MSNBC's Hayes Nods As OWS 'Community Organizer' Defends Property Theft As 'Technicalities'
No wonder President Obama adopted some of the language of the Occupy movement in his class-warfare speech this week. It's led by the likes of Alfredo Carrasquillo, a fellow "community organizer" with whom the president perhaps identifies. Carrasquillo specializes in breaking into foreclosed homes to dole them out to people—beginning with himself—to live in.
Chris Hayes gave Carrasquillo a sympathetic platform on his MSNBC show this morning. Making it clear that he was speaking as a "devil's advocate," not, God forbid, expressing his own opinion, Hayes gently inquired of Carrasquillo whether, you know, it could be said he has no right to break into and live in homes owned by others. Dismissing the notion out of hand, Carrasquillo described theft of others' property as "technicalities." That seemed good enough for Hayes, who helpfully pointed out that the homes Carrasquillo is breaking into "are just sitting there, no one's making use of them." Video after the jump.
<
Watch the kid gloves with which Hayes treats someone who might better be called a "criminal organizer."
CHRIS HAYES: And, and, and, I want you to respond to, I think, to play devil's advocate for a second, right? Folks may be watching at home or heard the story say: this is America. If you want a home you should save up and you should buy a home, and that home is owned by Bank of America. You have no right to be in it. What's your response to people who say that?
ALREDO CARRASQUILLO: My response is this: that Bank of America has basically been one of the biggest criminals in history. I mean, they've been basically foreclosing on homes, forcing families that are working hard trying to provide for their children, forcing them to be homeless and out on the street. There's more vacant homes than there are people on the street. Right is right, wrong is wrong. And ultimately, these homes need to be filled with families that need them. And that's all there is to it. There's always technicalities involved in it. But the fact of the matter is if there's empty homes, they should be filled with families that need them.
HAYES: You said there are 70 foreclosed properties on that block. They are just sitting there, right? No one's making use of them.
- Mark Finkelstein's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Bed Wetting Lefties
Submitted by Kleenex on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 10:31am.
Yet another reason they have such low viewership. It's only theft if somebody else does it.
<sound of duct tape ripping off roll>
Submitted by motherbelt on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 10:41am.
What's your response to people who say "That home belongs to Bank of America; you have no right to be in it"?
This is a serious question????
What about Hayes's bank account ?
Submitted by NeoKong on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 10:40am.
Is anybody using it...."technically"...?
I mean all that money is just sitting there when there are people who need money.
It's all just sitting there...in that bank.
If Chris Hayes and Alfredo
Submitted by Reaver on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 11:02am.
If Chris Hayes and Alfredo Carrasquillo have cars parked in the MSNBC parking lot while they're doing the show then I guess “technically” no one’s using them right? Where would be the harm? Another thought given the OWS stewardship of the parks they occupied these homes will likely be fit only for demolition after the squatters are evicted. Vacant homes are unlikely to have electricity or running water.
Why would 'occupiers'
Submitted by texasborngranny on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 11:33am.
care whether 'vacant homes are unlikely to have electricity or running water?
As far as running water goes, they don't seem to care about bathing or where they poop and since the likes of Soros are probably catering their meals,they don't have to about cooking.
With regard to electricity, next door neighbors to the 'occupied' houses should check their outdoor electrical outlets... it would be typical of 'occupiers' to use (steal) their power from people who go to work each day, pay their taxes and utility bills and actually own their home.
maybe someone should provide the addresses and bus/taxi fare to the homeless for the 'occupied' houses so they wouldn't have to sleep outside. I'm sure the 'occupiers' would be more than happy to share what is NOT actually theirs with those less fortunate.
Car....?He has no car.
Submitted by NeoKong on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 12:02pm.
This guy is a bum to the tenth degree.
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/homeless-activist-alfredo-c...
After reading this article about him dragging his family into some abandoned home I was thoroughly disgusted. What was even worse was that he was surrounded by people who were congratulating him as if his breaking and entering was some sort of measure of success.
One of his fellow Occupiers
Submitted by jkwtrading on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 12:34pm.
One of his fellow Occupiers is already drooling over the idea.
Really?
Submitted by Mashugana on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 10:42am.
The Occupy movement is still going?
I was sure it would be over by now. Who doesn't love a protest, right?
Carrasquillo will next be
Submitted by motherbelt on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 10:49am.
Carrasquillo will next be demanding that Barack Obama seize these properties from banks and give them to others, thus removing that little "technicality."
He obviously went to the Whoopi Goldberg School of Law: If no one's using it, it's not really "theft-theft."
Carrasquillo?
Submitted by Newsbubba on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 11:00am.
I'm betting that he has already interviewed for Vann Jones old job as one of Bambi's Commie Czars.
