It’s Special Election Day in the West Los Angeles district of CA-36, replacing retired Representative Jane Harman. Angelenos have a chance to vote for a true progressive, Blue America-endorsed Debra Bowen . Tuesday’s special election in California’s 36th District is a prequel to what will likely be the main event on July 12. If no candidate gets a majority of votes cast – highly unlikely in the crowded 16 person field – the top two vote-getters will advance to a runoff in the first test of the state’s new “jungle primary” system . The Frontrunners: Los Angeles City Councilwoman Janice Hahn jumped into the race almost immediately after now-former Rep. Jane Harman announced in February she’d step down to head the Woodrow Wilson Center. Hahn and Harman are close, and while Hahn doesn’t have the former congresswoman’s official endorsement, Harman did provide her with a heads-up she was leaving. Hahn comes from a well-known political family – her brother, James, served as the city’s mayor from 2001 until 2005, and her father, Kenneth, was a county supervisor for forty years. California Secretary of State Debra Bowen took a bit longer to officially decide, but since her entrance, the two women have been at the top of a very crowded pack in the all-party primary. Hahn quickly rolled out endorsement after endorsement of other Members of the state’s Congressional delegation, Sen. Dianne Feinstein , and even former House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt . She’s also garnered most of the labor endorsements in the race. Bowen has worked to paint herself as the more progressive candidate in the race, particularly on environmental issues, and has been endorsed by Democracy for America, former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean , and the Sierra Club. Hahn is another BlueDog-cum-DINO, like Harman. Do we really need another one of those in the House? Debra Bowen (here’s her Blue America page and the live chat she did with us in March ) has been fantastic advocating for fair and transparent elections as Secretary of State and it would be incredible to get a clear and unapologetic liberal in office. This is our first “jungle primary” (I really hate that term), so it’s critical that Bowen gets the turnout she needs to be in the final runoff election in July. Please, if you are in the 36th District, do not forget to vote and support our candidate, Debra Bowen.
Continue reading …A rift between big business and the Tea Party movement is growing as the very real prospect of America defaulting on its debt looms, the Christian Science Monitor finds. The federal government hit the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling yesterday, and while Tea Party-backed lawmakers are sticking to their guns…
Continue reading …O’Reilly vs. Stewart Over Common Controversy, Part 1 Stewart vs. O’Reilly on Rapper Common Part 2: Jon Stewart Goes Head-to-Head With Bill O’Reilly The Clicker – Sneak peek: Jon Stewart vs. Bill O'Reilly “The Daily Show” host Jon Stewart is chatting with the “O’Reilly Factor” host tonight at 8 p.m. on Fox News. The cable news channel has posted a sneak peek of the debate, which has been split to air over two nights. Jon Stewart debated Bill O'Reilly about Common: Behold, the … Jon Stewart took Bill O’Reilly up on his challenge to debate the invitation of Common to a White House poetry reading last week. If you haven’t heard much about this controversy, don’t worry: The two people in America it seems to most … We're Live Blogging: Bill O'Reilly Faces Off Against Jon Stewart Rap & Hip-Hop Music News, Videos, Lifestyle & Interviews – RapFix.MTV.com. Bill O'Reilly , Jon Stewart: An Un-Common Debate* – TVNewser Bill O’Reilly ‘s interview with Jon Stewart, which will air tonight, was actually pre-taped late in the day Friday. TVNewser has learned two segments will air tonight on “The O’Reilly Factor” and two more will air tomorrow night. … Video: Jon Stewart & Bill O'Reilly Debate Common's Appearance At … Jon Stewart and Bill O’Reilly debate Common’s appearance at the White House last week. OpenBookJen says: RT @ArrghPaine : RT @jazzcattrio Jon Stewart To Bill O'Reilly: 'There Is A Selective Outrage Machine Here At Fox' http://mediaite.com/a/ussal #p2 #tcot
Continue reading …[1] Fox has finally released photos, a long-form plot synopsis and a trailer for the upcoming JJ Abrams-produced Elizabeth Sarnoff-written (Lost, Deadwood) television series Alcatraz. The “chilling new thriller centers on America’s most infamous prison and one-time home to the nation’s most notorious murderers, rapists, kidnappers and thieves.” Find out what the show is about, see some photos, and… Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : /Film Discovery Date : 17/05/2011 00:30 Number of articles : 4
