but that’s for another post).

Hagan, a former Vice President with Bank of America who oversaw subprime lending programs there, has proposed the amendment under the guise of “protecting consumers”, but when Bank of America is a staunch supporter of the legislation, it’s easy to be suspicious of anyone’s supposed good intent.

(more…)

As self-righteous Senators grill Goldman Sachs about their role in the housing bubble, it would not be far fetched to request that the Senators switch seats with the Goldman executives.

After all, it wasn’t Goldman that passed the Community Reinvestment Act that forced banks to make loans to people who could never pay them back. It wasn’t Goldman that created and supported Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And it wasn’t Goldman that drove interest rates down to a below market level to cause a housing rush not seen since gold was found in them thar’ hills in the mid-1800s.

But if Senators were really interested in finding out the cause of the housing bubble, they would call one Eric Stein to the dais.

Mr. Stein is currently that Deputy Secretary of Treasury for consumer protection and is likely to head the vastly powerful Consumer Bureaucracy currently being pushed by big banks and Wall Street. But prior to his appointment to Treasury, Mr. Stein the bag man for the Center for Responsible Lending and its many Self Help subsidiaries, was singly responsible for more bad loans than all Goldman employees together. Working with billionaire con-man John Paulson, Stein lobbied to pass the laws at the root of the crisis and pressured banks to make bad loans that caused their portfolios to collapse when the economy turned. They were the Bonnie and Clyde of the subprime mortgage world.

(more…)

From the great Peter Wallison in today’s Wall Street Journal:

The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that, in the wake of the housing bubble and the unprecedented deflation in housing values that resulted, the government’s cost to bail out Fannie and Freddie will eventually reach $381 billion. That estimate may be too optimistic.

Last Christmas Eve, Treasury removed the $400 billion cap on what the government might be required to invest in these two GSEs in the future, and this may tell the real story about the cost to taxpayers. In typical Washington fashion, everyone has amnesia about how this disaster occurred.

The story is all too familiar. Politicians in positions of authority today had an opportunity to prevent this fiasco but did nothing. Now—in the name of the taxpayers—they want more power, but they have never been called to account for their earlier failings.

(more…)

Last week, in CFPA Czar or Fox in the Hen House? You Decide, I brought you more details about the people and structure of the ACORN-esque Center for Responsible Lending (CRL) and the Center for Community Self Help (CCSH) as part of a series of pieces we’ve been writing about the financial crisis and the proposed Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA).

The importance of the pieces in this series cannot be understated.  As Congress faces down a massive power-grabbing partisan financial reform bill this week, it seems to have lost sight of many of the causes of the financial crisis in the first place.  While we hear about the exemptions in the bill of institutions like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the stories we’ve been covering on CRL and CCSH further illustrate the dangers of unchecked entities and a government with too much intervention and far too much power.

At the peak of the subprime mortgage boom and the subsequent financial crisis, primary donors to CRL and CCSH basked in billions of dollars in pure profit, thanks in large part to that very intervention and power.

Next, we’re going to introduce you to the questionable lobbying activities of this complex organization.  But before we do, let’s review a few pertinent details from our previous posts about this organization:

• John Paulson is the largest single donor to the Center for Responsible Lending.  Paulson owns one of the world’s largest hedge funds, and most recently, the SEC has alleged “that Paulson & Co. paid Goldman Sachs to structure a transaction in which Paulson & Co. could take short positions against mortgage securities chosen by Paulson & Co. based on a belief that the securities would experience credit events.”
• Herb and Marion Sandler are the second largest donors to CRL, and together with Paulson appear to comprise the majority of the organization’s funding.  The couple owned GoldenWest Financial/World Savings bank, before selling it for over $2 billion to Wachovia, which tanked shortly thereafter
• Eric Stein, who once worked for Fannie Mae (an institution currently exempt from regulation in the financial reform bill), was also the longtime leader of CRL and Sr. Vice President of CCSH.  Today, Stein sits in Obama’s Treasury Department in charge of crafting the current financial reform legislation and the new Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA).

Now, onto the lobbying.

A complaint that was filed with the House, Senate, and the IRS alleges that CRL, CCSH, and its vast network of non-profit and for-profit companies may have committed serious violations of the Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) and the Honest Leadership in Open Government Act (HLOGA).  The complaint was filed in the Fall of 2009 by the Consumers Rights League.

