Online Critics Decry Even More Wells Fargo Fraud Scandals (boingboing.net) 213
On Saturday author/blogger Cory Doctorow launched a new barrage of criticism towards Wells Fargo:
It's been a whole day since we learned about another example of systematic, widespread fraud by America's largest bank Wells Fargo (ripping off small merchants with credit card fees), so it's definitely time to learn about another one: scamming mortgage borrowers out of $43/month for an unrequested and pointless "home warranty service" from American Home Shield, a billion-dollar scam-factory that considers you a customer if you throw away its junk-mail instead of ticking the "no" box and sending it back.
$43/month gets you pretty much nothing: people who tried to actually use their AHS insurance found it impossible to get them to actually do anything in exchange for this money. Here's a quick Wells Fargo fraud scorecard: stealing thousand of cars with fraudulent repos; defrauding mortgage borrowers; blackballing whistelblowers; creating 2,000,000+ fraudulent accounts, and stealing millions with fraudulent fees and penalties.
Life Pro Tip: if you don't like banks, join a credit union.
$43/month gets you pretty much nothing: people who tried to actually use their AHS insurance found it impossible to get them to actually do anything in exchange for this money. Here's a quick Wells Fargo fraud scorecard: stealing thousand of cars with fraudulent repos; defrauding mortgage borrowers; blackballing whistelblowers; creating 2,000,000+ fraudulent accounts, and stealing millions with fraudulent fees and penalties.
Life Pro Tip: if you don't like banks, join a credit union.
Negative agreements aren't legal in some places. (Score:5, Informative)
The habit of having a "negative agreement" where you have to check a box and send back if you don't want a service is not legal in some areas.
Re:Negative agreements aren't legal in some places (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm surprised that they're legal *anywhere*.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If filming horses mating is illegal we've got a whole other set of problems to deal with ...
Re: (Score:2)
I'm fine with the horse porn, thank you, but you can't make me deny the Holocaust! That's filthy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Negative agreements aren't legal in some plac (Score:2)
Hitler was appointed, not elected. Hitler was never elected. I have no idea why this myth continues to be parroted. Read a book!
Seriously, use Google. Hitler wasn't elected.
Re: (Score:2)
Hitler wasn't that bad. It wasn't so much that he was an idiot in military affairs as that his generals were idiots about the overall situation. They thought that the correct thing to do, when losing the war, was to negotiate terms, accept an unfavorable peace, and rebuild. Hitler knew that was not going to happen.
Therefore, Hitler was only interested in winning, and his generals were interested in losing slowly when things went bad. As things got worse, Hitler had to call for more and more extreme a
Re: (Score:2)
Although Wernher von Braun and pals were a great help, your statement is mostly false. The father of modern rocketry is Robert H. Goddard, an American.
Re: (Score:2)
Three per month is especially bad when you consider that, after the very beginning of the campaign, the military on the receiving end would have learned the critical importance of shooting down otherwise insignificant-looking air formations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Duh, that was because the war in Europe was over by the time of the Trinity test. To suggest had the war in Europe still been raging that the use and distribution of atomic bombs would have been the same is utterly preposterous.
As for shooting down insignificant looking air formations by 1945 both the German and Japanese air force was so degraded that shooting down insignificant air formations was not possible. The raid over Hiroshima and Nagasaki did not have a fighter escort because one was not needed.
Eve
Re: (Score:2)
Three nukes a month would have devastated Germany in short order. It would have been difficult to get the bombers in after the first couple, but it might not have been necessary, and the Allies would find ways to get the bombers through. They could send formations of B-29s if they had to, expecting to lose some to the detonation.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When thinking about the Battle of Britain, you have to realize that this was the first battle of its kind ever, and the Germans were seriously limited in finding out what was working.
First, they attacked radar stations, and the British found that keeping the stations transmitting was a whole lot easier than keeping them working. Second, they attacked the air defense system. This was working, but the Germans didn't realize that. Then they switched to cities, like all the prewar theorizing had suggested
Re: (Score:2)
A real knuckle-biter.
