Hannity previewed attack on Edwards over New Orleans foreclosures, ignored reported Edwards pledge
SUMMARY: On Hannity & Colmes, Sean Hannity stated that "The Wall Street Journal reported that John Edwards had invested in and worked for a company that is foreclosing on residents of New Orleans," adding: "The Edwards campaign has since announced that the senator will divest from the company." However, Hannity did not note that the Journal also reported that Edwards "pledged that he would personally provide financial assistance to New Orleanians who are facing foreclosure by [the company] or have lost their homes already."
On the August 20 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, co-host Sean Hannity previewed the August 26 edition of Fox News' Hannity's America by stating that "The Wall Street Journal reported that [former Sen.] John Edwards [D-NC] had invested in and worked for a company that is foreclosing on residents of New Orleans," adding: "The Edwards campaign has since announced that the senator will divest from the company. But we wanted to hear from the actual people who are losing their homes in foreclosure." Hannity was referring to an August 17 Wall Street Journal article that reported that "subprime-lending units of Fortress Investment Group LLC" had filed foreclosure actions against New Orleans homeowners. While Hannity did note that Edwards said he would divest from the any Fortress Investment Group funds "that have a stake in the subprime lenders that filed the foreclosures," according to the Journal article, he did not note that the Journal also reported that Edwards "pledged that he would personally provide financial assistance to New Orleanians who are facing foreclosure by Fortress-affiliated businesses or have lost their homes already." According to the washingtonpost.com blog The Trail, Edwards campaign spokesman Eric Schultz stated on August 17 that Edwards "has taken personal responsibility by cleansing his portfolio of any investments that may have ties to these practices, and he [is] also personally committing to helping people who may have lost their homes."
From the August 20 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes:
COLMES: Finally tonight, Sean has a sneak preview of a special investigation this weekend on Hannity's America. What's going on?
HANNITY: Yeah, thanks, Alan. Listen, last week, The Wall Street Journal reported that John Edwards had invested in and worked for a company that is foreclosing on residents of New Orleans. Now, considering that Edwards spends so much time talking about, quote, "two Americas," and even launched his presidential campaign with a speech in New Orleans, the story came as a shock to most of America.
The Edwards campaign has since announced that the senator will divest from the company. But we wanted to hear from the actual people who are losing their homes in foreclosure. So we sent our cameras to New Orleans and found some of the people whose homes are in foreclosure, thanks to John Edwards' company. Take a look.
SHERLENE ROBINSON [video clip]: Due to the storm, we wasn't able to pay the mortgage down here. We were living in Texas, off housing out there. And they sent us a foreclosure letter.
We started picking back up, paying the loan. It was $700 a month. They broke it down to $421 a month. And we have been paying that. We can't do anything, because we're still in foreclosure. They have us in foreclosure on our credit account. I called and asked them, could they get that off my credit, and they told me no, even though I'm paying them every month. I'm still in foreclosure with them.
HANNITY: Two Americas, $1,200 haircuts, 28,000-square-foot mansions, and $55,000 speeches on poverty. We're going to have more of that interview on a very special edition of Hannity's America this Sunday night at 9 p.m. Eastern, so don't miss it.
From the August 17 Journal article:
As a presidential candidate, Democrat John Edwards has regularly attacked subprime lenders, particularly those that have filed foreclosure suits against victims of Hurricane Katrina. But as an investor, Mr. Edwards has ties to lenders foreclosing on Katrina victims.
The Wall Street Journal has identified 34 New Orleans homes whose owners have faced foreclosure suits from subprime-lending units of Fortress Investment Group LLC. Mr. Edwards has about $16 million invested in Fortress funds, according to a campaign aide who confirmed a more general Federal Election Commission report. Mr. Edwards worked for Fortress, a publicly held private-equity fund, from late 2005 through 2006.
