> provided confidential mortgage pricing data from Fannie Mae to a principal competitor
It seems like the Fannie Mae data was shared with Freddie Mac. Aren't they both quasi-government organizations? GSEs. So they're both supported by the government but there's a firewall between them to keep some semblance of competition?
Having worked on this data since investors buy the loans, the loan level data by definition needs to be public. Even the borrower information is not secret because real estate ownership is public in USA. So I don’t understand what information it could possibly be other than fraud data. I think sharing fraud data is not colluding.
When Trump was elected I convinced myself it was positive in the way the depression of a business cycle is positive. Sure there is pain but it’s good to cut the strangulation and inefficiency of too much bureaucracy. I hoped this admin would “throw the baby out with the bathwater” more than I’d like. And those differences in opinion are okay and healthy.
But this is just insane. There is no bull case in these actions. None. It’s just outright grift and corruption.
Its wild to me how many people justified his re(!!!)-election on a bunch of hypotheses as if we didn’t have an entire first term of empirical evidence of how he operates.
People are so stupid. I volunteer at a food bank and help give away food to needy people wearing MAGA hats. Crazy. I want to go into snarky mode and say things but I stay professional.
These weird trump hagiographies need to go. Its clear he's a failure and a conman and an incredible bigot and awful human being way before 2016, VERY clear in 2016-2020 and inexcusable to vote for him in 2024 or support him in any way, shape, or form in 2025.
I'm outside the US political sphere so might have a different perspective looking in from abroad, but how could anybody possibly have expected anything but just grift and corruption from a second Trump term? There was the whole first term to see that he said one thing and then would act only what ever way benefited his, his family's, and his associates' interests...
From inside the USA, I don’t know. It’s baffling how even in 2015 people expected anything different from the crassest man alive.
Perhaps they thought the grift and corruption would benefit them, and not harm them and thus were okay with it? Like how from the first term someone was quoted saying something along the lines of “they’re not hurting the right people”
Today, all of us have many choices about where we get our news from, and by and large we overwhelmingly choose to listen only to those sources that confirm our existing opinions.
This means that people who voted for Trump are unlikely to ever hear about this sort of corruption, or if they do it will be spun as "his enemies attacking him" or something.
The part you're missing is that a very large number of voters (on both political sides) expect nothing but outright grift and corruption from both parties. And they're not wrong to do so.
Remember, Trump won both times against a candidate who was anointed by the powers that be, not chosen by the people. (Hillary Clinton at least went through the motions of holding primaries, but Kamala Harris didn't even have that).
So people say - out of the two corrupt parties, I might as well vote for the one that isn't actively attacking me.
Keep in mind that Democrats will declare you an outcast if you disagree with any single line of the party agenda - and they're currently pushing at least 3 ideas each of which is strongly rejected by some (independent) fraction of the voterbase.
The real question is why was there this hope at all, given Trump has been telling us who he is for decades? Seems like a lot of projection has been going on in the minds of people who voted for him.
It seems like the Fannie Mae data was shared with Freddie Mac. Aren't they both quasi-government organizations? GSEs. So they're both supported by the government but there's a firewall between them to keep some semblance of competition?
Deleted Comment
Deleted Comment
But this is just insane. There is no bull case in these actions. None. It’s just outright grift and corruption.
> Trust is efficient.
Politics aside, we should all be dismayed at the USA turning into a low-trust environment. Should we not?
Everyone around him said how much of an idiot and a POS he is.
What were you thinking? Good job.
I'm outside the US political sphere so might have a different perspective looking in from abroad, but how could anybody possibly have expected anything but just grift and corruption from a second Trump term? There was the whole first term to see that he said one thing and then would act only what ever way benefited his, his family's, and his associates' interests...
Perhaps they thought the grift and corruption would benefit them, and not harm them and thus were okay with it? Like how from the first term someone was quoted saying something along the lines of “they’re not hurting the right people”
This means that people who voted for Trump are unlikely to ever hear about this sort of corruption, or if they do it will be spun as "his enemies attacking him" or something.
I think the answer is that the democrats are shockingly bad too, in many parts of the US. People expect grift and corruption from both parties.
Perhaps they didn’t expect the scale of this admin’s grift.
Remember, Trump won both times against a candidate who was anointed by the powers that be, not chosen by the people. (Hillary Clinton at least went through the motions of holding primaries, but Kamala Harris didn't even have that).
So people say - out of the two corrupt parties, I might as well vote for the one that isn't actively attacking me.
Keep in mind that Democrats will declare you an outcast if you disagree with any single line of the party agenda - and they're currently pushing at least 3 ideas each of which is strongly rejected by some (independent) fraction of the voterbase.
Dead Comment
Dead Comment
Dead Comment