Fannie Mae officials ousted after sounding alarm on sharing confidential data
apnews.com
apnews.com
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?
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?
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...
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.
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”
They did Bernie dirty, and were lucky to get even as many votes as they did. The email scandal immediately before the election didn't help, but that's more of an excuse for what someone was going to do anyway.
After ~10 years of the current president campaigning both in and out of office. Particularly after Jan 6th. Even more so after congress was too spineless to do their jobs for the people who elected them. NONE of what's happened since really, really, surprises me. Sadden? Disappoint? Dismay? Oh yes, all of those and more. I've been amazed at how fast all that stuff started to happen in the second term. I do totally believe that waste of carbon never read Project 2025 ; just rubber stamping what the rich supporters have asked for.
Looking back further. I'm seriously saddened the Democrats didn't do the right thing for the American People way back in 2008 / 2009. National Single Payer Healthcare. Make healthcare efficient, have competition among providers, but give every person the right to healthcare as part of the social contract and the taxes they pay.
I'm still hopeful that when the pendulum swings back the other way we can end the nightmare of all the damned paperwork and billing and having to do annoying renewals every bloody year.
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.
But, noone was as bad a president as Trump in recent decades, as shown by his approval during the first term, so the re-election is still baffling.
The information bubble, coupled with terrible democrats' strategy, seems a better explanation of the election results, IMHO.
The attack part is just a hyperbole. The leader of MAGA will openly call for people being jailed or primaried if they disagree.
I also get where you are coming from. I have seen this play out 3 times. A non-establishment candidate comes in promising change and removing corruption. Very good at agitation and rousing people by talking about how their government has failed them. Promising to make things better.
But once in power things take a nose dive. The candidate and the party members are even more corrupt. They believe grift and corruption is the norm so there is nothing wrong in being overly and openly corrupt.
And despite the blatant corruption supporters keep making excuses for the behavior. "At least they won against the establishment" or "at least they are in my corner" but often they cannot point to examples to how their lives are better. In most cases they either point to policies which are making lives better for a selected set of people i.e. corruption or just devolve into whataboutism along party lines.
In most cases it takes at about a decade for people to see that their lives aren't any better and this "non-establishment" candidate is even worse. By that time serious damage to the government infrastructure has already been done. There is no coming back.
Sooner or later this behavior will turn US into a third world country where government employees demand bribes openly. But hey, "both parties are corrupt" so why not have partisan and corrupt government employees too.
Everyone around him said how much of an idiot and a POS he is.
What were you thinking? Good job.