I'll bet Stalin is rolling over in his grave thinking how easy this takeover and creation of the USSA is for Da One compared to all the effort he had to go through to establish the USSR.
Pay attention...
Submitted by retrocon on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 10:54am.
If the "O"verlord gets re-elected, watch the following progression:
1) Foreclosed homes owned by the gov/Fannie/Freddie will be provided to the unemployed, low or rent free, by executive order.
that will get touted as a big success, then,
2) the admin will demand the same of foreclosed homes owned by banks that received TARP funds,
as he has taken a number of lessons from Castro, and as "real" unemployment reaches past 20 to 25 percent,
3) they will say "any home with a mortgage will be subject to government controls, and have to accommodate multiple families." On the premise that a) we have been getting federal subsidies called "interest tax deductions," and b) the real owners, the lending institutions, which will require additional bailouts due to failures caused by Dodd-Frank and the screwed up Obamaconomy, will be indebted to the feds.
This, and a lot of other executive decisions, way beyond actual, constitutional executive authority, will be the result of another four years.
I'm not paranoid, this guy believes he is above the constitution.
... and that's just the short list, retro.
Submitted by Newsbubba on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 11:03am.
It's not paranoia if someone is really out to get you.
We'll have to shoot our way through another four years.
OK, I'll buy the little commie agitator's explanation.
Submitted by Newsbubba on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 10:57am.
Just look at the White House! I mean how many more homeless people could Moochie and Bambi squeeze in that waste of space? Hell, it doesn't even belong to them. They are living there rent free. I say go out on the DC streets and load it up. It's just sitting there wasted.
I'll even volunteer the "extra space" in my house to the homeless if EVERY liberal on the planet will do the same. let's solve this problem together.
Let's even expand on this little RBFSOB Junior's definition of crime as "technicalities." "Technically" speaking my car should be left sitting with the keys in it when I'm not using it. I mean, there are more people who don't have cars than people who don't have homes. just think of how much more fair it would be to leave ALL vehicles with the keys in them.
This community organizer Shiite is starting to make sense to me. Has NB ever done a study of how many homeless or poor people the Reverends Al and Jackson have living in their spare rooms? I say if they lead, I'll follow
Come on America! Give it up. Give it all up for others, especially the others who think they deserve a free ride.
So according to Alfredo
Submitted by misterbee241 on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 11:02am.
the buyer has absolutely no responsibility in the matter. Cant pay for it? Then dont. Blame the bank when they come to reclaim their property. The world is truly turned upside down.
Liberal (il)logic
Submitted by DontFeedTheTrolls on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 11:04am.
I bet there's money just sitting in banks all across America, and nobody is using it!!! Why not just give it out and then everybody will have money!! And we could do the same with hotdogs!!
he would like to do that, but
Submitted by jkwtrading on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 12:31pm.
he would like to do that, but Obama is beating him to it.
Alfredo obviously failed both economics and logic
Submitted by UpNorth on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 11:28am.
back in whatever community college he attended.
It does NOT follow that because, a. there are people who don't own homes, then b. those people are entitled to one of those vacant homes.
If you purchase a _______ (insert home, car, TV) and borrow from the bank, you owe money to the bank, Alfredo. If you don't pay it back, the bank will take back that which you purchased, because you violated your contract.
We have seen the future.......
Submitted by Herbster on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 11:36am.
Listening to these two cretins "Discuss" foreclosed (Read, "Available for free") homes is a "Technicality." How any station - including MSNBC can take these two fools and foist them on the public is beyond me. However, there is a lesson here. These two represent the thinking of the current occupant of the White House and his communistic minions. Mr. Hayes and his friend exist and spout their propaganda because of the apathy of the public in general.
I fear that (Apathy) will lead to the re-election of the current occupant of the White House. With the assistance of the always left leaning propagandists in the media, his re-election is assured. He and his family will continue to live in (And disrespect) the White House, which, as luxurious as it is, is still public housing.
Another prediction. after the '12 election, the media will immediately begin the push for "Their candidate" in '16. Who will it be? Andrew Cuomo.....and you can bet the farm on that. You will also see Chelsea (Another genius) Clinton run for office. She is "Being groomed" at NBC.
As Goethe wisely stated: "There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action."
Is this what we have come to in this society?
Submitted by dlwoltmann on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 12:12pm.
If there is proof that someone changed the loan AFTER you signed it, or stole your home thru false documentation, then they should be prosecuted. But short of that, people are responsible for the papers on those mortgages that they signed. If I hear one more person talk about how they were scammed or defrauded, I'm going to scream. It used to be that you would not admit to the stupidity of not fully reading documentation before you signed it, but people are now wearing it like a badge of honor. As far as the OWS "protesters" squatting on foreclosed properties, that is trespassing, no matter what city you live in. Any head of a law enforcement agency that does not immediately evict them should be removed from office.