(more…)

On Wednesday, we brought you the story of a little report from the Boston Fed and its role in creating the housing bubble. In that piece, we mentioned an organization you probably hadn’t heard of before, the Center for Responsible Lending. It is one of the more influential–in a bad way–organizations you don’t know. Over the coming weeks, we’ll lift the veil on this organization. Consider today’s installment a primer.

The Center for Responsible Lending is the most influential liberal advocacy group dealing with the financial services industry in the nation’s capital. It is the policy arm of credit unions based in North Carolina and California. Yes, its parent organization has a vested interest in the outcome of CRL’s advocacy.

The Center performs both public policy research and lobbying. (Lots of lobbying, but that is for another day.) Despite its well known left wing prejudices, the media uncritically accepts the Center’s published papers, giving the group extra heft on Capitol Hill.

The Center aggressively criticizes lending discrimination and pushes lenders to increase their underwriting to poor neighborhood where borrowers are less likely to be able to pay back mortgages. The Center is keenly interested in the redistribution of wealth and cares little about the financial safety and soundness of the banks it targets.

Lenders who fail to cooperate with the Center are accused of “redlining,” i.e. illegally discriminating against borrowers in low-income neighborhoods.

(more…)

Because of the resignation of Hillary Clinton from the U S Senate and the subsequent appointment of Kirsten Gillibrand, both of New York’s U.S. Senate seats are on the ballot this fall. While most of the focus has been on a potential dust up between the Junior Senator and former Congressman Harold Ford, Jr., no one has emerged as a potential candidate to oppose Senator Chuck Schumer, who’s campaign coffers contain more than $30 million.

But a candidate might emerge. New York Tea Party leaders are talking up the potential candidacy of CNBC Talking Head and former Reagan Advisor Larry Kudlow. A graduate of the University of Rochester, Kudlow is one of the architects of the Reagan tax-cuts that sparked one of the great economic boom in modern times. Kudlow who also worked for New York Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, is recognized as a leading anti-tax supply side economist. Kudlow is also know as one of the most effective debaters on the Right.

Kudlow is  known to have beaten an addiction to cocaine which almost derailed his career. Kudlow was addicted to coke and he beat it, Schumer is addicted to special interest campaign contribution and that’s a bigger problem today. Kudlow is the kind of candidate who could raise tea party money across America . Kudlow could also command the Republican and Conservative nominations and might even be able to petition his way on the ballot as the Libertarian party nominee.
(more…)

Former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer took to the New York Times OP-ED page to call for the full release of a AIG corporate e-mails to determine how and why the company crashed.

This is the same Eliot Spitzer who stonewalled attempts by the New York State Senate Committee on Investigations and the New York Commission on Ethics to obtain the E-Mails of Spitzer and his top aides surrounding the abuse of power in his using the New York State Police to spy on his political opponents. Likewise, Spitzer attempted to prevent his top aides from testifying. This man’s hypocrisy knows no bounds.

The idea of former New York Governor and Attorney General Eliot Spitzer criticizing the AIG bailout is ridiculous; Spitzer is responsible for the economic condition of the company for which they needed a bailout. In fact, Spitzer’s crackdown on Wall Street caused the firms to increase leverage because he took away the ability for them to make money in research and underwriting, and they looked for other ways to make money; like securitizing subprime mortgages.

(more…)

ACORN has been fairly criticized for its actions that led up to the mortgage crisis, which culminated in a huge rash of foreclosures last year.  While the tide appears to be waning, it’s a problem that is still occuring.

Specifically, ACORN strong-armed banks and worked with members of Congress, such as Barney Frank, to weaken credit standards in order for banks, as well as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, to fund risky mortgages.  Mortgages, of course, that stood little chance of ever being paid, as we witnessed last year.

But ACORN’s penchant for shaking down banks didn’t begin 2 years ago, or even 10 years ago.  Check out this article from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution from 1988.  Grant Williams was an organizer for ACORN at the time ( I wrote here about his new gig at SEIU), and he managed to weasle ACORN into a bank’s proposed interstate merger.  From the article:

(more…)