Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
3. So. The evidence against the banks is strong enough to cause the banks
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 10:13 AM
Apr 2013

to be willing to pay penalties rather than face a trial, but rather than go to trial, the Justice Department or the regulator is agreeing to keep the evidence amassed against the banks confidential?

I can see doing that in a case in which the evidence and a trial or a hearing could go either way. But it doesn't sound like that is the case here. This is not right. Our Justice Department or regulatory agency is acting like a private party to a civil law suit not like a government prosecutor.

Imagine you have a thief who stole large amounts of your money and the prosecutor makes a deal that the thief can return a small portion of your money to you and then get off scot free. You probably would not like that, would you? It might be appropriate for an independent judge to mitigate a sentence, but for the prosecuting agency or the Attorney General to just make a deal like this is insulting and unfair to the people who were illegally foreclosed.

Volaris

(10,270 posts)
4. This is Holder's Justice Department....
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 10:28 AM
Apr 2013

I'm surprised they did anythng at all. "

Bank Fraud? Are you kidding? Califirnoa and Washington and Colorado say people can smoke WEED now!!!!!!! We don't have time for no "Bank Fraud"...."

Response to Galraedia (Original post)

midnight

(26,624 posts)
8. Fourteen request and only one request and three partial requests provided for info. about
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 11:02 AM
Apr 2013

about reviews dealing with inflated fees, fraudulent foreclosures,abusive practices.

Banks violated the law? I thought we were told they didn't?

Anyone know who the bald man who is up their with Mr. Ashton?

 

Heather MC

(8,084 posts)
9. So when are the affected homeowners going to get the information?
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 11:44 AM
Apr 2013

I am glad she is asking the questions. Now how long before the Homeowners get the information she spoke about. Verbal is one thing, Action is better. People need help now.


Please don't read this as an attack Against Senator Warren. She is my She-ro for bringing the problem to light.

 

Plucketeer

(12,882 posts)
13. This, my friends, is what a breath of fresh air looks like
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 01:36 PM
Apr 2013

Imagine - if you can - most other congressional / senate hearings being SO forthright and unchoreographed. Hearings where the grilled aren't danced around because of the cloaked presence of ulterior influences. Oh to dream!

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Video & Multimedia»Elizabeth Warren embarras...