Technically, no one is using
Submitted by shirtsbyeric on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 12:18pm.
Technically, no one is using the White House for 17 days this month. Why not go Occupy that?
another glaring example of their infantilsim
Submitted by wizardjr on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 12:32pm.
Infants want what the want. They do not understand property rights or earned property. QED.
Waitng for the hedge fund
Submitted by Nothing Left on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 3:00pm.
Waitng for the hedge fund manager to finance the company that subcontracts to evict the squatters....
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Submitted by Tomorama on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 3:41pm.
I scan through this on Sat and Sunday really briefly and this feminine version of Ray Ray Maddow is a know it all KNOW NOTHING about the real world.
Every panel, all left and all as usual in agreement like the dashboard doggies that inhabit this horrid network that is so far to the left, they are in another country.
Anyone that says Fox news is right orientated anywhere near as much as this is left is full of sh**.
Legitimizing theft
Submitted by Galvanic on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 4:20pm.
CARRASQUILLO: "There's always technicalities involved in it. But the fact of the matter is if there's empty homes, they should be filled with families that need them."
Need them, or want them? The difference is neither semantic nor a technicality.
There is a housing surplus in this country, so squatting is not a matter of survival. It's a crime.
Earthy
Submitted by rammingspeed on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 4:37pm.
ALL of these people, including MSNBC and the rest, are the filth of the Earth.
"Earthy" post was---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 12/10/2011 - 9:49pm.
pithy.
I agree.
MD
Someone's making use of them
Submitted by CobraMan on Sun, 12/11/2011 - 1:20pm.
"They are just sitting there, right? No one's making use of them."
Someone's making use of them. The Realtors are, for sure. That's why those houses have For Sale signs in their front yards. The banks want a return on their investments, as they should. It was the bank's money that purchased those houses to begin with. If the people who received the banks money to finance their home purchases and fail to repay their mortgage as agreed, the banks are fully justified in seizing those homes and selling them on the open market. THAT"S the part that these OWS supporters never seem to want to discuss.
The bank's aren't the bad guys here. The people who default on their loans are. THEY'RE the ones who violated a lawful contract, not the banks. The banks are just trying to get their money back, just as you or I would in similar situations. Don't forget that the bank's money is OWED to their depositors. The banks have to recoup the money they loaned to people somehow, ether by reviving their repayments or "seizing" and selling the assets that was used guaranteed repayment, which is called "collateral," like foreclosing a house.
This is the part that too many people never discuss, the money that is owed to everyday people, like you and I, who deposit their money in a bank. People like the OWS and their supporters never mention those depositors. They act as if all the money belongs to the banks, that the banks raised all that money themselves. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The vast majority of the money that banks have loaned out belongs to their depositors. It''s the depositors who wants that loaned out money returned, one way or the other.
I would love to see these idiots tell their friends and family that, sorry, your bank account is worthless because we have seized the assets that the banks were trying to sell to recoup their loss from a unpaid loan because, you know, the house the bank was trying to sell wasn't being used. Sorry about wiping out your entire life's saving, Grandma, but those evil bankers make far too much money as it is and it isn't fair to others. It's far better that the government take the bank's money and give it to the poor.
What's that? You're now poor because the bank can't repay you for your deposits, all because people like myself forced the banks to surrender their capital, the very capital that is based on your deposited money? Don't worry, we will make sure that the government will give you some of it back, at least enough to pay for your mandatory health insurance policy. There's SSI and Medicare too, don't forget. Isn't life peachy? Power to the people!
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Amazing how common sense just doesn't factor into---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 12/11/2011 - 10:16pm.
the OWS mindset.
Excellent post, CobraMan.
MD
Or Anwar al-Awlaki???
Submitted by IdahoJim on Mon, 12/12/2011 - 7:46pm.
I get so d*mn tired of your sig.
Did you not hear Newt? Al-Awlaki declared war on the United States. He called for the destruction of America. He joined a foreign army that declared war on the us.
War is not a civil or criminal offense. War is a military issue. We don't let judges or police fight in or judge wars, that is the military's responsibility. Enemy combatants are not offered the same rights and privileges under the constitution as US residents are afforded. Why should they be when their goal is to destroy the very country that is based on that constitution. And by declaring war they are actively denying that the US Constitution has any validity for them.
As far as I am concerned, the instant Anwar declared war on the US, or called for the destruction of America, he renounced his citizenship, and any civil rights, and became a problem for the military to solve. He voluntarily removed himself from our justice system.
Good riddance.
IdahoJim
http://idahoandy.net