Anatomy of Fake News

#1
volinbham

volinbham

VN GURU
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
70,181
Likes
63,717
#1
So this item has been floating around the web since yesterday

HUD suspends FHA mortgage insurance rate cut an hour after Trump takes office - LA Times

Sounds horrible! How could he make his first act something that raises homeownership costs for working Americans! I'm outraged! I told you so!.

However, HUD was intentionally vague and reporters didn't even bother to investigate.

Turns out this was part of the larger freeze on ALL new regulations that have been not yet been implemented. They are under 60 day review. Further, Pres Obama did the EXACT SAME THING in 2009.

Simple investigation would add this context but instead it's a "see! we told you so" scoop.

Left websites are already labeling this a "tax hike" on the middle class because they believe not lowering the interest rate on mortgage insurance is the same thing as a tax and it sounds worse to say Trump raised taxes immediately upon entering the WH.

On a side note, I'd find out who at HUD put this out and have a serious talk with them. Clearly they wanted to portray this as targeting of this specific regulation.

Example 2: Rick Perry and the DoE

New York Times' Perry report another example of lapsed journalistic ethics | TheHill

The article explains it well although it does leave out easily accessed comments from Perry a couple years ago where he lays out specifically the nuclear arsenal portion of DoE's mandate.

Is it any wonder people are skeptical of the media?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9 people
#3
#3
volinbham said:
So this item has been floating around the web since yesterday

HUD suspends FHA mortgage insurance rate cut an hour after Trump takes office - LA Times

Sounds horrible! How could he make his first act something that raises homeownership costs for working Americans! I'm outraged! I told you so!.

However, HUD was intentionally vague and reporters didn't even bother to investigate.

Turns out this was part of the larger freeze on ALL new regulations that have been not yet been implemented. They are under 60 day review. Further, Pres Obama did the EXACT SAME THING in 2009.

Simple investigation would add this context but instead it's a "see! we told you so" scoop.

Left websites are already labeling this a "tax hike" on the middle class because they believe not lowering the interest rate on mortgage insurance is the same thing as a tax and it sounds worse to say Trump raised taxes immediately upon entering the WH.

On a side note, I'd find out who at HUD put this out and have a serious talk with them. Clearly they wanted to portray this as targeting of this specific regulation.

Example 2: Rick Perry and the DoE

New York Times' Perry report another example of lapsed journalistic ethics | TheHill

The article explains it well although it does leave out easily accessed comments from Perry a couple years ago where he lays out specifically the nuclear arsenal portion of DoE's mandate.

Is it any wonder people are skeptical of the media?
Click to expand...

They knew exactly what they were doing. This is what passes for reporting nowadays. Any reporter caught trying to do his job is demoted, transferred or fired.
 
#4
#4
Honestly this is the part of the story that should get the most attention - remember 2007-8?

FHA-backed loans have seen robust growth in recent years and lenders not chartered as banks now control a majority of the riskier FHA market. The shift toward nonbank lenders also has drawn concerns because banks have strict reserve requirements while the crop of new lenders operates under a variety of business models.
Click to expand...
 
#6
#6
volinbham said:
Honestly this is the part of the story that should get the most attention - remember 2007-8?
Click to expand...



No, they don't remember because most have no clue what really was behind the 2007-2008 leadup to the subprime loan real estate bubble bursting. Many don't understand what "sub-prime" mortgages are, how they were gathered into packages and offered in the money markets as "securities" (mortgage backed securities) with different levels of risk. One would think these securities offered reasonable "security" from investor loss as hey, most everyone makes their mortgage payment, right?

But no, predatory lending practices made available to the huge institutions by:

BOTH DEMOCRAT & REPUBLICAN legislation

and also protected from loan sharking prosecution, allowed the mortgage companies to issue home loans to applicants who in previous times would not, and should not, qualify for the size of mortgage (or even any mortgage) because they did not have the ability to pay. Even NINJA home loans, "No Income No Job Approved", no banker of previous years in his right mind would ever approve were offered. Why? Because they would KNOW the applicant's probability of default and bankruptcy because of the size of the loan was too high, but they could bundle and sell the loans to investors. That defines sub-prime loans.

But loan sharking NINJA mortgage companies rolling these sub-primes into huge "securities" and selling them to hedge fund investors, ad nauseum, didn't care.

And we all went through the market crash and Great Recession as a result.

I know, this is getting to be a TL-DR type post. Maybe volinbham can pick up from here about loan institutions forcing mortgage insurance they specify on clients. How the proposed, but not yet operational tiny reduction in federal FHA loan only mortgage insurance monthly payments (totaling about $500 per year per loan that Trump cancelled) would, once again, be another little thing enticing too many of those unable to maintain a mortgage and thus LOSING EVERYTHING IN BANKRUPTCY.

Bush, Obama, ... I don't know who else did this; however they all stopped the going forward of previous administration's enforcement of enacted policies "in the pipeline or close but not yet publicly published as law in the Cogressional Record". This is done to prevent last minute end runs and make sure all new enactments meet with the newly elected president's policies for approval.

Trump did excatly what his predecessors did.
Exactly. And for Chuck Shumer and the democratic leadership to do what they've done is pure BS political backstabbing rising out of the gutters of hell.
 
#7
#7
volinbham said:
Honestly this is the part of the story that should get the most attention - remember 2007-8?
Click to expand...