Continue reading …WASHINGTON — A set of confidential federal audits accuse the nation’s five largest mortgage companies of defrauding taxpayers in their handling of foreclosures on homes purchased with government-backed loans, four officials briefed on the findings told The Huffington Post. The five separate investigations were conducted by the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s inspector general and examined Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citigroup and Ally Financial, the sources said. The audits accuse the five major lenders of violating the False Claims Act, a Civil War-era law crafted as a weapon against firms that swindle the government. The audits were completed between February and March, the sources said. The internal watchdog office at HUD referred its findings to the Department of Justice, which must now decide whether to file charges. The federal audits mark the latest fallout from the national foreclosure crisis that followed the end of a long-running housing bubble. Amid reports last year that many large lenders improperly accelerated foreclosure proceedings by failing to amass required paperwork, the federal agencies launched their own probes. The resulting reports read like veritable indictments of major lenders, the sources said. State officials are now wielding the documents as leverage in their ongoing talks with mortgage companies aimed at forcing the firms to agree to pay fines to resolve allegations of routine violations in their handling of foreclosures. The audits conclude that the banks effectively cheated taxpayers by presenting the Federal Housing Administration with false claims: They filed for federal reimbursement on foreclosed homes that sold for less than the outstanding loan balance using defective and faulty documents. Two of the firms, including Bank of America, refused to cooperate with the investigations, according to the sources. The audit on Bank of America finds that the company — the nation’s largest handler of home loans — failed to correct faulty foreclosure practices even after imposing a moratorium that lifted last October. Back then, the bank said it was resuming foreclosures, having satisfied itself that prior problems had been solved. According to the sources, the Wells Fargo investigation concludes that senior managers at the firm, the fourth-largest American bank by assets, broke civil laws. HUD’s inspector general interviewed a pair of South Carolina public notaries who improperly signed off on foreclosure filings for Wells, the sources said. The investigations dovetail with separate probes by state and federal agencies, who also have examined foreclosure filings and flawed mortgage practices amid widespread reports that major mortgage firms improperly initiated foreclosure proceedings on an unknown number of American homeowners. The FHA, whose defaulted loans the inspector general probed, last May began scrutinizing whether mortgage firms properly treated troubled borrowers who fell behind on payments or whose homes were seized on loans insured by the agency. A unit of the Justice Department is examining faulty court filings in bankruptcy proceedings. Several states, including Illinois, are combing through foreclosure filings to gauge the extent of so-called “robo-signing” and other defective practices, including illegal home repossessions. Representatives of HUD and its inspector general declined to comment. The internal audits have armed state officials with a powerful new weapon as they seek to extract what they describe as punitive fines from lawbreaking mortgage companies. A coalition of attorneys general from all 50 states and state bank supervisors have joined HUD, the Treasury Department, the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission in talks with the five largest mortgage servicers to settle allegations of illegal foreclosures and other shoddy practices. Such processes “have potentially infected millions of foreclosures,” Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Chairman Sheila Bair told a Senate panel on Thursday. The five giant mortgage servicers, which collectively handle about three of every five home loans, offered during a contentious round of negotiations last Tuesday to pay $5 billion to set up a fund to help distressed borrowers and settle the allegations. That offer — also floated by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency in February — was deemed much too low by state and federal officials. Associate U.S. Attorney General Tom Perrelli, who has been leading the talks, last week threatened to show the banks the confidential audits so the firms knew the government side was not “playing around,” one official involved in the negotiations said. He ultimately did not follow through, persuaded that the reports ought to remain confidential, sources said. Through a spokeswoman, Perrelli declined to comment. Most of the targeted banks have not seen the audits, a federal official said, though they are generally aware of the findings. Some agencies involved in the talks are calling for the five banks to shell out as much as $30 billion, with even more costs to be incurred for improving their internal operations and modifying troubled borrowers’ home loans. But even that number would fall short of legitimate compensation for the bank’s harmful practices, reckons the nascent federal Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection. By taking shortcuts in processing troubled borrowers’ home loans, the nation’s five largest mortgage firms have directly saved themselves more than $20 billion since the housing crisis began in 2007, according to a confidential presentation prepared for state attorneys general by the agency and obtained by The Huffington Post in March. Those pushing for a larger package of fines argue that the foreclosure crisis has spawned broader — and more costly — social ills, from the dislocation of American families to the continued plunge in home prices, effectively wiping out household savings. The