Re:Negative agreements aren't legal in some places (Score:5, Funny)
There’s no point in acting surprised about it. All the planning charts and demolition orders have been on display at your local planning department in Alpha Centauri for 50 of your Earth years, so you’ve had plenty of time to lodge any formal complaint and it’s far too late to start making a fuss about it now What do you mean you’ve never been to Alpha Centauri? Oh, for heaven’s sake, mankind, it’s only four light years away, you know. I’m sorry, but if you can’t be bothered to take an interest in local affairs, that’s your own lookout. Energize the demolition beams.
I'm not entirely sure how this quote applies to the situation described in the article, but if we make the effort I'm sure we can find a way.
Re: Negative agreements aren't legal in some place (Score:2)
Kafka was an optimist. Things are worse than what's depicted in a Kafka novel. Douglas Adams came closer to reality combined with a huge dose of absurdity and irony.
Re: Negative agreements aren't legal in some place (Score:4, Funny)
Trump speeches sound like Vogon poetry.
Re: Negative agreements aren't legal in some place (Score:5, Funny)
Oh freddled covfefe,
Thy micturations are to me,
As plurdled gabbleblotchits,
On a lurgid bee,
...
That makes sense. Trump is a Vogon Captain (Score:2, Troll)
Not even a good disguise. Seriously.
Re: (Score:2)
That's all political speeches though.
Re:Negative agreements aren't legal in some places (Score:5, Funny)
Where is it legal? Asking for a friend and his company with the amazing monthly paper clip delivery service that's just $999 a month.
Re: (Score:2)
I see that on just about any "free" software installation and update to get you to install extra "promotionware". Java still does it, last I remember. I suppose they can argue the "extra" product is not being charged for and thus does't fall under such statutes; and the boundary between product and "feature" can also be blurry. Still, it's an annoying practice.
The worse case I ever saw was a confirmation box with a double-negative, something like:
[_] I don't want to not install the ShinyMonkey Toolbar.
Hal
Re: Negative agreements aren't legal in some place (Score:2)
I pretty much use "free" software, exclusively. I never see any such thing. ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
Where IS it legal?
And how much did they have to bribe the corrupt state legislature to make it legal?
Re: Negative agreements aren't legal in some place (Score:2)
It has gone downhill since the 70's.
And it started with the end of the Apollo program.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd bet that Wells Fargo owns a lot of mortgages it didn't initiate. There's plenty of companies that specialize in arranging mortgages and then selling them immediately. My contract is with one of those, not with Wells Fargo, so denying special Wells Fargo treatment, even with lube, is not violating any agreement.
I do not understand... (Score:4, Insightful)
Why these recidivist fuckers aren't in jail ? Is that because they're WASP ? Is that because white collar crimes actually pay well ? Where the God damn fuck is justice in all of this ?
Re: I do not understand... (Score:2, Insightful)
Not because they're WASP, but because they're RICH.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Why these recidivist fuckers aren't in jail ?
Because they're "too big to fail".
Where the God damn fuck is justice in all of this ?
If you have to ask, you can't afford it.
Re:I do not understand... (Score:5, Interesting)
Many reasons.
* WF is huge, which means they have vast legal resources.
* Much of what they do is at the margins of legal
* The people losing money don't have many resources and their losses are relatively small
* Investigating and prosecuting them is a massive effort that strains the budgets of State AGs
* Finding culpable individuals in the organization and proving fraudulent intent is really difficult
I was actually surprised that the "account scandal" got sorted out like it did (CEO resigned, clawbacks of executive bonuses, etc). It probably had something to do with the actions being closer to actual criminal fraud.
Unfortunately I think we have two problems. One, we're a huckster culture, where we generally allow for fraudulent behavior as "good salesmanship".