Asked about the matter, Mr. Edwards yesterday pledged that he would personally provide financial assistance to New Orleanians who are facing foreclosure by Fortress-affiliated businesses or have lost their homes already. "I intend to help these people," the former North Carolina senator said.
He also promised to cleanse his portfolio of any investments that may be profiting from their losses. "I am going to divest" from any Fortress funds that have a stake in the subprime lenders that filed the foreclosures, he said in a telephone interview. "I will not have my family's money invested in these firms."
From the August 17 entry on The Trail:
Edwards campaign spokesman Eric Schultz sought today to frame Edwards' latest response to his Fortress link as proof that he cared for the people of New Orleans. He "believes that nobody in New Orleans should lose their home because of Hurricane Katrina," Schultz said. "Edwards has taken personal responsibility by cleansing his portfolio of any investments that may have ties to these practices, and he [is] also personally committing to helping people who may have lost their homes. For John Edwards, the tragedy in New Orleans is not just about politics. They have been abandoned by the federal government and deserve a strong advocate. As president, he will be that fighter, but he's not waiting until then. He's taking responsibility, because for him that is the meaning of leadership."
So companies who provide mortgages to customers who then default on those loans shouldn't do everything they're legally entitled to do to try to collect on that debt, and when that fails, they shouldn't be able to foreclose on those loans? In the case of the homeowner listed above, because of circumstances beyond her control, she stopped being able to make all the payments she should be making, in the amounts that she should be making, and so the credit bureaus are reporting that she's still in default because, well, she's still in default. How is that wrong, or something that is a valid criticism of Edwards? He's like poor people to earn enough to not have this happen to them. He'd like the Bush administration to help those in the direst of situations to be able to recover from these events. How is it wrong for the financial institutions to get what's coming to them or report that their customers didn't live up to their end of the bargain?
nomo, I agree about the mortgage holder. They are required to forclose but I think it is worth note that they are obviously working with them as evidened by their significantly lowered payment. I am not sure why they are coming off as the bad guy seems they are making an effort to work with the customers. I think if Edwards wants to help out of his own pocket that is great but he should do it out of a place of charity not shame because of his connection to this company.
If there's nothing wrong with it, why is Edwards divesting himself from the company?
Bruce, I think Edwards answered your question. He said he didn't want his family to profit from [victims of Katrina] loss.
Fair point. I wonder if he would feel that way if he weren't running for President?
There's nothing wrong with what the company is doing. They're running a business and they have to protect it. That said, I would not invest in a company that is foreclosing on Katrina victims even though I understand why they're doing it.
Because he doesn't want that brain-dead Nazi Sean Hannity to beat him over the head with it. It really bugs Hannity when a Democrat does the right thing, since Republicans NEVER do the right thing.
Oh, "When asked about the matter............" In other words, he gave the perfect political answer. Slick.
The perfect political answer would have been to deflect, then change the subject.
How is Edwards pledging financial assistance to those who were hurt by Fortress "slick"?
Worrier,
I have admitted my dislike of Edwards here before, it is no secret. So I am not unbaised where he is concerned, sorry.
It is slick because it's politically the most expedient thing to do. He is under no obligation to pledge financial assistance here, but he thinks by doing so he comes out looking magnanimous........or in my view, slick.
Tommy,
Just a quick question: Is your bias against Edwards so strong that you will not wait to see if he lives up to his statements?
Surely, if he is just being "slick" he will provide you with fodder down the road, won't he?
His living up to his statements is not the issue, as I said, he is under no obligation to offer financial assistance. His slickness comes in with the political motivation behind it.
Edwards is a phony, in my opinion. His concern with much beyond his political aspirations is suspect to me. I am not a fan.
Edwards is a phony, in my opinion. His concern with much beyond his political aspirations is suspect to me. I am not a fan. Tommy
I must say that I don't share your opinion of Edwards. I don't have a favorite however I respect Edwards. IMO he is the least phony cause he does not ignore the elephant in the room (poor people and simply people in need) and with his wealth he could do just that. Since many seem to find fault and humor with his continued concern for the poor if he truly were phony IMO, he would drop the issue of the poor. I mean if this was a ploy to get positive attention it has not worked with the media. He has not dropped the issue and for that alone he has my respect.