Justice Department is now contemplating whether to use the HUD audits as a basis for civil and criminal enforcement actions, the sources said. The False Claims Act allows the government to recover damages worth three times the actual harm plus additional penalties. Justice officials will soon meet with the largest servicers and walk them through the allegations and potential liability each of them face, the sources said. Earlier this month, Justice cited findings from HUD investigations in a lawsuit it filed against Deutsche Bank AG, one of the world’s 10 biggest banks by assets, for at least $1 billion for defrauding taxpayers by “repeatedly” lying to FHA in securing taxpayer-backed insurance for thousands of shoddy mortgages. In March, HUD’s inspector general found that more than 49 percent of loans underwritten by FHA-approved lenders in a sample did not conform to the agency’s requirements. Last October, HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan said his investigators found that numerous mortgage firms broke the agency’s rules when dealing with delinquent borrowers. He declined to be specific. The agency’s review later expanded to flawed foreclosure practices. FHA, a unit of HUD, could still take administrative action against those firms for breaking FHA rules based on its own probe. The confidential findings appear to bolster state and federal officials in their talks with the targeted banks. The knowledge that they may face False Claims Act suits, in addition to state actions based on a multitude of claims like fraud on local courts and consumer violations, will likely compel the banks to offer the government more money to resolve everything. But even that may not be enough. Attorneys general in numerous states, armed with what they portray as incontrovertible evidence of mass robo-signings from preliminary investigations, are probing mortgage practices more closely. The state of Illinois has begun examining potentially-fraudulent court filings, looking at the role played by a unit of Lender Processing Services. Nevada and Arizona already launched lawsuits against Bank of America. California is keen on launching its own suits, people familiar with the matter say. Delaware sent Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Inc., which runs an electronic registry of mortgages, a subpoena demanding answers to 75 questions. And New York’s top law enforcer, Eric Schneiderman, wants to conduct a complete investigation into all facets of mortgage banking, from fraudulent lending to defective securitization practices to faulty foreclosure documents and illegal home seizures. A review of about 2,800 loans that experienced foreclosure last year serviced by the nation’s 14 largest mortgage firms found that at least two of them illegally foreclosed on the homes of “almost 50″ active-duty military service members, a violation of federal law, according to a report this month from the Government Accountability Office. Those violations are likely only a small fraction of the number committed by home loan companies, experts say, citing the small sample examined by regulators. In an April report on flawed mortgage servicing practices, federal bank supervisors said they “could not provide a reliable estimate of the number of foreclosures that should not have proceeded.” The review of just 2,800 home loans in foreclosure compares with nearly 2.9 million homes that received a foreclosure filing last year, according to RealtyTrac, a California-based data provider. “The extent of the loss cannot be determined until there is a comprehensive review of the loan files and documentation of the process dealing with problem loans,” Bair said last week, warning of damages that could take “years to materialize.” Home prices have fallen over the past year, reversing gains made early in the economic recovery, according to data providers Zillow.com and CoreLogic. Sales of new homes remain depressed, according to the Commerce Department. More than a quarter of homeowners with a mortgage owe more on that debt than their home is worth, according to Zillow.com. And more than 2 million homes are in foreclosure, according to Lender Processing Services. Rather than punishing banks for misdeeds, the administration is now focused on helping troubled borrowers in the hope that it will stanch the flood of foreclosures and increase consumer confidence, officials involved in the negotiations said. Levying penalties can’t accomplish that goal, an official involved in the foreclosure probe talks argued last week. For their part, however, state officials want to levy fines, according to a confidential term sheet reviewed last week by HuffPost. Each state would then use the money as it desires, be it for facilitating short sales, reducing mortgage principal, or using the funds to help defaulted borrowers move from their homes into rentals. In a report last week, analysts at Moody’s Investors Service predicted that while the losses incurred by the banks will be “sizable,” the credit rating agency does “not expect them to meaningfully impact capital.” ************************* Shahien Nasiripour is a senior business reporter for The Huffington Post. You can send him an e-mail; bookmark his page; subscribe to his RSS feed; follow him on Twitter; friend him on Facebook; become a fan; and/or get e-mail alerts when he reports the latest news. He can be reached at 917-267-2335.