The other is an economy with marginal broad growth which forces large companies to pursue more and more dubious income to make up for the lack of growth in their sector's organic income. In theory, banks should be natural profit centers -- if the economy is growing, they basically make a percentage off that growth through loans and money handling. But they face an economy with marginal growth and increased growth expectations, so they have to grind out these increases on the margins of their business.
It's actually quite simple (Score:2)
You can't have it bo
Re: (Score:2)
Arrest them under state law. Deny bail, delay any action after the bail hearing to keep them in jail as long as possible. As soon as some other level of government springs them from jail, rinse and repeat on new charges.
A sufficiently aggressive AG and a few good judges are about all that's really required. Nobody, even a CEO, likes being in jail, and hammering home the message that your money can't keep you safe f
Re: (Score:2)
In other words, Wells Fargo is a parasitic corporate entity who have perfected the art of living off their customers without providing any significant value for money.
Contract Crapware (Score:4, Interesting)
Sign a contract for service X, get unwanted service Y in addition slipped into the hundreds of pages of legalese. Who's going to refuse to sign mortgage papers over a $43/month bullshit charge? Especially if it's a contract of adhesion and you can't just cross it out? It's like crapware that comes preinstalled on a name-brand computer, they get a kickback for each install. Remember: it's not fraudulent fees and penalties, it's "innovative financial services."
Re: (Score:2)
Frankly not many. I knew a woman who was positive she signed a fixed rate mortgage when in fact she discovered after 2 years was variable. But, there are people like me. I was signing for a house and they slipped in the house inspection showed the roof needed to have some work. Wasn't much, like 400 or 500. I was like WTF, where did this come from, why was I not informed earlier? I said I was not going to proceed, cancel. Suddenly both realtors went into panic mode and said they would pay for the work out o
Re: (Score:2)
You aren't alone. I thought the realtors were going to stroke out when I started reading the contract instead of just signing it. They were quick to offer to explain it to me, then seemed a little more nervous when I told them that it wasn't a problem, I used to work for the state bar, I can read legalese just fine.
I found a few things that seemed strange, got some language changed and a full repair to the AC done by them before anything was signed.
More people should read their contracts over before signi
Re: (Score:2)
Whether it's a benefit or not depends on a lot of things about your life situation. A mortgage can be worse than rent. You can get out of rent in a month or two. But it can also be a lot better. I don't regret the time I spent as a renter before ending up with a house. Now my situation has changed again, and I'm going to go back to being a renter. I'm not really pleased, but I'm not upset about THAT aspect. (I really don't like home maintenance or gardening, or any of the other things that make a hou
Re: Contract Crapware (Score:2, Interesting)
It is also likely that this is an affiliate program where your info is shared by Wells with the insurance company through a joint venture agreement. The insurance company reached out and you threw the crappy insurance offer away. The insurance company informs Wells you accepted their offer and then takes the premium out of your escrow account.
Everything seems fine until the insurance company screws the customer and Wells gets blamed because "big bank bad".
Wells more than likely found this in their own int
Re: (Score:2)
wow, gets "blown out of proportion" by the press? Do you mean "reported on"?
Re: (Score:2)
If they don't validate the charges that they negotiated you into, then they deserve the blame and criminal penalties. At least they're getting a bit of the blame, but not as much as they deserve. And that's assuming your whitewash story is true. (It *could* be, but that doesn't exculpate Wells Fargo. And I'd give the odds at less than 25%.)
Why mention Wells Fargo? (Score:3, Informative)
It's neither legal not ethical for a company to"offer" services on an opt-out basis, but why does this rant focus on Wells Fargo (scummy though they also be)?
American Home Shield is not owned it operated by WF. It is owned by the same company that owns Terminix, Merry Maids, and some other brands. When you buy a house, the transfer is a public record in most places, and you absolutely will get a lot of junk offers from companies who have no relationship to any of the ones you used.
