Say Anything Blog

Last week the Subprime Senator paid a visit to the Grand Forks Herald’s editorial staff.  He was rewarded with two puff pieces in the Wednesday newspaper, one a “news” story on the front page and the other a editorial.  Both of these were egregious in a number of ways. 

I posted on the “news” story on Thursday. I meant to get to the editorial written by Tom Dennis for the editorial board sooner than this but the Fourth of July family commitments had me tied up.  So without further ado I’ll get into the editorial. 

I think what’s really funny is how this editorial while being as syrupy as it can get makes provisions just in case further information comes out.  It seems to me that if Conradwide had any credibility they wouldn’t feel the need to do this over and over.  That means to me that they think he’s guilty but nobody’s going to find a smoking gun.  Come to think of it, if the Herald believes that then they’d probably be right for once.

If that [more incriminating evidence emerging] happened, of course it would change our view. But we suspect it won’t happen, because Conrad’s reputation and past conduct as well as the current lineup of evidence all point to innocence rather than guilt.

Actually it’s unlikely because they’ll explain away any evidence that comes up.  It’s been reported in the media that there’s a memo from this Mozilo that told his subordinates to take a point off for the Subprime Senator.  If that’s not good enough then nothing will be. 

Conrad visited the Herald editorial board Tuesday and made his case. He got or refinanced loans from Countrywide four times beginning in 2002, he said. Three of those transactions took place entirely at market rates, Conrad claimed (and offered interest rate snapshots and other documents to support).

Those claims would ring false if evidence of sweetheart deals at below-market rates had surfaced. But as far as we know, no critic has found a meaningful disparity in the deals Conrad got and the rates that were available at the time.

As for the fourth loan, there is evidence that Angelo Mozilo, Countrywide’s CEO, told his subordinates to take one point off of Conrad’s closing-cost fees. Conrad says he wasn’t aware of this discount. When he learned of it a few weeks ago, he donated the amount — $10,500 — to charity.

What does it matter that only one loan was dirty?  Would a judge buy a shoplifters excuse that he paid for three CD’s and only had one under his shirt?  The other thing apparently the fact that Countrywide waived the rules in order to finance his apartment house in Bismarck has gone down the memory hole.

Maybe Mozilo shaved the point because Conrad is a senator. Or maybe not. Maybe he discounted points for many dozens or hundreds of people for any number of reasons. Mozilo’s motives for that action haven’t been fully established yet.

This is probably the worst statement in this whole editorial.  For what other reason would Mozilo cut Conrad a deal? We know that Conrad didn’t get a break because of his sparkling personality.  Kent Conrad’s an utterly unremarkable person except that he happens to be a fairly seniro US Senator. 

Apparently the Herald’s just going to play stupid on this point.  Unbelievable.

In recent weeks, the Herald, the North Dakota Republican Party and others have raised questions that Conrad answered more fully on Tuesday. For example:

n the early days of the Conrad/Countrywide affair, many reporters called, and Conrad spoke to most of them. But telling the same story so often to so many led to seeming, rather than actual, contradictions.

You know it’s always best to stick to the truth when you’re going to be asked to recount a story a number of times.  After all it’s easier to remember.

I don’t recall the Herald asking any hard questions.  In fact they didn’t do any original reporting that I can tell.  But that’s besides the point.  What is important is that the Herald never questioned these multiple stories and only address them in order to help with the cover-up.  Did Conrad say he never met the man and only later admit he had called him on the phone.  Did he then say that Mozilo only happened to be in his buddy Johnson’s office when he called him looking for advice.  (If that doesn’t light up the BS meter nothing will.) (Oh and when is the Herald going to question Conrad on his friendship with Fannie Mae scammer James Johnson.  (The guy that was too sleazy for Obama to keep on his VP vetting staff.)

The Subprime Senator has told other stories that show a pattern of lying.  He said that the house was his wife’s when the public record documents prove that it belongs to both of them.  He said that he wanted to disclose the fact that he owned a 1.4 million dollar beach home but the security people in the Senate wouldn’t let him.  That’s obviously false because he lists his Washington DC residence and his official residence (that he probably has never stayed in) in Bismarck on the forms.  Besides using public records Rob found it in a matter of minutes. 

Conrad’s now-clarified version of events has him talking to Mozilo only once on the phone, and then for only about a minute or less. (The conversation took place two years before the “point shaving,” by the way.)

What does two years have to do with anything?  The fact of the matter is Mozilo wanted to do a favor for a US Senator hoping to get a favor back when he needed it. 

“Why the extraordinary help in bailing out Countrywide?” as a Herald “Viewpoint” column asked last week.

Conrad claims he gave routine, not extraordinary, help to a bill bailing out the mortgage industry, not Countrywide specifically.

Once again the Herald is silent on the issue, only allowing it to be mentioned in a “viewpiont” article submitted by the head of the Republican party.  That way they can pretend that this is a partisan issue rather than one of a politician doing favors for a person who gave them a large, personal gift. 

The “routine” help that Conrad did for Countrywide was waiving the budget rules for a THREE HUNDRED BILLION DOLLAR MORTGAGE BAILOUT BILL.  Is there anything routine about that bill?  I’m sure that the Herald got example of other similar bills in scope that he performed this “routine” help. 

Comeon Tom there was nothing routine about this bill!

Yes it does help the morgage industry as a whole but so what.  Even if Countrywide wasn’t the biggest player in the market it would make sense for them to have a friendly US Senator on their side.  Is the Herald going to claim that this THREE HUNDRED BILLION DOLLAR MORTGAGE BAILOUT BILL doesn’t help Countrywide many times more than the $10,700 gift they gave Conrad?

That must have been some phone call in 2002 if it predicted the entire housing crisis and engineered Congress’ response, Conrad suggested.

This is the stupidest argument out there Kent.  Do you think that a huge business in a heavily regulated industry doesn’t want to have favors owed to them by a US Senator for whatever reason might come down the pipe?  I’m sure that if the subprime crisis wouldn’t have happened there still would have been mortgage laws being debated in the Senate and in committees that Kent Conrad sits on. 

I think Countrywide looked on is like having a lawyer on retainer.  It might be an expense today but it’ll pay off in the long run.

“How does the Senate’s self-proclaimed ‘numbers guy’ not know the most basic facts about his own mortgage?” last week’s Viewpoint also asked.

But remember, Conrad says that none of his four mortgages got interest-rate discounts, and only one saw the shaving of a single point. And points vary enough between lenders to make “missing” this discount a reasonable claim.

Once again the Herald ignores the fact that Countrywide waived the rules to finance his apartment complex in Bismarck.  (In other stories Conrad claimed this was routine.  Just like it was routine for him to waive the budget rules to help Countrywide out.)

I like how the Herald emphasizes that no interest rates were cut.  Tom, nobody ever claimed that he got a break on his interest rates.  What he did get was a $10,700 personal gift in the form of a point waived.

Apparently the Grand Forks Herald is ok with North Dakota’s US Senator getting that kind of deal and turning around and giving extraordinary help to give the mortgage industry a gift of taxpayers money amount to THREE HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS.

This editorial was written by Tom Dennis for the editorial board.  I suspect that the actual tone of the article was set by someone in Fargo and Tom (who I respect) was only writing it the way he was told to.