Continue reading …The federal government reached its debt limit Monday, and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner again detailed the disastrous and widespread consequences of Congressional inaction. Skeptics continue to suggest that a failure to raise the debt ceiling would not significantly harm the economy, but Geithner argued the exact opposite, insisting that a default on the federal debt would deal a blow to the global economy, as a crucial pillar would be compromised. The federal government would be forced to freeze spending, including its payments to investors, businesses, citizens and the military, shocking the U.S. economy and potentially plunging it into a fresh recession, Geithner wrote in a Friday letter to Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.). From the letter: A default on Treasury debt could lead to concerns about the solvency of the investment funds and financial institutions that hold Treasury securities in their portfolios, which could cause a run on money market mutual funds and the broader financial system — similar to what happened in the wake of the collapse of Lehman Brothers. As the recent financial crisis demonstrated, a severe and sudden blow to confidence in the financial markets can spark a panic that threatens the health of our entire global economy and the jobs of millions of Americans. Abruptly freezing federal outlays, Geithner added, “would likely push us into a double dip recession.” The letter was the latest warning from a top economic official that delaying an increase of the debt ceiling could wound the economy for years to come. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, Council of Economic Advisors Chairman Austan Goolsbee and a host of independent economists have repeatedly stressed the importance of raising this limit, which currently prevents the government from carrying out the commitments that Congress has already made. Now that the government has reached its debt limit, the Treasury is set to engage various temporary measures to tread water until August 2. At that point, it will have to default on some of its loans, Geithner wrote in a recent letter to Congress. These “extraordinary measures,” aimed at staving off default, began earlier this month, when the Treasury stopped issuing special securities that help state and local governments manage their debt. The next round of these measures — in which the government liquidates certain investments of a pension fund and blocks other funds from new investment — is set to commence Monday. But lawmakers have downplayed the urgency of this issue. “When you say the drop-dead day is going to be August, I question that,” Rep. Tom Rooney (R-Fla.) said, according to the Wall Street Journal last week. Republican leaders in Congress have used the debt ceiling debate as a way to try to enforce fiscal austerity, saying they will not vote to raise it unless the legislation comes with measures aimed at reducing the deficit. Economists have criticized lawmakers for injecting party politics into the debate, and for essentially threatening to crash the economy in order to achieve this agenda. But this Republican view has traction. Stanley Druckenmiller, the billionaire money manager who runs Duquesne Capital, said a default by the U.S. government would not cause lasting economic damage. The bigger issue is the federal deficit, he told the Wall Street Journal. As an investor in U.S. debt, he’d accept a late debt payment if it meant the government also made an effort to trim spending, he said. “People aren’t going to wonder whether 20 years ago we delayed an interest payment for six days,” he said. “They’re going to wonder whether we got our house in order.” Others in the financial community have disagreed, however. “We are particularly concerned by the growing belief that hitting the August drop-dead date would be no big deal,” Bank of America chief economist Ethan Harris said in a note last week.