However I feel that each and every Republican candidate with the exception of Ron Paul are all only concerned with their own political aspirations. I see Mitt flip flopping on every issue to meet his Republican requirements. I see Rudy whoring off the 9/11 tragedy. McCain dragging Juniors 6 year old bunny while trying to tell all it's actually a new bunny. And the rest just saying anything as long as they get an invite to the next party. With the main theme from all, terror, be afraid and more terror.
Pearlene, I share your impression of Edwards. He isn't my first choice but I would certainly support him if he is the nominee. I have this theory about the nature of the attacks against Edwards. When he ran as VP many people commented about how successful his Two Americas campaign was. Many people were saying he could have been the candidate. Many people also speculated about the success of a future run. I think the opposion wants to make sure that they attack his platform that resonated with America so well. They will do or say anything to peck away at the Two Americas and since the platform is so valid and resonates they have to attack the messenger. You can see a similar campaign with respect to Global Warming...for some reason the strategy is destroy Al Gore's credibility to destroy the creditability of Global Warming...it doesn't matter that he is only the messenger that the scientist supply the message and Al Gore is irrelavant to the message. I think they are doing the same thing with Edwards...the message resonates so destroy the messenger any way you can. They can't fight the policy so they smear the person instead.
In my experience, conservatives often attack those who are concerned with the poor as phonies. This allows them to ignore the issue of poverty and, instead, focus on the supposed "phoniness" of the speaker. In this case, conservatives call Edwards a phony so that they can ignore the issue of poverty (again). It is not terribly surprising that conservatives continue to re-use such rhetoric, the press eats it up and reprints it. And, of course, the issue of poverty is again ignored. I respect Edwards for talking about poverty in this country. The phonies are those that would distract from what Edwards is talking about (poverty). Poverty in this country is a serious issue.
I keep hearing this "phony" argument about Edwards, and here is my problem with that. There is nothing to back it up. You might "think" that he is a phony, but his actions provide proof contrary to what you might think he is.
Edwards has been working on poverty issues longer than he has been involved in politics, and long before he was considered even remotely wealthy. How is that phony? He didn't just trip over this poverty issue on his way to running for President, and for some to suggest otherwise is just, well, disingenuous at best.
I do believe you call him a phony because you think that somehow and somewhere down the line, he will turn out to be as such, but so far, there is nothing that he has done, or worked for, that you could even remotely consider him phony. You may think his actions are phony, but the proof says otherwise. I think it is entirely possible that you guys think that he is a "phony" because he is a rich politician, and how could he REALLY care about poor people. It comes from a point of cynicism, and the thought that these guys couldn't possibly care about poor folks. His record proves otherwise.
Edwards is a phony, in my opinion.
AS I see it, the big phonies in this race are Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani. Fred Thompson is also in this group, but since he's not an official candidate yet, his phoniness comes in from the side.
The most un-phony candidates in this race are Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter, and Sam Brownbeck. They're all certifiable idiots, and they're staying true to form - especially Tancredo.
There's one of the big differences between John Edwards, and George Bush.
Edwards promises to help those who may lose their homes.
George Bush does the same, but lowballs the owner for the property, and gets the government to invoke Eminent Domain so he can grab the property and then build profitable buildings like a sports stadium on it.
There are certainly TWO America's -
The super-rich white community where Edwards like to club around. And the poor community that is being foreclosed on by dastardly businesses that Edwards owns.
(I would just love to see a picture of Edwards twizzling his long black moustache as he boots a poor mother and children from one of his slummy "Potter" homes!)
"...the poor community that is being foreclosed on by dastardly businesses that Edwards owns."- johnrtorres638
Which Edwards-owned businesses are those?