No, they don't remember because most have no clue what really was behind the 2007-2008 leadup to the subprime loan real estate bubble bursting. Many don't understand what "sub-prime" mortgages are, how they were gathered into packages and offered in the money markets as "securities" (mortgage backed securities) with different levels of risk. One would think these securities offered reasonable "security" from investor loss as hey, most everyone makes their mortgage payment, right?

But no, predatory lending practices made available to the huge institutions by:

BOTH DEMOCRAT & REPUBLICAN legislation

and also protected from loan sharking prosecution, allowed the mortgage companies to issue home loans to applicants who in previous times would not, and should not, qualify for the size of mortgage (or even any mortgage) because they did not have the ability to pay. Even NINJA home loans, "No Income No Job Approved", no banker of previous years in his right mind would ever approve were offered. Why? Because they would KNOW the applicant's probability of default and bankruptcy because of the size of the loan was too high, but they could bundle and sell the loans to investors. That defines sub-prime loans.

But loan sharking NINJA mortgage companies rolling these sub-primes into huge "securities" and selling them to hedge fund investors, ad nauseum, didn't care.

And we all went through the market crash and Great Recession as a result.

I know, this is getting to be a TL-DR type post. Maybe volinbham can pick up from here about loan institutions forcing mortgage insurance they specify on clients. How the proposed, but not yet operational tiny reduction in federal FHA loan only mortgage insurance monthly payments (totaling about $500 per year per loan that Trump cancelled) would, once again, be another little thing enticing too many of those unable to maintain a mortgage and thus LOSING EVERYTHING IN BANKRUPTCY.

Bush, Obama, ... I don't know who else did this; however they all stopped the going forward of previous administration's enforcement of enacted policies "in the pipeline or close but not yet publicly published as law in the Cogressional Record". This is done to prevent last minute end runs and make sure all new enactments meet with the newly elected president's policies for approval.

Trump did excatly what his predecessors did.
Exactly. And for Chuck Shumer and the democratic leadership to do what they've done is pure BS political backstabbing rising out of the gutters of hell.
 
#9
#9
volinbham said:
So this item has been floating around the web since yesterday

HUD suspends FHA mortgage insurance rate cut an hour after Trump takes office - LA Times

Sounds horrible! How could he make his first act something that raises homeownership costs for working Americans! I'm outraged! I told you so!.

However, HUD was intentionally vague and reporters didn't even bother to investigate.

Turns out this was part of the larger freeze on ALL new regulations that have been not yet been implemented. They are under 60 day review. Further, Pres Obama did the EXACT SAME THING in 2009.

Simple investigation would add this context but instead it's a "see! we told you so" scoop.

Left websites are already labeling this a "tax hike" on the middle class because they believe not lowering the interest rate on mortgage insurance is the same thing as a tax and it sounds worse to say Trump raised taxes immediately upon entering the WH.

On a side note, I'd find out who at HUD put this out and have a serious talk with them. Clearly they wanted to portray this as targeting of this specific regulation.

Example 2: Rick Perry and the DoE

New York Times' Perry report another example of lapsed journalistic ethics | TheHill

The article explains it well although it does leave out easily accessed comments from Perry a couple years ago where he lays out specifically the nuclear arsenal portion of DoE's mandate.

Is it any wonder people are skeptical of the media?
Click to expand...

The media has been committing "lies by omission" since the '60's.
 
#12
#12
volinbham said:
So this item has been floating around the web since yesterday

HUD suspends FHA mortgage insurance rate cut an hour after Trump takes office - LA Times

Sounds horrible! How could he make his first act something that raises homeownership costs for working Americans! I'm outraged! I told you so!.

However, HUD was intentionally vague and reporters didn't even bother to investigate.

Turns out this was part of the larger freeze on ALL new regulations that have been not yet been implemented. They are under 60 day review. Further, Pres Obama did the EXACT SAME THING in 2009.

Simple investigation would add this context but instead it's a "see! we told you so" scoop.

Left websites are already labeling this a "tax hike" on the middle class because they believe not lowering the interest rate on mortgage insurance is the same thing as a tax and it sounds worse to say Trump raised taxes immediately upon entering the WH.

On a side note, I'd find out who at HUD put this out and have a serious talk with them. Clearly they wanted to portray this as targeting of this specific regulation.

Example 2: Rick Perry and the DoE

New York Times' Perry report another example of lapsed journalistic ethics | TheHill

The article explains it well although it does leave out easily accessed comments from Perry a couple years ago where he lays out specifically the nuclear arsenal portion of DoE's mandate.

Is it any wonder people are skeptical of the media?
Click to expand...

Fake news!
 
#17
#17
After listening to an NPR program trying to turn Trump's inflation of the number of people attending his inauguration into some sort investigation worthy moment, I'm inclined to agree with VBH on this one. The MSM is going to have to up its game if it's going to start an info war.
 
#18
#18
CNN front page main article on Trump's immigration order with the large headline- TRUMP: "WE DON"T WANT THEM HERE."

Then buried in the article is the actual context of the statement:

Trump on Friday said that his actions would "keep radical Islamic terrorists out of the United States of America."
"We don't want them here," Trump said as he signed the order. "We want to ensure that we are not admitting into our country the very threats our soldiers are fighting overseas. We only want to admit those into our country who will support our country and love deeply our people."
Click to expand...
Trump's immigration ban sends shockwaves - CNNPolitics.com

I disagree with the broadness of Trump's EO, but this is headline is intended to mislead.

Only adds to my belief the MSM is just deceitful as the govt.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top