Re: (Score:3)
It's neither legal not ethical for a company to"offer" services on an opt-out basis, but why does this rant focus on Wells Fargo (scummy though they also be)?
American Home Shield is not owned it operated by WF. It is owned by the same company that owns Terminix, Merry Maids, and some other brands. When you buy a house, the transfer is a public record in most places, and you absolutely will get a lot of junk offers from companies who have no relationship to any of the ones you used.
Wells Fargo is mentioned here because they chose to continue to do business with a company that does not operate a service legally or ethically, as you pointed out.
And let's call "junk" offers what they should be called; illegal. There's a reason scam is a legal term, and not just a word found in the urban dictionary.
Re: Why mention Wells Fargo? (Score:2)
Not all junk offers are illegal. I already said that if the company did what the summary described, it was illegal. What more do you want?
Re: Why mention Wells Fargo? (Score:5, Interesting)
Not all junk offers are illegal.
My point is perhaps they should be. And until you can clearly define the difference between a scam and a "junk offer", perhaps we should get rid of the latter bullshit term and call it what it is.
I already said that if the company did what the summary described, it was illegal. What more do you want?
From TFS:
"Here's a quick Wells Fargo fraud scorecard: stealing thousand of cars with fraudulent repos; defrauding mortgage borrowers; blackballing whistelblowers; creating 2,000,000+ fraudulent accounts, and stealing millions with fraudulent fees and penalties."
There's certainly more than one reason Wells Fargo was called out here. Commonly referred to calling a spade a spade. What more do I want? Shutting down unethical and corrupt businesses would be a refreshing start. Either that, or get rid of laws that define ethics in business; we obviously ignore the shit out of them anyway.
Re:Why mention Wells Fargo? (Score:5, Informative)
It's neither legal not ethical for a company to"offer" services on an opt-out basis, but why does this rant focus on Wells Fargo (scummy though they also be)?
I see you just outed yourself as not reading the link, because had you done so, your question would have already been answered. So since you were too lazy to look, I'll do you a favor and summarize. Various Wells Fargo mortgage customers went over their monthly statements and found a mysterious charge (about $43 a month) for a service they never agree to or asked for, namely the home warranty from AHS. And when customers tried to get Wells Fargo to take it off their bills, they failed. So Wells Fargo fully participated in billing customers for a service they never chose to receive and that's why the rant focuses on them.
Re: (Score:3)
Mailboxes are getting useless. Currently almost all of my important mail goes to a post office box because I have had problems with identity theft from stolen mail. When I got involved in elder care with my parents and my Dad kept misplacing important mail, I filed a forwarding with the post office; the ONLY mail that go
Re: (Score:2)
Actions speak louder than lists (Score:5, Insightful)
"Here's a quick Wells Fargo fraud scorecard: stealing thousand of cars with fraudulent repos; defrauding mortgage borrowers; blackballing whistelblowers; creating 2,000,000+ fraudulent accounts, and stealing millions with fraudulent fees and penalties."
Lists of blatantly corrupt and illegal activities don't mean jack shit unless you do something about it.
And by do something, I mean shut them the fuck down, and throw executives in prison.
Since Greed N. Corruption took over as CEO of US Capitalism, Inc. that will never fucking happen.
How ironic that if any US citizen did this, it would be labeled terrorism. The fact that nothing is ever done only clarifies just how unethical and corrupt the Banking Industrial Complex has become.
Re: (Score:2)
Lists of blatantly corrupt and illegal activities don't mean jack shit unless you do something about it.
Taking your business elsewhere is often futile.
When I got a mortgage, I went out of my way to avoid Wells Fargo. The dirty secret in getting any loan is that the guys offering the loan (ie. the bastards at the credit union, etc.) can sell the debt to another institution before the ink dries.
Which is how I became another "satisfied" customer of the institution I tried to avoid.
My home warranty has been useful (Score:3)
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hope you boys and girls have a nice little nest egg saved to replace your AC when it dies (because they all do eventually). Otherwise, I need to invest in company stock that builds window units. Holy shit!
