Recent Items

Jon Stewart Disses OCC and Independent Foreclosure Review

Posted on by

Jon Stewart piled on to the widespread criticism of the Independent Foreclosure Review fiasco. He gives a decent short form description of MERS and highlights the lack of independence of the consultants. My only quibble is he also describes the settlement amount as $9 billion, which is technically accurate but misleading (the cash portion was only $3.6 billion and as Senator Merkley pointed out, the non-cash portion could be satisfied with as little as $12 million in principal reductions). But overall, this segment was effective in keeping the hot lights on the IFR mess.

Print Friendly
Twitter15DiggReddit0StumbleUpon0Facebook44LinkedIn1Google+5bufferEmail

49 comments

    1. psychohistorian

      I agree with the disheartening part. Yves has provided enough data for gaggles of prosecuting attorney’s to use to put some folks in jail and they aren’t even attempting any prosecutions.

      And meanwhile the financial raping continues apace…..or is that God’s work?

      Thanks again to Yves for her focus on the IFR mess, as part of her reporting on the bigger messes of which this mess is just a part…..don’t mess with Yves.
      Isn’t English fun?

  1. AbyNormal

    i gave up Stewart years ago. he swirls issues to a wider audience, but the realities of the pain an destruction being endured by so many and followed by applause with laughter… its too twisted for even Aby.

    1. Chris Engel

      Consider the satirical spin he engages in as the “spoonful of sugar” that the wider American audience needs to be able to digest the raw depressing reality of our political and financial system.

      It may seem an inappropriate juxtaposition, but on the whole it’s better to get this content out there by any means necessary (even if it means focusing on the hypocrisy and absurdity of players and institution within our corrupt system that draws laughter and applause, rather than sympathy for the victims).

      1. AbyNormal

        Chris, i fear desensitization is allowing corruption to storm through more barriers. satire is a strong coping mechanism when shared with familiarity of the intricacies, but as an educating tool…im not so sure.

        1. Chris Engel

          Good point.

          I remember when I was in college for undergrad too many people bragged about “getting their news from the Daily Show” — and this was in an era less than 10 years ago where internet was ubiquitous on campus and people could easily access hard-hitting news for free from a number of sources with ease and convenience.

          It was around that time the major trend of low attention span anti-real-journalism stuff really exploded.

          It’s up to the educators and community activists out there to explain to people WHY they should give a shit about wonky topics like Wall Street reform, tax reform, corporate malfeasance, guaranteed minimum income, public option in healthcare, etc., in the context of global trends or whatever way that allows people to understand that it matters.

          Desensitization is occurring on all fronts though — to violence, to injustice, to pain…

          1. financial matters

            I think not enough people are personally affected yet especially in the US. But I think this will change as the financial tail keeps chasing itself without supplying any productive service. I think the search for collateral is continuing this game of musical chairs (re-hypthecation). This will eventually lead to margin calls on stock market equities and breaking of the buck in money market funds. This should help focus the US electorate more seriously on economic issues.

            It would also be helpful if US ‘foreign aid’ was better understood. Aid doesn’t involve debilitating debt and wanton exploitation of natural resources. I think the USD is running its course if it can’t become a more stabilizing influence. Nicholas Shaxson’s Treasure Islands is a good place to start.

          2. reslez

            Honestly don’t see why people need to concern themselves with the minute details of the criminal state. The point is to minimize your involvement with it as much as possible. Build alternative systems.

            Reform is a waste of time. The state is so corrupt it can’t be saved.

    2. Moneta

      I’ve come to wonder if his show doesn’t just contribute to the problem. Instead of doing something, those in the know just find ways to cope.

      1. reslez

        Stewart spends too much of his time bewailing the circus mass media has become (was it ever anything else?). He also adheres to the Third Way myth that all we need is for people to be “reasonable” to solve our problems. His disappointing but heavily attended rally in D.C. is proof.

        Being reasonable with people who are fighting relentlessly to steal your home, your job, your health care, and your retirement is a sucker’s game. Stewart would better serve us if he spent his time pointing out those frauds rather than the sideshow of mass media.

        1. neo-realist

          If Jon told too much of the raw truth about how we’re getting a**raped by the oligarchs, the suits would pull his show off the air. He’d be reduced to podcasts and one off theater shows. He probably believes that it’s better to raise consciousness about the system by pulling some punches so he can stay on the air and continue delivering soft core progressivism.

    3. LAS

      Stewart is well-positioned, makes no bones about his POV. He is OK.

      I give up on main stream journalism which is so privately funded that it fails to inform the democratic majority what is in their best interest to be aware of, and rather acts like a propaganda medium for the corporate elite.

