Shocking Video Unearthed Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis

the persons who posted this video are lying republicans... sliced and spliced bits and pieces... too bad your video editing is so obvious

NICE TRYING LYING REPUBLICANS, BUSH KISSERS.. GO AND SERVE IN IRAQ

Ashtone - last comment was for you!
The video is of a hearing on accounting, not the hearing held regarding regulation.

"The new rule, introduced by Bush, compels the companies to put 57% of their mortgage financing by 2008 toward homes for people with lower incomes. Fannie Mae and Freddie, the two largest U.S. mortgage finance companies, currently meet a 50%threshold."
There was no regulation impending! Every quote is out of context in this video.

Why didn't Bush regulate Non-GSE's??

Typical FREE MARKET economics, the WINNERS win big, the losers jump from buildings. Give me regulated, slow long term sustainability over this fluctuating chaos any day.

fannie mae , frediie mac were not FREE MARKET "BECAUSE JIMMY CARTER, BILL CLINTON " FORCED BANKS WHICH IS PRIVATE COMPANIES TO GIVE BAD LOANS. AKA TOXIC LOANS.AND RAINES RAN AWAY WITH MILLIONS FOR HIS RUNNING THEM IN THE GROUNDS THANKS DEMO-CRAPS YOU FUCK US TAX PAYERS AS USUSAL FOR YOUR SCREWING US WORKERS FOR YOUR COMMUNIST CRAP. IS THE WAY OVER PAID ASSHOLE ATHLETES YOU LOVE SO MUCH INCLUDED IN YOUR FREE MARKET . HMMM CEO 1000'S OF WORKERS UNDER THEM WORTH 2MILL.?NO ? ASSHOLE ATHLETE ? YES

Again, no one FORCED them to give bad loans, in fact, Bush increased the incentive to give bad loans, eliminating HUD restrictions in 2004. Bush tried to increase loans to poor. Banks could have easily given 30 yr fixed rate loans, like I have through ACORN, and not pushed these people into TEASER RATES. Banks made the contracts, and knew the risks. It was derivative market that drove the bad loans. Do your research.

WELL SAID!
You have a great, educated, well-researched comment.
The answer from Nar is typical.
A good reason to have a test before people can vote. Bush tried to UP from $50 Billion to %57 Billion for low-income.

"In 2004 President Bush embarked on a mission to increase the level of homeownership, ordering Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase targets for loans made to lower-income individuals."NYT

Frank ACTUALLY opposed it! Every quote here is out of context,but Connies can't tell!

Since the reference entity is not a party to agreement between the protection buyer and seller, the seller of protection has no inherent recourse to the reference entity in the event of default and no right to sue the reference entity for recovery.

In other words, the govt guaranteed loans and lowered the credit requirements, so the BANKS had a fucking field day and gave out any shitty as high risk loan they could dream of and created a whole credit derivivitive market

. Credit default swaps have unique characteristics that distinguish them from insurance products and financial guaranties. The protection buyer does not need to own an underlying obligation of the reference entity. The protection buyer does not need to suffer a loss.

Unfortunately, Fannie Mae-quality, safe loans in the subprime market did not become the standard, and the lending market moved away from us. Borrowers were offered a range of loans that layered teaser rates, interest-only, negative amortization and payment options and low-documentation requirements on top of floating-rate loans. In early 2005 we began sounding our concerns about this "layered-risk" lending. For example, Tom Lund, the head of our single-family mortgage business, publicly stated,

"One of the things we don't feel good about right now as we look into this marketplace is more homebuyers being put into programs that have more risk. Those products are for more sophisticated buyers. Does it make sense for borrowers to take on risk they may not be aware of? Are we setting them up for failure? As a result, we gave up significant market share to our competitors.