IMO, a responsible homeowner will keep about 10% of the value of their home in cash or easily liquidated assets in order to handle this kind of maintenance. You need to put away about 1% of the value per year whether you spend it or not that year. That's about what it averages out to, but it tends to come in inconveniently large hits when it needs to be done. I have very little sympathy for someone who buys a house, and doesn't plan ahead for this sort of thing.
For AC replacement under a home warranty, you'
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We bought a house and the seller paid for a year of a home warranty service.
The seller "paid" out of the money you gave them.
I also was "gifted" a "home warranty."
Every single problem I encountered was judged a pre-existing condition, and it was my fault for not noticing the problem during the home buying process. (This includes the garage door, microwave, HVAC system... all of which was functional during the home inspection)
"Wells Fargo" is the "Clintons" of Consumer Banks (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's other shady crap they pull too (Score:4, Insightful)
Years ago I got mail from them regarding my credit card. I had been signed up for "Credit Defense", which WF charged some % of your monthly balance to put toward a pot that you could draw on should you be unemployed for a length of time. I didn't think much of it and didn't care because I didn't have a high balance.
Fast forward a few years and couple moves later and my balance was a bit higher. To top things off, this charge was getting between $50 and $60 every month, which was making payments harder. Basically my story was a lot like this guys [reddit.com]. I called up WF, they told me to call this third party company. I call them "Sorry, I can't refund". So I broken record the assholes, "So send me to someone who can". A few people later and I can "file a complaint" or whatever their lingo was. They had to prove that I had signed a document allowing them to charge me. They couldn't, so I got refunded near $2k for my troubles. No bogus charges since.
If it weren't for having my longest running line of credit with them, I'd have walked into a branch, shredded my credit card and given them the two finger salute years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
>
If it weren't for having my longest running line of credit with them, I'd have walked into a branch, shredded my credit card and given them the two finger salute years ago.
A peace sign? The Vulcan sign of prosperity?
Re: (Score:2)
I think he means by utilizing each hand, identically.
But thank you for that... I can't recall the last time I saw a post on Slashdot that made me laugh that hard.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps GP is British?
British version of the finger is traditionally given using two fingers.
I've had both (Score:5, Interesting)
Different but the same (Score:3, Interesting)
My son's school pictures arrangement is about like this too. Some company called Lifetouch contracts with the schools for school pictures. OK, no big deal, right?
If only...
So here's what they do. They herd the kids through the usual picture rigamarole and then a few weeks later, there is a proof image to look at and parents can decide which poses the want, right?
Oh no. Not at all.
A few weeks later, a full print set with all the usual sizes shows up in my son's backpack. A few 8x10s, some 4x6s, a bunch of wallets. Probably about the $25-30 package. Printed, ready to go, in his backpack. And Lifetouch puts a letter in there saying (paraphrased): "Hey mom and dad! Here are the wonderful pictures of your super cute kid! We already printed them for you, if you want to keep them just send a check back to the school. Or if you hate your kid and think he's ugly, send them back with a note to the teacher. Oh, and if you keep them and don't pay, we'll just kick your kid out of the photo line next year."
And not to mention what happens if you do send them back. Who knows? I bet they don't actually get sent back to Lifetouch. My guess is a pile of crisp 8x10 photos with all the identifying information a sexual predator would want printed right on the envelope goes straight into the dumpster.
In defense of AHS (Score:2)
AHS User - good service (Score:2)
I did not get AHS from a forgetting to check box, which is bullshit and Wells should be raked over the coals for that. I took the service when I purchased my place because of another friends positive experience with them.
But I have successfully used them for the 10 years I owned my home.
A/C issue in the heat of summer, multiple years, someone shows up in a couple of days and gets it fixed.
Washing machine rebuild.
Dishwasher fixed.