      1. AbyNormal

        accepting and replacing MSM failure with shows like Stewarts has not created a demand for stronger flow of information from the MSM. if what is happening can be considered entertaining then we haven’t experienced nothing yet…

  2. LucyLulu

    I’d also quibble with the checks being “government issued” checks. They weren’t. They were from Rust Consulting. The negative connotation of the message that homeowners are being “bailed out” by the government doesn’t need to be put out there.

    I generally like Stewart but I’m with Aby on this one. I can’t find the humor in people having their homes stolen from them and then being insulted by this settlement.

    1. Chris Engel

      Do private consultants usually handle payouts in court settlements?

      I mean as a general case, I thought since the venue was a government court, that a government agency would be “middling” the money from the defendant to the victims. Strikes me as odd, and yet another area where government should buck up and accept that public institutions should be handling certain things.

      1. MaroonBulldog

        In civil cases,the plaintiffs’ attorneys disburse payouts, as trustees for their clients, through client trust funds. Where the plaintiff class is very large, the attorneys may engage a third party administrator to manage the disbursement process, but the attorneys remain on the hook for trustee liabiity. American ourts do not handle the disbursement of funds to plaintiffs in civil cases.

  3. otishertz

    Can’t take Jon Stewart seriously. Reminds me of the talk show host on V for Vendetta. Learning his older brother, Larry Leibowitz, is the chief operating officer at the New York Stock Exchange explained a lot. His show is carefully contrived programming made to induce a vicarious release of frustration in order to diffuse outrage, make horrible things acceptible, and dismiss abominations with humor.

    Main dtream media is main stream media. No credibility.

    1. Coldtype

      I struggle to see how anyone could leave that segment with the impression that MERS was acceptable. Satire is an appropriate response to injustice. In this example it works to delegitimize the FIRE sector and the federal regulatory agencies that do everything but regulate.

      1. otishertz

        I don’t get your use of the term “appropriate.” Appropriate for what or to whom? Satire is a weak response to injustice. Satire obscures the real issues by definition. Certainly there must be more effective responses to injustice than veiled humor.

        Not sure this show is satire anyway. I see a guy making funny faces while trivializing serious issues accompanied by canned laughter. There is no mass edification occuring as a result of this hyper commercialized programming. It serves only to minimize and dismiss various reasonable and timely outrages.

          1. AbyNormal

            if im not making myself clear…HEY YVES, IS YOUR YEARLY INCOME NEAR JOHNS?

            i rest my case

          2. Chris Engel

            Is it a crime to make money these days?

            Don’t go overboard, the guy is producing a quality product, his production company pays all their employees well and he does what is net-net a positive thing bringing awareness to issues most of his viewers would otherwise ignore.

          3. AbyNormal

            Chris, don’t go there with me…if i had a problem with people making money i wouldn’t have called attention to Yves income for her product. a product, i might add that assist navigating technical contracts breaking down their lives. in 2010 this was the first place i referenced to when my best friends home was being threatened (and they were current on their mortgage with above avg income).

            John’s dumb-downed over-priced product is entertainment off the back of widespread destruction and fraud, which is resulting in broken lives.

      2. Moneta

        Appropriate for whom?

        Satire needs to be constructive if the intent is to denounce and try to probe the population into changing its ways.

        Is Stewart’s show accomplishing this? What is his goal?

          1. Moneta

            Satire is supposed to make the reader or person listening feel guilty for what they are doing… it is supposed to open their eyes and nudge them into changing their ways.

            However, when I watch his shows I do not feel nudged. I feel that everyone else but me is the problem.

            He is very good at ridiculing the elite but he never really gets dirty which means he is not ready to really fight for the cause.

            Basically, the show just makes everyone hope someone else will roll up their sleeves and do the dirty work.

  4. Shirley

    All righty, then. You have a popular talk show that does a story about, of all things, MERS and the Independent Foreclosure Review, and the bouncing checks…and people are complaining that he’s contributing to the problem somehow?

    The Smothers Brothers got run off the air for a lot less than Stewart says in any given 5 minute piece.

    1. Moneta

      It’s not a comparison game… who cares who says worse or better?

      At the end of the day, what is impact is he having? Is he pacifying or empowering the people?

      I say he’s pacifying.

  5. ScottW

    Ever see George Carlin? People laught at his critique of the Government. So what. The litmus test of how one needs to address an issue, precisely what they need to say, the tone they need to use, and yes the inevitable, “But I have a problem with . . .” is one reason progressive causes have difficulty gaining traction. Kudos to anyone who is talking about this issue in a critical manner and in whatever format.