Continue reading …Once again the United States Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Roberts has shown the nation it will always favor corporations over people even if it means conjuring new law out of thin air. Like Citizens United, the recent 5-4 ruling in AT&T’s favor gutting the power of consumers to file class-action lawsuits against giant corporations tips the scales of justice against the people and renders the enormous power of corporations even more enormous. When I first heard about the case, AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion there was little doubt in my mind that the Gang of Five — John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, and Clarence Thomas would figure out a way to ignore Supreme Court precedent and again apply their judicial activism in service to the corporations, and by extension, to the oligarchy they apparently believe the “founders” intended. It’s kind of funny when we see Republican presidential candidates like Mitt Romeny, Tim Pawlenty, and Newt Gingrich pandering to the “little guy” denouncing “elites” who are trampling on their rights only to remain mute on the fact that their beloved Republican Supreme Court never, ever rules in favor of the “little guy.” The Republican president Ronald Reagan gave us Scalia and Kennedy; the Republican president George Herbert Walker Bush gave us Thomas; and the Republican president George W. Bush gave us Roberts and Alito. This cabal has shown over and over again where its true loyalties lie, not to “the law,” not to “the Constitution,” not to “calling balls and strikes,” but to a 21st century version of corporate feudalism. This new corporate feudalism that the High Court is determined to thrust on the nation is even more exploitative than the earlier brand of Medieval feudalism because it is absent noblesse oblige. The serfs toiling on the corporate plantation can only continue to pay Chase and Bank of America for their underwater mortgages, ExxonMobil and Chevron for their $4 a gallon gas, and AT&T, Comcast, T-Mobile and the rest for the privilege of communicating in a modern society. And if the serfs seek redress the High Court will slap them down before they can get anything substantial off the ground. With Citizens United placing a stranglehold of corporate power over our state, local, and federal system of elections, we cannot turn to our political “leaders” for redress, we can’t turn to the courts, and we certainly can’t turn to trying to morally persuade sociopathic non-human entities called corporations — so where does that leave us? In the current context of unrestrained corporate dominance it’s unconscionable that the Obama administration has not done more to blunt its disastrous effects. The Justice and Treasury Departments, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Internal Revenue Service, etc. could be doing a hell of a lot more in bringing balance to the equation of corporations versus people. The administration’s lagging performance in holding Wall Street accountable is well known, but it won’t even lift a finger to block grotesque mergers like the one between Comcast and NBC Universal, and AT&T and T Mobile. In all these mergers and acquisitions it’s always the consumers and the employees who lose, while the CEOs and a select few of shareholders and financiers make out like the bandits they are. Nothing illustrates the corruption rampant in Washington more than the recent resignation of Federal Communications Commission member, Meredith Attwell Baker, a Republican who Obama appointed to show how “bipartisan” he can be, who is now going to work as a lavishly paid shill for the very industry she was supposedly “regulating.” Ms. Baker will now make the big bucks serving Comcast/NBC Universal after she voted for the merger of Comcast and NBC Universal. Sweet. And few in the Beltway see anything unsavory about it. Our political leaders, our Supreme Court, our captains of industry and finance, are so out of touch it’s going to be a long, long time before ordinary working people see any relief. All of our institutions, political, economic, even religious, social, and cultural, all of them, are failing the people miserably in pursuit of the Almighty Buck. The cunning game of appointing young ideologues to the bench has paid off handsomely for the corporate power structure. Someone should tell those people running around in tri-cornered hats and talking about the “founders” that it might be wise to save an ounce of their collective wrath for the Republicans who have appointed five Justices who are trampling on individual freedoms in service of corporations.