AHS hold a lot of weight with their contracted vendors. They tend to be highe
I have AHS and am happy... (Score:2)
I'm not sure what the Wells Fargo contract covers (possibly not much?), but they've always provided good service
I can tell you (Score:2)
Why is that? Because they know they've managed to completely weaken any regulatory actions.
AHS profits from "non-covered expenses" (Score:2)
I had AHS for a few years. They always came out promptly when I called, and did the repairs. The problem was that they always found "non-covered expenses" that ran up my bill into the hundreds of dollars, instead of the claimed $50 co-pay. Examples included coolant evacuation and recharge for $400, and a concrete condenser pad for $150. When my condenser went out, my total non-covered expenses were $900!
Later, when I dumped AHS and started paying for my own repairs, I discovered that my A/C contractor didn'
Re:if you don't like banks... (Score:5, Insightful)
Or perhaps you're just one of the millions of people who've been screwed.
Re: (Score:2)
you're an idiot conspiracy theorist who knows nothing about economics.
If you don't know fraud goes unpunished at the highest levels of finance, you really haven't been paying attention. No conspiracy here, just the power of wealth and connections.
Re: if you don't like banks... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That purposeful denial of reality [npr.org] confirms my opinion.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you say "no conspiracy"? I see no grounds for assuming that just because the wealthy and powerful aren't punished they aren't engaging in conspiracy. And there are certainly meetings which are very carefully not recorded. If there were a conspiracy, what evidence would you expect to see that isn't present?
It would be quite reasonable to say we can't prove there's an illegal conspiracy. Even that would probably depend upon who "we" was, however. It seems quite clear that Wells Fargo management wa
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And bark. And balance balls on their noses, and play horns.
Re: (Score:2)
Which banks? What about banks?
Were you to say the basic principles that are behind banking are important to the working of economics, I'd agree. This doesn't mean organizations that seem to be run by gangsters are a good idea. This doesn't mean that the currently existing banks should be either liked or trusted. This doesn't mean that the current regulations are either just or reasonable. Etc.
I really like the idea of banks. It's just the implementation that seems a bit lacking.
Re: (Score:2)
My main question is what is to stop a Credit Union from being just as dishonest and corrupt as a bank?
Not-For-Profit, is more of a Tax thing, then a change on how one does business. Except for Profit there is excess revenue, which could then be used for a lot of things, such as paying the CEO more money, or investing back into the organization. Finding loopholes to find a way to scam people to increase the excess revenue is just as bad as a company finding a loop hole to scam people to increase profit.
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't like the whole idea behind the banking system, that's one thing. If you don't like individual banks (or even most banks), that's another and more rational stand. There's a difference.
Re: (Score:3)
It's not the gulf, it's the conflict of interest on the bank's part between its retail and investment activities, as illustrated by the sub-prime mortgage crisis of 2008. Even where they weren't technically gambling with depositors' funds, their investment activities put them in a position where they were in danger of failing while holding onto those funds.
Re: (Score:2)
When you put your money in the bank, they just don't lock it up. Awaiting for you to take it out. They invest it, they will use your cash to give people loans who pay it back with interest (where the old fashion savings account gave you a little bit of it). Banks do have FDIC insurance, so if those investments fail, your personal savings up to $100,000 is protected. But when you put your money in the bank, it isn't your money, it is the banks, to do what they want. As an agreement you are allowed to take
Re:if you don't like banks... (Score:4, Insightful)
You're talking in vague, hand-wavy analogies here. What's actually going on is the banks are creating an obligation (to you) in exchange for liquidity. The bank then converts that liquidity into productive assets (loans and investments), subject to the requirement that they retain enough to service likely account demands in the near future.
And either way, it doesn't mean that the banks can't be regulated. From the 1930s to the 1990s retail banks couldn't undertake certain risky businesses that might jeapordize their ability to meet depositor obligations. That was changed by a law signed in 1999 by Bill Clinton, and ten years later the mix of retail and investment banking contributed to a crisis that almost brought down the world economy.
