Posted on 07/24/2015 12:44:27 PM PDT by Jim W N
If you’ve been paying attention the news the last few weeks, you’ve no doubt seen the meteoric rise of GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump, as the hype train for the real estate mogul shot into light speed after some brutally honest remarks about illegal immigration.
Well, who he just pointed the finger at for the 2008 financial crisis might just hit the emergency brakes and bring this whole thing to a screeching halt.
I’m pretty sure this isn’t going to sit well with a huge portion of his followers, and this may have been the gaffe that shoots down his presidential aspirations.
Then again, maybe it won’t, and folks will just chalk it up to the fact the guy basically has no filter and just says what he thinks.
Do you think this hurts Trump’s chances at nabbing the 2016 nomination?
You're welcome. FWIW, in Bush's 2002 speech he makes mention of Park Place in Atlanta as being a success story he wants to duplicate across the country. Based upon the results of the real estate bubble bursting, I'd say he got his wish.
Bush's words:
One of the barriers to homeownership is the inability to make a downpayment. And if one of the goals is to increase homeownership, it makes sense to help people pay that downpayment. We believe that the amount of money in our budget, fully approved by Congress, will help 40,000 families every year realize the dream of owning a home. (Applause.) Part of the success of Park Place is that the city of Atlanta already does this. And we want to make the plan more robust. We want to make it more full all across America.
The results of Bush's policies:
|
Park Place South is, in microcosm, the story of a well-intentioned policy gone awry. Advocating homeownership is hardly novel; the Clinton administration did it, too. For Mr. Bush, it was part of his vision of an “ownership society,” in which Americans would rely less on the government for health care, retirement and shelter. It was also good politics, a way to court black and Hispanic voters. But for much of Mr. Bush’s tenure, government statistics show, incomes for most families remained relatively stagnant while housing prices skyrocketed. That put homeownership increasingly out of reach for first-time buyers like Mr. West. So Mr. Bush had to, in his words, “use the mighty muscle of the federal government” to meet his goal. He proposed affordable housing tax incentives. He insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac meet ambitious new goals for low-income lending. Concerned that down payments were a barrier, Mr. Bush persuaded Congress to spend up to $200 million a year to help first-time buyers with down payments and closing costs. And he pushed to allow first-time buyers to qualify for federally insured mortgages with no money down. Republican Congressional leaders and some housing advocates balked, arguing that homeowners with no stake in their investments would be more prone to walk away, as Mr. West did. Many economic experts, including some in the White House, now share that view. The president also leaned on mortgage brokers and lenders to devise their own innovations. “Corporate America,” he said, “has a responsibility to work to make America a compassionate place.” And corporate America, eyeing a lucrative market, delivered in ways Mr. Bush might not have expected, with a proliferation of too-good-to-be-true teaser rates and interest-only loans that were sold to investors in a loosely regulated environment. “This administration made decisions that allowed the free market to operate as a barroom brawl instead of a prize fight,” said L. William Seidman, who advised Republican presidents and led the savings and loan bailout in the 1990s. “To make the market work well, you have to have a lot of rules.” But Mr. Bush populated the financial system’s alphabet soup of oversight agencies with people who, like him, wanted fewer rules, not more. The president’s first chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission promised a “kinder, gentler” agency. The second was pushed out amid industry complaints that he was too aggressive. Under its current leader, the agency failed to police the catastrophic decisions that toppled the investment bank Bear Stearns and contributed to the current crisis, according to a recent inspector general’s report. As for Mr. Bush’s banking regulators, they once brandished a chain saw over a 9,000-page pile of regulations as they promised to ease burdens on the industry. When states tried to use consumer protection laws to crack down on predatory lending, the comptroller of the currency blocked the effort, asserting that states had no authority over national banks. The administration won that fight at the Supreme Court. But Roy Cooper, North Carolina’s attorney general, said, “They took 50 sheriffs off the beat at a time when lending was becoming the Wild West.” The president