The ironic thing is the liberal media would have a much stronger card to play against Newt if they had bothered to cover Freddie/Fannie’s culpability in the housing collapse from the beginning. But because it was Democrats who were so heavily tied in with Freddie/Fannie all along, the media buried the story. Even when Freddie/Fannie have continually asked for new billion-dollar bailouts, it seems to get no coverage at all.
If they had been like Enron from the start, something the media could make a Republican connection to, the coverage would have been wall-to-wall and everyone in the country would have known every intricacy of the scandal and would have believed Freddie/Fannie were the spawn of Satan by now. So in a way it’s the media’s liberal bias that has resulted in Newt having an easier time of it right now.
In theory, I agree with you. But this SEC Civil Fraud suit was just filed yesterday. The MSM hasn't even had time to react yet or even beginning to connect the dots of a storyline between Syron & Newt. Give it a few days.
And this is just a Civil Fraud Suit against Syron. Wait. "The BB Swami" says that Newt/Syron & Freddie Mac connection stories will start showing up soon, then there will be a criminal indictment of Syron, then it will start really drawing Newt political blood.
My bet is that Newt could well be public relations roadkill somewhere between Iowa and New Hampshire....
Again, I could be wrong, they could do nothing to Newt, but I wasn't wrong about Cain, from Day 1, start to finish while everyone else was attacking his accusers and acting like they weren't credible to anyone.
Here we go again. ;o)
Please, at least let’s us Freepers know and tell the truth...
Newt was hired as a consultant when the bank were looking for a way to help people learn how to work, to save and to buy a house - then the process took a turn when the banks got sued and made to adopt the sub-prime loans - giving, ‘gifting’ not ‘low income’ but even ‘no income’, no credit loans.
Newt’s advice - “that’s insane...”
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/11/15/gingrich-fires-back-at-lobbying-charge/
Now, dig back to just WHO it was that made the banks give those loans? Was it Newt? hardly. Was it the banks? They didn’t want to do it.
Does Acorn and CRA strike a bell? The banks were taken to court on the charge that they were “Redlining (denying poor people loans because of their ethnic heritage)...”
Starting to get the drift?
And who was their lawyer that took it to court? Can you handle the truth?
http://www.mediacircus.com/2008/10/obama-sued-citibank-under-cra-to-force-it-to-make-bad-loans/