Re: (Score:2)
You're using jargon. GP is more understandable.
Re: (Score:3)
The problem is the banks, don't like normal citizens. With penalties on being too poor (High Interest Loans, too small of a balance, overdraft fees, etc...) If you try to get out of the bank they charge you for leaving the bank. As a citizen and getting dinged for trying to survive, they may not like these banks.
If you had millions of dollars in the bank, they treat you like gold, give you low interest loans, greater interest on your account....
Yes I understand the millionaire is a lower risk, so they g
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Life Pro Tip (Score:5, Informative)
The difference is that they are owned by the depositors. Hence they are not subject to the same commercial pressures that regular banks are. Unfortunately most of the mutual financial organizations in the UK where destroyed in the 1980/1990's when the building societies converted to banks. During the financial crisis the building societies in the UK weathered the storm much better than the banks and demutilized former building societies did for example.
Re:Life Pro Tip (Score:5, Interesting)
Desjardins, the biggest credit union in North America has actually become worse than a bank.
Maybe you can be fine with a small credit union somewhere but the GP is pretty much right nowadays.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So which financial institution makes mistakes on your accounts now?
I hear good things about The First National Bank of Serta [serta.com].
There are also less established institutions [toter.com] offering innovative solutions to the financial industry.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's because she represented the same business as usual that's been giving non-urban areas of the country the shaft for the last couple decades.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
She is a big time arms dealer (smuggler actually, that's what they're trying to hide about Benghazi, the weapons shipments to terrorists in Syria).
That was a CIA operation, more accurately. Maybe Clinton knew, maybe she didn't. It's always hard to tell with the CIA. But don't make it sound like it was her own personal operation.
Re: (Score:2)
may I ask where this 'warmonger' label comes from?
Officially started when she voted for the Iraq war in the senate. She has always been pro war in every theater (including Syria) before and since. She is a big time arms dealer (smuggler actually, that's what they're trying to hide about Benghazi, the weapons shipments to terrorists in Syria).
And she's a regular machine politician, of the same kind as Richard Daley (both) in Chicago.
Thank you for the reply, but based on the facts in your motivation the label 'warmonger' could be applied to a large majority of US politicians.
The 'machine politician' label seems to be off topic, and is again something that I have never seen any rational substantiation for.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course the majority of US politicians are warmongers. Have you seen our military budget? Let me ask you a question: when was the last year the US was not involved in a war? But Hillary is especially war like. She considers Henry Kissinger to be a close, personal friend and mentor. I assume you've heard of war criminal Henry Kissinger.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Have you ever actually bought a house?
Typically you're in a room with a Realtor, who works for the seller, because the Realtor always works for the seller, that's who pays them (even if you think they're working for you), a real estate lawyer, who works for the Realtor, and maybe a seller, if its a private sale. There's a stack of papers about three inches high and you have to sign about fifty times and initial another twenty. The lawyer has set aside about twenty minutes to do all this and reading everythi
Re: (Score:3)
That sounds pretty bad. In the UK, the buyer and seller each have their own solicitor. Typically, all communication happens via the two solicitors (which can sometimes involve long round-trip times) and anything that you're supposed to sign will be first read by your solicitor, who should point out anything that looks dubious.
The French system is much better. The estate agents work for the buyer and have a legal responsibility to them: they are liable for any costs incurred by the buyer that the buyer
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Yes, I have bought dozens of houses. I am aware that it is a lot of paperwork. That is not an excuse to ignore any of it, nor it is an excuse not to have your own attorney thoroughly review them with you.
Reading everything is not impossible by any stretch of the imagination. If your lawyer only spends 20 minutes on it, you need to tell them that is unacceptable and make them read everything.
Making the largest purchase you'll make in your lifetime is not a time to be uneducated and complacent.
Re: (Score:2)
Bitcoin doubled in value over the last month; meanwhile banks pay one percent of one percent interest on savings.