Quicken Loans takes on Justice
Seventy-seven years ago, Detroit’s Brown Bomber, Joe Louis, went toe to toe against the Nazis’ Max Schmeling. Symbolically, it was freedom and liberty against fascism. Now another Detroiter has strapped on Louis’s old gloves, but his fight is against his own government.
Quicken Loans’ street-tough owner Dan Gilbert is pitted against the Obama administration’s Justice Department. Detroit News columnist Nolan Findley describes a Justice Department that’s run like the Chicago mob.
First, the Obama administration whips up a blame-the-banks fervor after the financial collapse. Then, armed with federal fraud statutes adopted after the savings and loan meltdown in the 1980s, it scours the transactions of lenders to find hints of irregularities. It extrapolates from the skimpiest evidence a pattern of widespread abuse, and if needed, frightens insiders into coughing up creative accusations against their employers.
With its "proof" in hand, Justice presents institutions with a choice — pay a large and painful fine to make the investigation go away, or try their luck at a jury trial in an environment in which the words "bankers" and "baby killers" register about the same revulsion.
The nation's six largest banks have all crumbled, choosing to pay $136 billion in fines and admit their "wrongdoing" rather than get their legs broken.
Quicken, owned by Dan Gilbert, has decided not to cower, at least for the moment. Instead of paying protection money, it filed a lawsuit to stop a three-year investigation. Thursday, the government responded by filing charges against Quicken, accusing it of submitting ineligible mortgages for FHA insurance.
In its complaint, Quicken says Justice demanded a multi-billion dollar settlement based on a sampling of just 55 of the 246,000 loans issued. Defects, according to the lawsuit, include miscalculating a borrower's income by $17 and lending another $26 too much. In those meager mistakes, Justice sees systemic fraud.
Quicken's lawsuit accuses the government of "investigating and pressuring large, high-profile lenders into paying nine- and 10-figure sums and publicly admitting wrongdoing, including conceding that the lenders had made false claims." That's an excellent summary of Justice's racket.
Joe Louis lost his first fight against Schmeling. But he won the second fight with a first-round knockout. In his 1976 biography, Louis wrote that he had to “get Schmeling good.” And that “the whole damned country was depending on me.”

Let’s hope Mr. Gilbert feels the same.
FOLLOW US ON
Recent Articles
- Transgender Armageddon: The Zizian Murder Spree
- Jasmine Crockett, Queen of Ghettospeak
- The Racial Content of Advertising
- Why Liberal Judges Have a Lot to Answer For
- Dismissing Evil and Denying the Holocaust — What’s the Endgame?
- The Witkoff Warning: Will Jordan’s King Fall?
- Can Trump Really Abolish the Department of Education?
- Carney’s Snap Election -- And Trump Saw It Coming
- We Can Cure Democracy, But Can We Cure Stupid?
- George Clooney: Master of Cringe
Blog Posts
- Two new revelations about the Signal leak, along with two theories
- Big Tech’s Invisible Hand: How Google and Meta manipulate our elections
- New report: Netherlands is now euthanizing minors
- Tantalizing tidbits: Five news stories about leftists, and sea lions, acting aggressively
- Rockets to Roses: Israel’s bizarre trade cycle with Aza
- Fort Knox? Gold cams!
- There is no birthright citizenship for illegal aliens
- Turn off the phone. Close the laptop.
- Nine reasons Democrats are doomed to irrelevance
- Wagner College should restore Trump’s honorary degree—and set a national example against cancel culture
- The Signal Scandal was a nothingburger, but the WSJ takes the opportunity to attack Vance
- The Trump effect: An unprecedented investment surge and economic renewal
- Hydrocarbon-friendly Trump a match for energy-hungry India
- And Big Bird can’t sing
- The DC appellate court order affrming Judge Boasberg dishonestly ignores its lack of jurisdiction