Apprently, you haven't been to Chatham County NC where he lives. While he has a nice house out there, he by no means lives in some white super rich suburban utopia.
And what company does Edwards own where he forecloses on poor people who can't pay their mortgages? Oh wait, he doesn't own that company at all. What he does run though is a Poverty Center that advocates for such people, and tries to improve the plight of poor people around the country.
Nice obfuscation of the truth though. Maybe someday the things you think will be true, but for now, they're just lies, lies, and well, more lies.
Mag, I think Mr. Torres has left the building. Drop a pile o' crap, then cut & run.He may be researching Edwards haircut expenditures for the last decade.
I'm sure that he has "cut and run", as he has done in other threads in which he has graced us with his presence. Which makes me wonder if someone could get a good job doing what he does. Oh wait, there are already a bunch o' fools out there doing exactly that.
I look forward, in the future, to his inane ramblings about how "bad" the democrats are, especially with no factual backing to base his assertions on.
I see some clear differences. Don't think Neon has any bile here for anyone but Hannity. Been a few hits on people supposedly putting down disabled people, learning or otherwise. I don't see that type of mentality amoung any regular poster. That said the joke deffinitly hit you wrong. So any joke on a pundits mental facilities is going to run smack dab into you.
The USN determined that I was a 100% mental cripple at one point. I give and take on that type of joke. Means little to me personally other than carrying my end of a conversation. You are stiffling the conversation. You have that right.
I may have been a little harsh on neon. He may have wrote before he thought...I know I do it often enough. But I consider it a compliment that you think I am stiffling that type of conversation. I think we can all communicate just fine without that kind of offensvie comments. I take neon at his word that he really didn't see the offense but that is why the comment gets me so p-off...many people use that as a slur and they never consider what they are actually saying and what the meaning behind those comments are.
Don't take it easy on me. And don't back off your initial reaction. I can't use the excuse that I didn't think before I wrote. I considered (briefly) that someone might find it offensive, but ultimately concluded that there really was nothing in it that was deprecating to those with learning disabilities and forged ahead.
I don't think any of us want to get into a discussion of what's societally off-limits or debate "good taste". And I'll suffice it to say that with that in mind, and knowing that what I wrote was neither the only way to berate hannity's sideshow-barker spiel, nor likely to be considered for a pulitzer, I still think it best that I flagged it for removal.
Why it's not gone yet, I don't know, but I'll flag it again.
And I do appreciate the honest criticism. It's a drag to go through life thinking oneself perfect...
Dream large Johny.
I heard a "telling anecdote" about Edwards last week. A caller to Ed Shultz's show, a truck driver from North Carolina. He said he had a problem he couldn't resolve; called Edward's office (when he was a senator) and left a message. He got a call back from Edwards himself, who took care of the problem. This man was not a high roller, just an ordinary citizen.
This reinforces my positive opinion of Edwards, based upon his proposed policies and his actions... not some vague "gut feeling" which could spring from too much fried food.
Nice story. Edwards once helped my grandmother cross the street. He then gave her a $100,000 for her hip replacement surgery right there on the spot.
Oh... I also drive a a truck.
My gut feeling is that you are 0 for 3. :)
1 for three... (It's the truck) ;-)
Barney, if you're pitching for a writing job on the 1/2 hour News Hour, I think it's been cancelled.
Too bad, You seem to have the same grasp of satire as that show had. ;0)
Who cares what Hannity or any douche-bag market fundie thinks? It's their 'let the market sort it out' dogma that enabled the very deregulated sh*tstorm that led to the big housing swindle.
Thank God for the bailout from World Bank and the Fed, we wouldn't want the billionaires to feel as if they're all alone, having to pull themselves up by their bootstraps to get out from under that steaming pile.