did push rules aimed at forcing lenders to more clearly explain loan terms. But the White House shelved them in 2004, after industry-friendly members of Congress threatened to block confirmation of his new housing secretary. "In the 2004 election cycle, mortgage bankers and brokers poured nearly $847,000 into Mr. Bush’s re-election campaign, more than triple their contributions in 2000, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. The administration did not finalize the new rules until last month." Among the Republican Party’s top 10 donors in 2004 was Roland Arnall. He founded Ameriquest, then the nation’s largest lender in the subprime market, which focuses on less creditworthy borrowers. In July 2005, the company agreed to set aside $325 million to settle allegations in 30 states that it had preyed on borrowers with hidden fees and ballooning payments. It was an early signal that deceptive lending practices, which would later set off a wave of foreclosures, were widespread. Andrew H. Card Jr., Mr. Bush’s former chief of staff, said White House aides discussed Ameriquest’s troubles, though not what they might portend for the economy. Mr. Bush had just nominated Mr. Arnall as his ambassador to the Netherlands, and the White House was primarily concerned with making sure he would be confirmed. “Maybe I was asleep at the switch,” Mr. Card said in an interview. Brian Montgomery, the Federal Housing Administration commissioner, understood the significance. His agency insures home loans, traditionally for the same low-income minority borrowers Mr. Bush wanted to help. When he arrived in June 2005, he was shocked to find those customers had been lured away by the “fool’s gold” of subprime loans. The Ameriquest settlement, he said, reinforced his concern that the industry was exploiting borrowers. In December 2005, Mr. Montgomery drafted a memo and brought it to the White House. “I don’t think this is what the president had in mind here,” he recalled telling Ryan Streeter, then the president’s chief housing policy analyst. It was an opportunity to address the risky subprime lending practices head on. But that was never seriously discussed. More senior aides, like Karl Rove, Mr. Bush’s chief political strategist, were wary of overly regulating an industry that, Mr. Rove said in an interview, provided “a valuable service to people who could not otherwise get credit.” While he had some concerns about the industry’s practices, he said, “it did provide an opportunity for people, a lot of whom are still in their houses today.” The White House pursued a narrower plan offered by Mr. Montgomery that would have allowed the F.H.A. to loosen standards so it could lure back subprime borrowers by insuring similar, but safer, loans. It passed the House but died in the Senate, where Republican senators feared that the agency would merely be mimicking the private sector’s risky practices — a view Mr. Rove said he shared. ‘We Told You So’ Armando Falcon Jr. was preparing to take on a couple of giants. A soft-spoken Texan, Mr. Falcon ran the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, a tiny government agency that oversaw Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, two pillars of the American housing industry. In February 2003, he was finishing a blockbuster report that warned the pillars could crumble. Created by Congress, Fannie and Freddie — called G.S.E.’s, for government-sponsored entities — bought trillions of dollars’ worth of mortgages to hold or sell to investors as guaranteed securities. The companies were also Washington powerhouses, stuffing lawmakers’ campaign coffers and hiring bare-knuckled lobbyists. Mr. Falcon’s report outlined a worst-case situation in which Fannie and Freddie could default on debt, setting off “contagious illiquidity in the market” — in other words, a financial meltdown. He also raised red flags about the companies’ soaring use of derivatives, the complex financial instruments that economic experts now blame for spreading the housing collapse. Today, the White House cites that report — and its subsequent effort to better regulate Fannie and Freddie — as evidence that it foresaw the crisis and tried to avert it. Bush officials recently wrote up a talking points memo headlined “G.S.E.’s — We Told You So.” But the back story is more complicated. To begin with, on the day Mr. Falcon issued his report, the White House tried to fire him. (See: White House Philosophy Stoked Mortgage Bonfire) |
Sure it goes further back. The dems and republicans have been blaming each other for their corruption for decades. This is nothing new.
It’s part of the party schitch. Just blame them. They’ll blame you and just blame them back. It’s a product of endless government corruption
Fact remains there is audio/transcripts out there of Bush pushing home loans for totally unqualified minorities. Just several years prior to the epic housing crash.