Continue reading …When an admittedly liberal Nobel laureate in economics thinks trying to balance the budget is holding America hostage, one has to wonder if there are any adults remaining on the left side of the aisle. Consider what New York Times columnist Paul Krugman wrote Monday: Six months ago President Obama faced a hostage situation. Republicans threatened to block an extension of middle-class tax cuts unless Mr. Obama gave in and extended tax cuts for the rich too. And the president essentially folded, giving the G.O.P. everything it wanted. When an opinion piece begins with dishonesty, it's all downhill from there. The position Obama found himself in last December was all of his own doing. He and the Democrat Party that controlled the White House and both chambers of Congress had all year to propose and pass a budget. Instead, because it was an election year and they knew what they would offer the American people would not be well-received, they punted and waited literally until the last minute. Having been severely rebuked at the polls by a nation fed up with their profligate spending, Obama and the Democrats found themselves with little bargaining power as the clock approached midnight, and ended up accepting a far worse outcome than if they had performed their Constitutional duties in a more timely fashion. It is therefore dishonest of Krugman to call that a hostage situation for the Party he unashamedly supports put itself in that position by abdicating their responsibility as elected officials. With a groundwork of lies laid in the opening sentence, Krugman continued deceiving his readers: Now, predictably, the hostage-takers are back: blackmail worked well last December, so why not try it again? This time House Republicans say they will refuse to raise the debt ceiling — a step that could inflict major economic damage — unless Mr. Obama agrees to large spending cuts, even as they rule out any tax increase whatsoever. And the question becomes what, if anything, will get the president to say no. Once again, the fact that we're at this point is Obama and the Democrats' own doing. This debt ceiling issue could have been addressed months ago. However, the current White House resident loves working in crisis mode. Just ask his former Chief-of-Staff Rahm Emanuel who famously said you should never let a good crisis go to waste. Virtually everything proposed by this President wreaks of urgency and hostage taking. If we don't immediately pass a stimulus package, we're going into a depression. If we don't immediately bail out General Motors and Chrysler, we're going into a depression. If we don't immediately pass ObamaCare, we're going into a depression. This has been the modus operandi of this administration since before Obama was sworn in. Now these crisis-loving folks are trying to convince the American people that the world will come to an end if we don't immediately raise the debt ceiling, this despite the existence of numerous budgetary mechanisms that would keep much of the government running for several months if a solution isn't quickly arrived at. Not surprisingly, Krugman is willing to play his part in scaring the citizenry: Consumer spending would probably crash, as nervous seniors started wondering how to pay for rent and food. Businesses that depend on government purchases would slash payrolls and cancel investments. Furthermore, markets might well panic, especially if interest payments are missed. And the consequences of undermining faith in U.S. debt might be especially severe because that debt plays a crucial role in many financial transactions. Well, despite Monday being the deadline, stocks are currently trading near their post-recession highs and there hasn't been any mass-liquidation of U.S. treasury paper in the weeks leading up to today. I guess the end of the world has once again been delayed. But Krugman wasn't done: So hitting the debt ceiling would be a very bad thing. Unfortunately, it may be unavoidable. Why? Because this is a hostage situation. If the president and his allies operate on the principle that failure to raise the debt ceiling is an unthinkable outcome, to be avoided at all cost, then they have ceded all power to those willing to bring that outcome about. In effect, they will have ripped up the Constitution and given control over America's government to a party that only controls one house of Congress, but claims to be willing to bring down the economy unless it gets what it wants. But the president can't call the extortionists' bluff unless he's willing to confront them, and accept the associated risks. You got that? It's the end of the world as we know it if we don't raise the debt ceiling, but the President has to be willing to risk this – wait for it! – for the good of the nation. Keep in mind that all the Republicans are asking for – with the budget having ballooned by 41 percent in the past four years and Social Security and Medicare closer to bankruptcy than previously thought! – is some spending cuts to slow the rate of debt growth in the future. Is trying to balance the budget akin to sticking a gun to someone's head? Isn't it really the President and his Party that are holding America hostage by refusing to address the debt issue? This White House resident even ignored all the recommendations of his own bipartisan deficit commission. So who's holding whom hostage, and exactly why is it okay for the President to take the country into what Krugman thinks is the abyss, but it would be immoral for the Republicans to do it? As I've been saying for years, it takes a lot of rationalizations to be a liberal these days.
Continue reading …