- Edwards "pledged that he would personally provide financial assistance to New Orleanians who are facing foreclosure by Fortress-affiliated businesses or have lost their homes already. -
Ok...the O'Reilly parking meter is now officially plugged with nickels...we'll see if/or how Edwards fulfills his promise.
The Issue is what a 2 faced liar Edwards is.
1) If I had my 16 million in one investment, I sure as hell would know what business they were in.
2) Everyone wants to make money from their investments, Edwards made a ton.
3) He was paid $479,000.00 to advise the company.
4) He knew EXACTLY what was happening all along.
5) They donated to his campaign $150,000.00
6) All was going great when nobody knew, making tons of money, advising on business practices.
6) Then he was exposed as the hypocrite that he is. He started the BS: "I didn't know"... HE WAS IN THE BOARDROOM!
Liar Liar, Pants on Fire. I'm glad he was caught.
The Issue is what a 2 faced liar Edwards is.
1) If I had my 16 million in one investment, I sure as hell would know what business they were in.
I'm sure Edwards was well aware of what business they were in - that does not mean that Fortress Investments, who has several affiliate companies in which they are invested, are micromanaging the day to day business operations - there is no company in existence that large where the members of the board will know every last detail - they receive reports from management which generally state profit and loss from activities.
2) Everyone wants to make money from their investments, Edwards made a ton.
Good for him. George Bush also made a ton of money by using political strings to claim eminent domain to bulldoze low income homes to build a stadium, and then managed to hoodwink the residents to add a sales tax to pay for it - but remember, W hates the government, right?
3) He was paid $479,000.00 to advise the company.
Edwards is a lawyer - law firms regularly make advice to structure a company in the most profitable manner from a tax and investment return standpoint - big surprise that they pay him for it - the guy is obviously quite a good attorney.
4) He knew EXACTLY what was happening all along.
Foreclosures are normal course of business for any mortgage firm - how exactly would Edwards know about a forclosures on the homes of Katrina victims peformed by a company that is in the portfolio of Fortress investments? They own shares - they don't manage each individual company. I'm sure he knows exactly what's going on with a million loans. (or maybe 100,000 loans - I agree, he should know each borrower personally)
5) They donated to his campaign $150,000.00
where is your source? and the unfortunate reality is that it takes money to get elected - I'm sure the Republicans would love to run against an opponent with no funding.
6) All was going great when nobody knew, making tons of money, advising on business practices.
yep, and most people don't look at their 401K with a microscope unless they lose money. I'm sure looking for problems when I'm making money, that's for damned sure
6) Then he was exposed as the hypocrite that he is. He started the BS: "I didn't know"... HE WAS IN THE BOARDROOM!
Once again - being in the boardroom of a fund management company is quite different from running the day to day operations of a company in which you own shares - Do you think Fidelity is in the board meetings of every company its mutual funds hold? That's ignorant.
Liar Liar, Pants on Fire. I'm glad he was caught.
Your opinion, but the Repubs are far, far worse - and most of what THEY get caught doing is illegal.
Here's the truth, folks. "You're Not A Great American" Sean could careless about poor black people who lost their homes in New Orleans. This phoney, media prostitute is using these residents' situation to further his attacks against John Edwards.
Think about this for one minute, folks. If Edwards was not the center of attention in New Orleans, phoney Sean would never even mention the aftermath of Hurrican Katrina on the residents.
When was the last time this media fraud did a "report" (Hannity and Colmes, Hannity's America) on the residents of New Orleans? Their condition? Jobs? Rebuiding efforts? When was the last time evil Sean personally visited New Orleans and talked with the residents?
If anyone is evil here, it's this phoney Christian Sean who takes advantage of poor people of New Orleans to further is evil political agenda to attack Democrats.
Media prostitute and hypocrite Sean portrays himself (on-air) as an "average guy" on radio and television, but you really haven't met the REAL Sean Hannity off the air and out of the public. You would be shocked!
Continue to expose the real Sean Hannity, Media Matters and Daily News! You are on to something big!