    1. jhallc

      I don’t see this segment as a problem. Most folks commenting are deep into the IFR fiasco, MERS etc. thanks to this site and others. We tend to forget that 99.99% of John Stewart’s audience doesn’t have a clue about these issues. Anything that makes them aware of it is good in my mind. Some of them may actually read the next article they see on the foreclosure mess and maybe even find there way to this site.

  6. Brooklin Bridge

    Jon Stewart does more for the Vichy Left and for “Lessor of Evil-ism” than most other pundits could ever dream of doing. I can guarantee before even watching it that the following are missing from his coverage:

    1) The extend to which Obama and his DOJ are complicit in protecting the banks and harming homeowners.
    2) The role Obama played in bribing Eric Schneiderman away from his hold-out on the foreclosure settlement process by putting him in a useless, fake, commission (Not to mention that is probably exactly what Schneiderman wanted in the first place).
    3) Any serious examination of how the banks are controlling congress entirely ON BOTH SIDES of the isle and doing their part to protect the banks from any legal consequences whatsoever regardless of how serious the crimes or how extensive the suffering and loss.

    And I can also guarantee that the implication is that the responsibility for this fiasco falls on Republicans, i.e. those obstructionist monsters currently wearing the war paint. That may be true, but it masks so much evil on the side of the Democrats that it is equivalent to lying outright – and that is the Daily Show in a nutshell.

    1. Brooklin Bridge

      So, I just watched it and got 100% correct. I agree with Yves that what he did cover was well explained, but the atmosphere was: 1)Banks bad, 2)Elizabeth Warren good, 3)This happened in a vacuum.

      1. charles sereno

        I just tried the video and could only get through about halfway. I’m gratified by the NC commenters’ general response — “Stewart is a relief valve!” The spontaneous audience response was a laugh track designer’s ultimate dream. We’re in bad times. Yes, that’s not new. But it’s our bad times.

    2. Susan the other

      Jon is quitting. He’s off to direct films. Oh good. His departure from “The Comedy Channel” coincides with the death of humor. Nothing is funny anymore. So clearly, there’s no money in it for Jon. He’ll probably do movies to counteract the new genre of “Attack on Wall Street” by making a big parody of it all. Whatever. But I do find it interesting that he mentions MERS on his last night. Like Eisenhower talking about the Military Industrial Complex in his last confession to America.

      1. AbyNormal

        jeeze, your good Susan!

        “Like Eisenhower talking about the Military Industrial Complex in his last confession to America”

        Well, fame is a drug and when you take it away from an addict, things can get ugly. peltier, reality boulevard
        (can only imagine what will replace him)

      2. Brooklin Bridge

        Agree with AbyNormal. That was nicely put, “his last confession to America”!

        Good night Jon.

      3. neo-realist

        He’s taking a leave of absence from the daily show to make his film, not a permanent one. He may well use satire to make fun of the financial sector, but that’s what he does best.

  7. TedWa

    He gets many to laugh instead of cry and does bring the facts of the issues out – so, kudos to him.

    Are your states broke or going broke? Dallas County alone is owed more than $100 million in recording fees. This is because of MERS. We need to contact our state AG’s and our state reps about the owed recording fees and make them do someting to get those fees back. There is no reason at all the states should be going broke to support the banks continued crimes. We need to get that money back !!

    I’m sure you all know this, using MERS the banks separated the note from the deed thereby breaking the contract with the buyers and rendering the mortgage contracts null and void. Enough is enough, make them pay past recording fees !!

    1. Moneta

      But does his show give you a nudge or does it just pacify you? Does it serve as a release valve that helps you get through another day of drudgery or do you get the urge to get out there and change the situation?

  8. Paul Tioxon

    Needless to say, Jon Stewart is not supposed to be a graduate level seminar in anything. The fact that by comparison with almost all other ACTUAL TV news, it grants PhDs from the Max Planck Institute, makes it a wonder to behold. It is the source of news by default. It regularly exposes book authors to the public. Books other than 50 shades of bullshit. So, it is doing a good job for the public by keeping them informed and also wary of the crap spun out on every other news network. No mean feat Additionally, it is a carrier of ideas, and politics and populist writing on the wall, that is thinly, well almost not all at this point, veiled by humor.

    What is good about his show, is that it day in and day out faces the most serious issues. It destroys the regular news gathering apparatus and makes it look like the tamed, toothless handmaiden to power that it has become. But again, it does TRANSMIT IDEAS INTO THE CULTURE AT LARGE. In this role, it is reminiscent of the pamphleteers of the early American colonies, such as Thomas Paine, whose writing had more people talking, than say, the Federalist Papers. A man so far from the center of what passed for power at that time came to be one of the most influential of opinion makers, and motivator of men to act out in protest on the street that the course of political history was altered and informed by his well crafted opinion.

