Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

FBI official warned of widening loan fraud in 2004

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
ColbertWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 01:32 AM
Original message
FBI official warned of widening loan fraud in 2004
FBI saw threat of mortgage crisis
A top official warned of widening loan fraud in 2004, but the agency focused its resources elsewhere.
By Richard B. Schmitt, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
August 25, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Long before the mortgage crisis began rocking Main Street and Wall Street, a top FBI official made a chilling, if little-noticed, prediction: The booming mortgage business, fueled by low interest rates and soaring home values, was starting to attract shady operators and billions in losses were possible.

(...)

Today, the damage from the global mortgage meltdown has more than matched that of the savings-and-loan bailouts of the 1980s and early 1990s. By some estimates, it has made that costly debacle look like chump change. But it's also clear that the FBI failed to avert a problem it had accurately forecast.

(...)

The FBI and its parent agency, the Justice Department, are supposed to act as the cops on the beat for potentially illegal activities by bankers and others. But they were focused on national security and other priorities, and paid scant attention to white-collar crimes that may have contributed to the lending and securities debacle.

(...)

"The approach was certain to bring symbolic prosecutions and strategic defeat."

(...)

Officials said they began approaching mortgage companies and others in an attempt to raise awareness about the growing fraud problem. But the lenders had little incentive to cooperate because they were continuing to make money. Black says that in many cases, they were part of the fraud.

(...)

Many of the cases have been relatively small, however, with about half the investigations involving losses of less than $1 million -- the size of two or three loans.

But the tepid response also reflects a broad realignment of law-enforcement priorities at the Justice Department in which mortgage fraud and other white-collar crimes have been subordinated to other Bush administration priorities.

(...)

"Until there is a catastrophic loss, there is no incentive to investigate criminal conduct," said Cynthia Monaco, a former federal prosecutor in New York.

--Los Angeles Times


While the GOP's DoJ was busily targeting liberals, peace activists and seeking to hire and promote Christers, another disaster is ignored.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
glowing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 01:39 AM
Response to Original message
1. Well, how in the world would they want to authorize the FBI to look into their own people?
Most of the peons would be in jail, rather than ruining the country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ColbertWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 01:42 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Plus, "ignoring high tech fraud" is not as sexy as "John Edwards had sex!" n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glowing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 01:53 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Oh, how could we forget about that.. It was just so much fun to run the Edwards
had sex thru a microscope... Apparently, when Democrats have sex, its much more exciting than when GOPers have sex.. Or perhaps, people don't want the mental image of Vitters in diapers or Larry wide-stance in a bathroom. I find it amusing that they dropped it pretty fast when affairs and mistresses started to come back around and re-focus on John McCain's mistress, now wife Cindy-Loo-Hoo. AND then, once again, what about that lobbyist who disappeared all of a sudden from the stage? I know its disgusting to think McCain can even get it up, or that anyone would want to have sex with that old man.. I wonder if the McCain's sleep in different wings of their mansions.. I almost imagine that if they do share the same bedroom, that they have seperate sleeping beds.. like old people do.. My husband's grandparents sleep in diff. beds.. they're those adjustable beds.. she needs to sleep diff. than her husband, and at 80, sex is just not happening.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ColbertWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 06:45 AM
Response to Reply #4
11. Share the same bed? But which bed? In which house? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quantess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 01:53 AM
Response to Original message
3. Maybe her "warning" merely served to get others in on the action
and cash out while they could!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ColbertWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 02:17 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. "His"
Edited on Mon Aug-25-08 02:23 AM by ColbertWatcher
Chris Swecker (pictured below)



was the agent who warned reporters in 2004.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quantess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 02:27 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Ooops. That's one ugly woman.
I skimmed it and assumed "he" was named Cynthia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ColbertWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 02:35 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Cynthia is the name of a prosecutor quoted for the article, but ...
...I skimmed too and posted random bits hoping to copy the best parts.

Sorry if it was confusing.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 03:02 AM
Response to Original message
8. I "knew" it before that..
Kids who are friends of my son, were getting married and buying big-ole houses they could never ever ever afford..with interest only loans...

Score:

kids= 0
banks= 0

Of the 3 who did it, all had "lost" the house by 2005..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ColbertWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 04:48 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. So, your kids friends, that's 3 plus how many more?
Seriously? Has there ever been an actual accounting of the numbers of failed loans? Lost homes?

This story sickens me because once all the failures are taken into account it does become a "catastrophic loss" meaning there should be an "incentive to investigate criminal conduct" (like the prosecutor in the article said).

But there won't be.

Because it's only poor people or middle class people, like the ones in New Orleans, as long as no rich person was harmed in the making of this disaster no outrage need be wasted.

So the news revealed in this article will be ignored just like the original 2004 warning was ignored, just like all the warnings about how this GOP administration has failed this country are dismissed and ridiculed.

January can't come quick enough.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ColbertWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 05:33 AM
Response to Original message
10. Morning kick! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC