Never any media bias - well maybe just a little. All the time.

Good to see the press consistent as usual.....you know, calling for Obama to resign.

December 15, 2008
(Vol. 21; No. 25)

Must Swear In Obama Right Now
“We can’t afford to waste an hour, much less a day or a week or a month. And this business of being a lame duck President and saying, you know, ‘Adios. I’m going to the ranch. I’m just not going to do very much during this period.’ We can’t afford it....We’re in possibly, possibly the biggest crisis we’ve been in since December 7, 1941, and maybe since the time of the Civil War. So, we can’t afford to have this interregnum.”
— Ex-CBS Evening News anchor Dan Rather on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, December 5.

“If I had my druthers right now, we would convene a special session of Congress, amend the Constitution and move up the inauguration from Jan. 20 to Thanksgiving Day....Just get me a Supreme Court justice and a Bible, and let’s swear in Barack Obama right now — by choice — with the same haste we did — by necessity — with L.B.J. in the back of Air Force One. “
— New York Times columnist Tom Friedman, Nov. 23.

“Thanksgiving is next week, and President Bush could make it a really special holiday by resigning. Seriously....Just to be on the safe side, the Vice President ought to turn in his resignation first. (We’re desperate, but not crazy.) Then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi would become President until Jan. 20. Obviously, she’d defer to her party’s incoming chief executive, and Barack Obama could begin governing.”
— New York Times columnist Gail Collins in her November 22 column, “Time for Him to Go.”

Host Gwen Ifill: “Maybe what people are beginning to say is that this President-elect should be President now? ...”
New York Times reporter Peter Baker: “That’s right, exactly. People voted for change and [there’s] this strange, odd 77-day waiting period that we impose, in effect, between our election and our inauguration.”
— PBS’s Washington Week, December 5.

“No lame-duck President can do anything meaningful after the successor is elected. The time is spent figuring out things like how many presidential pardons to issue, many to convicted political pals....We should move the President’s inauguration up to the first Tuesday in December, one month after the election....People who elect a new president are eager for the change to take place. The sooner the better.”
— USA Today founder Al Neuharth, November 14 column.

LooseGoose wrote:Good to see the press consistent as usual.....you know, calling for Obama to resign.

December 15, 2008
(Vol. 21; No. 25)  

Must Swear In Obama Right Now
“We can’t afford to waste an hour, much less a day or a week or a month. And this business of being a lame duck President and saying, you know, ‘Adios. I’m going to the ranch. I’m just not going to do very much during this period.’ We can’t afford it....We’re in possibly, possibly the biggest crisis we’ve been in since December 7, 1941, and maybe since the time of the Civil War. So, we can’t afford to have this interregnum.”
— Ex-CBS Evening News anchor Dan Rather on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, December 5.

“If I had my druthers right now, we would convene a special session of Congress, amend the Constitution and move up the inauguration from Jan. 20 to Thanksgiving Day....Just get me a Supreme Court justice and a Bible, and let’s swear in Barack Obama right now — by choice — with the same haste we did — by necessity — with L.B.J. in the back of Air Force One. “
— New York Times columnist Tom Friedman, Nov. 23.

“Thanksgiving is next week, and President Bush could make it a really special holiday by resigning. Seriously....Just to be on the safe side, the Vice President ought to turn in his resignation first. (We’re desperate, but not crazy.) Then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi would become President until Jan. 20. Obviously, she’d defer to her party’s incoming chief executive, and Barack Obama could begin governing.”
— New York Times columnist Gail Collins in her November 22 column, “Time for Him to Go.”

Host Gwen Ifill: “Maybe what people are beginning to say is that this President-elect should be President now? ...”
New York Times reporter Peter Baker: “That’s right, exactly. People voted for change and [there’s] this strange, odd 77-day waiting period that we impose, in effect, between our election and our inauguration.”
— PBS’s Washington Week, December 5.

“No lame-duck President can do anything meaningful after the successor is elected. The time is spent figuring out things like how many presidential pardons to issue, many to convicted political pals....We should move the President’s inauguration up to the first Tuesday in December, one month after the election....People who elect a new president are eager for the change to take place. The sooner the better.”
— USA Today founder Al Neuharth, November 14 column.

Joblessness went down another 10K this month.  Those guys have opinions based on many things.  We sucked 8 years ago.  We really sucked.  You say Press,but those are five opinions.  I'm nervous about Trump.  I hope I'm wrong.  As  I said, I was wrong about Reagan and I was wrong about Clinton.   But I'm worried about a grab em by the pussy type president.   Anxious to get rid of Obama?  Nope.    Was a anxious to get rid of Bush?  Yep.   Your beef is with those five guys, but you'll have to post a shit load of stories to prove to those five guys why they should now call for OBama's resignation.

you'll need to write to them and ask them to do it. I think they're being anxious for change has turned into angst now. Mine has. But again, opinions are that, not lthe press.

DWags wrote:   But I'm worried about a grab em by the pussy type president.  

We've already had one. We even re-elected him. Seemed like a nice guy other than that, though.

xsanguine wrote:

DWags wrote:   But I'm worried about a grab em by the pussy type president.  

We've already had one. We even re-elected him. Seemed like a nice guy other than that, though.

Exactly. I brought this up about Billy C in a different thread a month or so ago but only Bob Sak responded.

We've had a few now that I think about it.

Trumps blood pressure jumps have just begun.

Obama is going to continue to do shit to Trump's new bestie and put Trump in a very public position to have to allow the Russians back to their "retreat" or unfreeze assets, etc.

GRR Spartan wrote:Trumps blood pressure jumps have just begun.  

Obama is going to continue to do shit to Trump's new bestie and put Trump in a very public position to have to allow the Russians back to their "retreat" or unfreeze assets, etc.  

F yeah! That's how an outgoing president should act, try to sabotage his replacement. Usually you only see that with regards to adversaries. That's what I call leadership!

Screw 'em!

Golly Gee.....What a shocker now that there's an R in office the NYT wants to investigate things.

Michael Calderone ‏@mlcalderone 52m52 minutes ago
NYT beefed up White House team and started DC investigative unit. Now promising $5 million more for Trump coverage:

New York Times Is Devoting $5 Million More Into Covering Donald Trump

Yep Goose its the biased media
http://truthfeed.com/breaking-fraudulent-clinton-votes-discovered-by-the-tens-of-thousands/26749/

Until its proven to be 100% bullshit

http://www.dispatch.com/content/blogs/the-daily-briefing/2017/01/18012017---fake-ohio-news.html

Robert J Sakimano wrote:too bad Trump supporters weren't upset with the mainstream media was (and still is) giving him a free ride..



it's gonna be a fun 4 years for dudes like me.

Define "fun" for you in that context?

GRR Spartan wrote:Yep Goose its the biased media
http://truthfeed.com/breaking-fraudulent-clinton-votes-discovered-by-the-tens-of-thousands/26749/

Until its proven to be 100% bullshit

http://www.dispatch.com/content/blogs/the-daily-briefing/2017/01/18012017---fake-ohio-news.html

lmao @ you using "truthfeed" as a site to debunk. Be serious.

LooseGoose wrote:

GRR Spartan wrote:Yep Goose its the biased media
http://truthfeed.com/breaking-fraudulent-clinton-votes-discovered-by-the-tens-of-thousands/26749/

Until its proven to be 100% bullshit

http://www.dispatch.com/content/blogs/the-daily-briefing/2017/01/18012017---fake-ohio-news.html

lmao @ you using "truthfeed" as a site to debunk. Be serious.

It's GRR so...LOL

Facts really suck don't they.

Its all a joke until you get fucked. Then you'll be outraged.

4 Recent Examples Show Why No One Trusts Media Coverage Of Trump

One may have hoped that the media would respond to their 2016 failures and resulting lack of credibility by reforming. Instead, it seems that many in political media are quadrupling down on the mistakes that served them and their readers and viewers so poorly in the lead-up to Donald Trump’s surprise victory in November.

It’s impossible to track all the ways in which the media are leaning into their bias, their unnecessary hostility, and their abandonment of journalistic principles. So let’s just look at a few examples from the last few hours.

Many members of the media would like to imagine themselves as brave heroes who will valiantly fight the excesses of the Trump administration. These examples show why people do not trust the media to tell the truth, much less hold anyone accountable for anything.

LooseGoose wrote:4 Recent Examples Show Why No One Trusts Media Coverage Of Trump

One may have hoped that the media would respond to their 2016 failures and resulting lack of credibility by reforming. Instead, it seems that many in political media are quadrupling down on the mistakes that served them and their readers and viewers so poorly in the lead-up to Donald Trump’s surprise victory in November.

It’s impossible to track all the ways in which the media are leaning into their bias, their unnecessary hostility, and their abandonment of journalistic principles. So let’s just look at a few examples from the last few hours.

Many members of the media would like to imagine themselves as brave heroes who will valiantly fight the excesses of the Trump administration. These examples show why people do not trust the media to tell the truth, much less hold anyone accountable for anything.

I don't want to believe or disbelieve the media. However, I like when they show a politician doing or saying one thing, then they show the same politician doing or saying the exact opposite. Then I can decide if the guy/girl is a liar, a phony, being abused by "the media" or just a plain out and out idiot.

For some it works this way: If the guy/girl wears your teams jersey's he/she is being abused by fake news and phony stories even if we say and hear him/her with our own eyes and ears.

If the guy and girl are wearing the other teams jersey, it's a solid news source because you can use your own eyes and ears and see what's going on.

Then, we all run to the message boards and act like the dumb asses we are for being as blind as we are.

Should have used the Christian News headline nstead.

After all if the headline comes off of some publication that has Christian in its name it should be true to the good Christian people who saw the BS story and passed it along.

But Christians have no bias. Okay.

GRR Spartan wrote:Should have used the Christian News headline nstead.

After all if the headline comes off of some publication that has Christian in its name it should be true to the good Christian people who saw the BS story and passed it along.

But Christians have no bias. Okay.

As I was raised catholic by a hippy mom and a go along with his hippy wife dad, (not anymore) I've been doing some interesting reading on how Catholics were discriminated and hated back about 100 years ago. Much like the muslims today. Catholics "enslaved women in convents, took orders from an all powerful pope, and had predatory priests I've read. (well, wait, I guess that last part is kind of true). There were actually some newspapers in America that sprung up to write inflamatory statements against catholics.

Ten times Trump spread fake news but its from the evil NY Times.

Might be believable if it was from The Christian News.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/business/media/trump-fake-news.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Ftechnology&action=click&contentCollection=technology&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront

Yep that Trump is an anti-Semite. Ignore the Jewish son in law and the Jewish grandkids.

ABC reporter: Trump speech carried anti-Semitic ’overtones’

I guess wipe all that out because he used the term "America First"......amazing.

DWags wrote:

GRR Spartan wrote:Should have used the Christian News headline nstead.

After all if the headline comes off of some publication that has Christian in its name it should be true to the good Christian people who saw the BS story and passed it along.

But Christians have no bias.  Okay.

As I was raised catholic by a hippy mom and a go along with his hippy wife dad, (not anymore) I've been doing some interesting reading on how Catholics were discriminated and hated back about 100 years ago.  Much like the muslims today.   Catholics "enslaved women in convents, took orders from an all powerful pope, and had predatory priests I've read.  (well, wait, I guess that last part is kind of true).  There were actually some newspapers in America that sprung up to write inflamatory statements against catholics.  

It's still there in some circles. I knew a really religious guy who hated the Catholic Church (on religious grounds) and even made his wife leave the church and become estranged from her very catholic family. And she did it... that guy must be packin what Da Mayor is.

Religion is weird.

The Washington Post last night....

xsanguine wrote:

DWags wrote:

As I was raised catholic by a hippy mom and a go along with his hippy wife dad, (not anymore) I've been doing some interesting reading on how Catholics were discriminated and hated back about 100 years ago.  Much like the muslims today.   Catholics "enslaved women in convents, took orders from an all powerful pope, and had predatory priests I've read.  (well, wait, I guess that last part is kind of true).  There were actually some newspapers in America that sprung up to write inflamatory statements against catholics.  

It's still there in some circles. I knew a really religious guy who hated the Catholic Church (on religious grounds) and even made his wife leave the church and become estranged from her very catholic family. And she did it... that guy must be packin what Da Mayor is.

Religion is weird.

My wife insisted that we also have a priest at or Presbyterian wedding. She knew how catholic my mom and grandma were. And wanted inclusion. We had both a priest and reversed up there. Weird. I wasn't even going to church at the time. She sat through the wedding classes with me too. Things we do for older relatives. #1347 in reasons why I married my tree hugging hippy wife.

LooseGoose wrote:The Washington Post last night....

Opinions and one story. You get that don't you?

Newspapers/journalists/people should stop having opinions and writing stuff. It's just so unfair to assholes to be called out for being assholes.

DWags wrote:

xsanguine wrote:

It's still there in some circles. I knew a really religious guy who hated the Catholic Church (on religious grounds) and even made his wife leave the church and become estranged from her very catholic family. And she did it... that guy must be packin what Da Mayor is.

Religion is weird.

My wife insisted that we also have a priest at or Presbyterian wedding. She knew how catholic my mom and grandma were. And wanted inclusion. We had both a priest and reversed up there. Weird. I wasn't even going to church at the time. She sat through the wedding classes with me too. Things we do for older relatives. #1347 in reasons why I married my tree hugging hippy wife.

That is cool. My wife is catholic and wanted the catholic wedding and I'm atheist but not Atheist so I couldn't care less. My response was "sure, whatever you want, ma". Plus Catholic Churches are pretty cool from an architectural perspective.

DWags wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:The Washington Post last night....

Opinions and one story. You get that don't you?

Yes, I can read. What paper paid for and printed those opinions?

It has been a really bad week for journalism

It has been a particularly embarrassing week for the press, and it's only Saturday.

For an industry that's as disliked and distrusted as Congress, there's a lot of work that media need to do to win back viewers' trust.

There's no room for error, especially now that there's a subgenre of "news" that has zero basis in fact, and is created from thin air for the sole purpose of generating cash.

But learning to be more careful and even-handed is apparently difficult for much of media, and this week was especially rough for newsrooms that are already struggling to regain credibility.

In no particular order, here are some of the most embarrassing media moments from this week:

LooseGoose wrote:

DWags wrote:

Opinions and one story. You get that don't you?

Yes, I can read. What paper paid for and printed those opinions?

The Washington post. Are they labeled opinions so the idiots realize they aren't news or are they trying to fool the idiots?

After Decrying Fake News, Journalists Are Still Binging On Fake News

After spending weeks post-election complaining about the rise of so-called fake news and attributing Hillary Clinton’s loss to its proliferation, a large number of members of the esteemed fourth estate decided that what America needed wasn’t less fake news, but a different kind of fake news. The kind of fake news that confirms their own biases and calls into question the credibility of those they oppose.

Take, for example, this salacious detail Politico reported about Wall Street banker Steven Mnuchin, President Donald Trump’s nominee for Treasury secretary. According to the Politico report, which was quickly gobbled up and redistributed by every major media outlet on earth, Mnuchin foreclosed on the home of a 90-year-old widow over a 27-cent debt.

Pretty horrifying, right? It would be, if any of it were actually true. According to Ted Frank, a seasoned litigator who runs the Center for Class Action Fairness, the whole thing is bogus. Not only did Mnuchin’s company not have anything to do with the litigation against the woman, her home was never foreclosed on, either. The suit that was filed against her was based on faulty paperwork by the mortgage servicer and quickly dismissed, at which point the bank that was involved put an offer on the table to pay her for her troubles.

In short, the news was completely fake, but that didn’t stop CNN, MSNBC, CBS, Vanity Fair, New York Magazine, Huffington Post, and many others from spreading the fake news as far as the eye could see. If you search Google for “mnuchin 27 cents,” the search giant currently returns over 95,000 results.

Don’t worry, though: there’s more. Author Richard Hine tweeted that Trump “literally blew a kiss” to FBI Director James Comey during a White House meeting on Sunday. He didn’t. As of Monday morning, Hine’s claim had been retweeted 8,000 times. That wonderful bit of fabrication was instantly spread by ThinkProgress editor Judd Legum, Newsweek writer Kurt Eichenwald, BuzzFeed editor Hayes Brown, Washington Post columnist Gene Weingarten, New Yorker writer Ben Taub, Vox writer Matthew Yglesias, and Slate editor Mark Joseph Stern, among others.

Not wanting to be left out, TPM publisher Josh Marshall then declared that Trump had given Comey, who many Democrats say unfairly intervened in the election by announcing that the FBI was conducting a criminal investigation of Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, a “hug.” The intended implications were clear.

Like so many others who got caught feeding fake news to the masses, Marshall was forced to correct his initial report (perhaps he shouldn’t have outsourced his fact-checking operation to Angela and Strawberry).

“The text above was based on the White House pool report,” he wrote. “However, now having watched the video myself, ‘hug’ seems overstated.” The esteemed pool report, you’ll recall, was also the source of the MLK bust nonsense. The error didn’t prevent Marshall from leaving up his false tweet, though. That fake news isn’t going to spread itself, after all.

This country needs a free press that is capable of establishing trust and credibility regardless of who or what it’s covering. So instead of continuing to give tens of millions of people an excuse to believe we’re all a bunch of hysterical Chicken Littles who are completely full of crap (and doing that every. single. day.), let’s give them a reason to believe we’re capable of getting the most simple of facts consistently right.

That’s not possible as long as you’re gorging on fake news. So stop it already.

Mnunchin foreclosed on a shit ton of guys who voted for the populist but make up one fake story about a 90 year old to take up airspace and let the dumbasses dwell on it while the forclosers greed is not seen. It's a playbook that's getting easy to scout.

It's pathetic goose. "Keep your eye on the speck of fake news over here and forget about this piece of shit and all he's done elsewhere. Poor poor Mnuchin, being picked on by one fake news story.

You guys are suckers. You deserve this cabinet.

"But one subject that’s bound to come up is particularly likely to resonate with everyday Americans: How many people lost their homes unfairly due to Mnuchin’s actions when he was CEO of a bank known as a “Foreclosure Machine”?

In late 2008, while the global economy was collapsing, Mnuchin and some partners purchased the failing bank IndyMac and turned it into OneWest, which grew into the largest bank in Southern California. OneWest developed a reputation as a “Foreclosure Machine,” and Mnuchin himself has been dubbed the “Foreclosure King.”

Earlier this month, a 2013 memo from the California attorney general’s office was leaked indicating that OneWest allegedly engaged in “widespread misconduct” to boost foreclosures, including the backdating of mortgage documents. In light of the memo, the nonprofit watchdog Campaign for Accountability called on the Department of Justice to investigate OneWest for “using potentially illegal tactics to foreclose on as many as 80,000 California homes.”


Ignore this shit, he was picked on by the media about one 90 year old lady. It's a lie, so it doesn't make him a scum bag. Dumb asses that voted for the populist list their homes. Hahahaha

And I ask you again. If someone doesn't pay their mortgage then what? Should the bank simply allow them to live there for free?
So no foreclosures? If that were the case the banks would need to charge borrowers that DID pay their mortgages more to make up the losses from the freeloaders.


So I ask again as I did a day or two ago. If not foreclosures then what?

DWags wrote:Mnunchin foreclosed on a shit ton of guys who voted for the populist but make up one fake story about a 90 year old to take up airspace and let the dumbasses dwell on it while the forclosers greed is not seen. It's a playbook that's getting easy to scout.

It's pathetic goose. "Keep your eye on the speck of fake news over here and forget about this piece of shit and all he's done elsewhere. Poor poor Mnuchin, being picked on by one fake news story.

You guys are suckers. You deserve this cabinet.

"But one subject that’s bound to come up is particularly likely to resonate with everyday Americans: How many people lost their homes unfairly due to Mnuchin’s actions when he was CEO of a bank known as a “Foreclosure Machine”?

In late 2008, while the global economy was collapsing, Mnuchin and some partners purchased the failing bank IndyMac and turned it into OneWest, which grew into the largest bank in Southern California. OneWest developed a reputation as a “Foreclosure Machine,” and Mnuchin himself has been dubbed the “Foreclosure King.”

Earlier this month, a 2013 memo from the California attorney general’s office was leaked indicating that OneWest allegedly engaged in “widespread misconduct” to boost foreclosures, including the backdating of mortgage documents. In light of the memo, the nonprofit watchdog Campaign for Accountability called on the Department of Justice to investigate OneWest for “using potentially illegal tactics to foreclose on as many as 80,000 California homes.”


Ignore this shit, he was picked on by the media about one 90 year old lady. It's a lie, so it doesn't make him a scum bag. Dumb asses that voted for the populist list their homes. Hahahaha

And NEVER once in that screed did you condemn the completely made up story the media put out and REFUSED to retract even when proven to be a lie. So as long as it agrees with your worldview you support fake news?

DWags wrote:Earlier this month, a 2013 memo from the California attorney general’s office was leaked indicating that OneWest allegedly engaged in “widespread misconduct” to boost foreclosures, including the backdating of mortgage documents. In light of the memo, the nonprofit watchdog Campaign for Accountability called on the Department of Justice to investigate OneWest for “using potentially illegal tactics to foreclose on as many as 80,000 California homes.”

So a "call for an investigation" is now a conviction? And I'm the sucker?? Good lord.

LooseGoose wrote:

DWags wrote:Mnunchin foreclosed on a shit ton of guys who voted for the populist but make up one fake story about a 90 year old to take up airspace and let the dumbasses dwell on it while the forclosers greed is not seen. It's a playbook that's getting easy to scout.

It's pathetic goose. "Keep your eye on the speck of fake news over here and forget about this piece of shit and all he's done elsewhere. Poor poor Mnuchin, being picked on by one fake news story.

You guys are suckers. You deserve this cabinet.

"But one subject that’s bound to come up is particularly likely to resonate with everyday Americans: How many people lost their homes unfairly due to Mnuchin’s actions when he was CEO of a bank known as a “Foreclosure Machine”?

In late 2008, while the global economy was collapsing, Mnuchin and some partners purchased the failing bank IndyMac and turned it into OneWest, which grew into the largest bank in Southern California. OneWest developed a reputation as a “Foreclosure Machine,” and Mnuchin himself has been dubbed the “Foreclosure King.”

Earlier this month, a 2013 memo from the California attorney general’s office was leaked indicating that OneWest allegedly engaged in “widespread misconduct” to boost foreclosures, including the backdating of mortgage documents. In light of the memo, the nonprofit watchdog Campaign for Accountability called on the Department of Justice to investigate OneWest for “using potentially illegal tactics to foreclose on as many as 80,000 California homes.”


Ignore this shit, he was picked on by the media about one 90 year old lady. It's a lie, so it doesn't make him a scum bag. Dumb asses that voted for the populist list their homes. Hahahaha

And NEVER once in that screed did you condemn the completely made up story the media put out and REFUSED to retract even when proven to be a lie. So as long as it agrees with your worldview you support fake news?

I condem it.

Jesus. What's the larger story? He's a scumbag but I'll be damned poor guy who was the king of dirty tricks has some mean story written about him.

Carry out the playbook. Bitch about the fake story don't look at what this evil motherfucjer has done to thousands. It has to get tiring.

And the whole "mortgage crisis" was about 60% a bunch of bullshit. Stupid people wanting to get bailed out of stupider decisions. I remember reading one whine ass story in the WashPo where these poor souls had been paying on their mortgage for 20 years and now owed more than when they started. Why? Well once the facts were in the dunderheads had started with a $60,000 mortgage and then borrowed over $200,000 in home equity loans. Well no fucking shit you're going to fall behind.

Buy your house. Live within your means. Pay your payments. Own your house. No fucking crisis. It's simple.

If you borrow and spend like a drunken prince while lording it over others with all the shit you did with that $$ I have ZERO fucking sympathy when you lose the home. You're a dumb ass.

LooseGoose wrote:And the whole "mortgage crisis" was about 60% a bunch of bullshit. Stupid people wanting to get bailed out of stupider decisions. I remember reading one whine ass story in the WashPo where these poor souls had been paying on their mortgage for 20 years and now owed more than when they started. Why? Well once the facts were in the dunderheads had started with a $60,000 mortgage and then borrowed over $200,000 in home equity loans. Well no fucking shit you're going to fall behind.

Buy your house. Live within your means. Pay your payments. Own your house. No fucking crisis. It's simple.

If you borrow and spend like a drunken prince while lording it over others with all the shit you did with that $$ I have ZERO fucking sympathy when you lose the home. You're a dumb ass.

All good. Should the lender play by honest rules too?

Or do they get a pass?

Earlier this month, a 2013 memo from the California attorney general’s office was leaked indicating that OneWest allegedly engaged in “widespread misconduct” to boost foreclosures, including the backdating of mortgage documents. In light of the memo, the nonprofit watchdog Campaign for Accountability called on the Department of Justice to investigate OneWest for “using potentially illegal tactics to foreclose on as many as 80,000 California homes.”

I always thought it was in the banks best interest to work with a homeowner instead of foreclosing and getting nothing and then having maintenance costs, etc.

CheesySpartan wrote:I always thought it was in the banks best interest to work with a homeowner instead of foreclosing and getting nothing and then having maintenance costs, etc.

I agree and most banks do try this 1st. But there comes a time.