Eric Schneiderman and Tom Miller – Why is the Washington Post Blurring the Issue?

Earlier this week, Naked Capitalism reported on the bad rap that New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has been getting from many corners since he had the poor taste to actually investigate the big banks and to suggest that the coalition of attorneys general seeking to address the issues nationally shouldn’t rush to an inadequate settlement with those banks.  Illustrating just how tangled the webs are, Matt Stoller points out that the  Washington Post may have its own reasons for undermining Schneiderman, and the misrepresentation of his falling out with Iowa AG Tom Miller may be simply a means to an end.

So why is the Post lying about this situation? Why the split between the news and editorial? It might have something to do with, well, money! You see, the Washington Post newspaper isn’t profitable, the company makes most of its money from its for-profit educational subsidiaries (hence the nickname “Kaplan Test Prep Daily), including its for-profit university. And guess who is investigating the shady practices of the subprime university educational racket?

The Washington Post suggested that the coalition of Attorneys General had collectively given Schneiderman the boot, making it sound as if there had been general agreement that Schneiderman’s demands–primarily that the group avoid a rushed, inadequate settlement–were unreasonable.  In fact, it was Miller alone who cut Schneiderman out of those discussions because he objected to a quick fix without a complete investigation.

The issue may be moot at this point, anyway, as Firedoglake is reporting that the banks, miffed about the FHFA lawsuit against them, blew off the last scheduled meeting with the AGs; the suit may be the final nail in the coffin of a process that was going nowhere beneficial and eating up a lot of time and resources to get there.