    Bernard Bailyn was an American historian who did a study of these transmitters of ideas in his book: THE IDEOLOGICAL ORIGINS OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION. And while the TV programming of Jon Stewart is just one show, the broader media of popular culture echoes, not quite like the coordinated echo chamber of the right wing conspiracy, but as a self reinforcing and signal strength extender to critical, dissident and even subversive ideas against the political establishment and its status quo.

  9. holdonasec

    To the compliners: you do realize The Daily Show is on Comedy Central, right? It’s not journalism, it’s topical jokes,rants and stunt pranks dressed up as reporting. I think people have deveolped irrational expectations because: a) the show mocks laziness, bias, dishonesty and sensationalism, and b) their jokes involve research and thought. Even well observed humor is not journalism; setting up a punchline is very different from an accurate report. More importently, a majority of the shows content is syntesized from other media, and if that’s reductive or incomplete, so will be the jokes.

    The Daily show is still better than most television comedy, which cares almost nothing about the difference between topical talking points and accurate observation. Consider the SNL sketches in which the Chinese ambassador berates Obama over debt: this included an attack on Obamacare which implied China accepts its 1.5 billion uninsured, except China has ostensibly socialized medicine and is trying to return to universal health care after chaos created by economic reforms.So having a Chinese official say “How exactly is extending health care coverage to 30 million people going to save you money?” reflects something other than jokes based on understanding the issues.
    I can understand wishing the Daily Show was more news than jokes or made a joke about every detail of a given topic, but come on, subtract interviews and ads and the entire fake news part is less than 15 minutes. Those who decide that less than everything is nothing are really missing the point.

  10. diane

    hmmm, the majority consensus seems to be: fock Jon, who the hell is Jon, other than an ob$scenely paid steam venter.

    I couldn’t agree more. jus’ weighin’ in.

    1. diane

      not to say that Jon does not have his own human miseries in life, and not to say that he shouldn’t be comforted when he truly hurts. Just to say that he does not speak for those who have been brutalized beyond belief, for not agreeing with the death cult rulez of inhumane Monster$.

  11. Unknown

    Iowa Attorney General-Lead Office of the Executive Committee here is VIDEO ON CALL
    http://youtu.be/7BmbJycBROc

    After being provided inconsistent information by Rust Consulting and many, many Attorney General offices, among other government offices, we went to the “lead” Iowa AG office (AG Tom Miller-Iowa) who is on the Executive Committee for the NMS and is suppose to be overseeing Rust Consulting. The Executive Committee was the best kept secret in this entire search for information! Other than the notation on the bottom of the NMS website, there was nothing more provided who was on this committee.
    Keeping track, providing accurate information, explaining what is occurring and being transparent should be a priority to the so called “ghost committee”. After all, the 49 AG’s negotiated this settlement on “borrowers” behalves and shouldn’t they be assuring them what they did was in their best interest? That was to be the Executive Committee’s job but did they, are they and will they do the right thing and come up with explanations: why dates change, why dates on AG websites posted as June are not on the NMS website that the Executive Committee controls? Shouldn’t the Executive Committee know if claimants will receive interest on the 1.5 billion, where the number 750,000 eligible borrowers came from, why it is not considered a conflict that Rust Consulting was handed a billion dollar contract to be the Administrator when they are in bed with Citi? This was the most sickening conversation and one we hope everyone will interpret as “protecting” Wall St, the Banks and all the loan servicers who stole homes from the American People.
    Warning: Content will be upsetting and we apologize if you lose your breakfast, lunch or dinner. PLEASE FORWARD THIS LINK and message and make this video go viral. Transparency is needed and there could not be a better time! Thank you everyone for your support and most of all our thoughts and prayers goes out to those who had their homes stolen and are trying to get through just one day without more salt being poured in the wounds. After all, borrowers are suppose to be “Thankful” for this small token called a settlement in lieu of the loss of their homes. Kind of hard to muster up thanks when it could have been avoided and the Banks were not prosecuted for illegal foreclosures. Very dark day in this country when homes can be stolen and the responsible parties can buy their way out of prosecution. Why doesn’t that apply to everyone else who breaks the law?! Sen. Warren had that right! To BIG to go to Trial!
    God Bless!

    “Sorry” I dont know where else to place this FOR ADMIN ON THIS SITE!!!!!

Comments are closed.