I’d love to see that detailed analysis of how Trump is better than Hillary. After all, he emulates the Clintons. What he spews out is what his marketing instincts tell him sells, not what he believes. Most of his current commentary is contradicted by public statements in the past 2-4 years.
Let us not forget that President Bush himself pushed to increase Minority Home Ownership.
Personally, I think both Parties had a hand in it, and I believe the same situation is repeating itself today.
During the 2008 financial crisis, Trump was a Democrat and Obama supporter.
It’s not the least bit surprising that this pretend “conservative” would get the financial crisis wrong. By their deeds you shall know them.
I guess he's a RINO and must be forced out in the Primaries. LOL
TARP. TARP was a disaster. It lead to a few trillion in additional debt and trillions more in “Quantitative Easing”.
So, yes, this was a Bush thing.
Bush had been in office 8 years. He could have done something during that time.
Just like now, Obama has been in office 7 years so everything going on now is his problem.
I think it was more complicated than that.
I believe, Bush (and his NWO comrades) intended to make the next, poor dumb bastard (read: Obama) die on that political hill by turning him into the fall guy for the real estate crash caused by Bush's policies.
The law of unintended consequences came into play. Seeing soaring profits, the banksters got greedy and the bubble inflated too fast and burst before Bush had a chance to get out of office.
Because the crash happened while Bush was still in office there was no way to blame Obama, so Bush's handlers had to go to their fall-back position and blame Clinton and they drafted a talking points memo and even produced a YouTube video which was widely circulated among the Bush loyalists who were all too eager to defend "their guy".
But, the proof is there in black and white. It was Bush's policies, still in place today, that he, and he alone, was the instigator of the crash.
Without Bush changing banking laws to benefit his Wall Street cronies, Carter's and Clinton's CRA would have no teeth to allow US banks to pursue the business of millions of Mexican illegal aliens. Without Bush's policies, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could not buy up these home loans.
And, if none of this had happened, the US real estate market would not have crashed.
Watch this video/audio of Bush speech pushing home loans for unqualified minorities.
“Minority bad credit history, you don’t have to have a have a lousy home for first time home buys, low income home buyers can have as nice as home as anyone else.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkAtUq0OJ68
Watch this video/audio of Bush speech pushing home loans for unqualified minorities.
“Minority bad credit history, you don’t have to have a have a lousy home for first time home buys, low income home buyers can have as nice as home as anyone else.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkAtUq0OJ68
Watch this video/audio of Bush speech pushing home loans for unqualified minorities.
“Minority bad credit history, you don’t have to have a have a lousy home for first time home buys, low income home buyers can have as nice as home as anyone else.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkAtUq0OJ68
Watch this video/audio of Bush speech pushing home loans for unqualified minorities.
“Minority with bad credit history, you don’t have to have a have a lousy home for first time home buys, low income home buyers can have as nice as home as anyone else.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkAtUq0OJ68
This Bush speech occurred just several years prior to the epic collapse.
Sorry. I don’t believe they were planning on the next guy.
But I’ll give you that they probably didn’t count on the collapse starting on their watch.
And Bush and his brother and his daddy are still open-borders, NWO guys. (not that you said they weren’t).
Actually the 2008 Financial collapse is the fault of the American People cause we keep electing politiclowns that belong to the Washington DC uniparty who keep selling us out to the highest bidders on K Street.
Didn’t realize that.
Don’t think he said anything untrue.
All you have to do is look at the damage the Repubs are doing now tpa,tpp,obamacare, opening up cuba,iran etc. and it is the same repub party of George Bush.
The Repubs are simply not on our side. They need to be accused and defend their actions.
And, you could be right. That's just my speculation. It's entirely possible they weren't planning on the crash at all.
They may have just been planning an ever-increasing home-buying market fueled by illegal aliens where their bankster buddies would be reaping ever-higher profits.
Once you’ve gone past the initial comment about Trump and Economics, I agree.
I do think Trump grasps economics rather well. His success depends on that.
Thanks for the link. I'll watch it later.
There are over 10 billion concrete reasons that confirms Trump grasps economics well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.