I thought James and Lachlan Murdoch, Rupert's son's and heirs, unless that money loving throwback disowns them, were planning on bringing some uptown chic to Fox News. Re-populate the newsroom with trendy sophisticates, a little refinement.
After all, Ayles is gone, O'Rielly is toast. Hannity would be the next logical candidate for a flush. Sleezy, check. Creepy, check. Shifty...and on and on.
Hannity is now a liability, and unless he has a liabilibuddy at Fox, someone to go to bat for him, he should be packing a cardboard box right now.
Carefully, lovingly, wrapping his Trump paraphernalia in whatever toxic rag he reads and awaiting the guys with the walkie-talkies who will escort him to the street below.
Maybe James and Lachlan could arrange some company for Hannity and give Pirro a nudge too. That would be nice.
10
Great column -- thank you! This is what makes an NYT subscription worthwhile.
17
"We report. You decide." I decided a long time ago.
5
With 1/2 to 2/3s of all wealth inherited, we’ve bred a class of people (some not all) who really don’t have to contribute to the greater common good, society or economy whatsoever anymore.
Sean Hannity is an example of that.
Unfortunately, when you’re swimming in time and money, you can buy politicians that will implement rules that favour your abilities to growth that wealth further (at the expense of the bulk of us in the middle or bottom).
This is where a fair progressive tax and appropriate capital gains taxes make sense. If you’re smart, it’s still VERY hard to lose your inherited wealth (the risks are still much lower for those at these wealth levels). BUT you contribute your fair share to the economy, roads, infrastructure and the education systems. When you take into account the carbon footprint of some of these lifestyles, it starts to make even more sense.
9
Actually, it is not news, it's an editorial; for commenters accustomed to Fox News who are puzzled by the difference, the editorial is a form where the author gives his/her value judgments and opinion about the meaning of certain facts. This editorial is relevant because, although Hannity is just one individual, and didn't cause the housing collapse or the financial crisis, it is behavior like his, multiplied, that did. And the real point is to call out the hypocrisy of the rich and the (tax) advantaged. The language of American politics is mostly a language of lies, in which the rich use false arguments to get the working class to fight among themselves. And it's working
38
We all thank the Times for letting Mr. Saporito -
- (Italian for ''tasty dish;'' Spanish for ''toad'') -
- demonstrate to us the kind of one-sided ''copy'' -
- let's not elevate this to the level of ''reporting'' -
- that ran Time Magazine straight into the ground.
Who knew that the Hard Left needed one more hit piece on Sean Hannity? All the NY Times may do here is remind the curious reader to actually listen to some of his show in YouTube or during prime time one night soon.
At least this guy's property management people upgrade his apartments and keep them repaired. Many or most big-city high grade apartments appear to have been made into LLC's - which explains why so many Trump corporations - 99%+ - are still actively doing normal business - despite all the scare stories about bankruptcies.
1
NY times seems to be fascinated by Hannity writing about him a lot lately. In a way it is good to keep him honest and ethical. But it is beginning to sound like a lot of news outlets are envious of Fox. Hannity is a live wire and what he and his colleagues are doing seems to be keep Fox ratings up. Fox is the only news outlet that has created a niche of defending the president,not very common nowadays. But that is where standing out of the pack and thinking differently has its advantage.
2
What does it say when "hypocrite"is the nicest thing one can say about Hannity.
13
Real estate agents, mortgage brokers, banks, hedge funds, the federal government...again hedge funds and large investors...
When what should be considered criminal negligence leading to widespread homelessness in the US, it’s easy to not blame anyone when the blame is spread across so many institutions and individuals. It just evaporates into the capitalist ether. And, hence the beauty of our corrupt system. No one is actually responsible - financially or morally. The problem, the poverty is left on the backs of the poor. Poor and now homeless.
12
I see the same odd pattern of buying alot of realestate ,think Trump with his golf courses and Cohen with his taxi medallions. All bought cash with suspicious foreign monies.
And I see the inpact that Trump's immigration is having in our area ,where our building is in a boon, the very best of the subcontractors are all immigrants, and it's brought down the cost of building , plus increased the overall quality too .
Trump and his cronies are totally illegally tied to Russia and as was the way Watergate was solved , so to shall Trumpgate; by following the money !
6
Connected to Russia? After thousands of man-days of trained FBI agents' investigation, the one thing we can safely assume is that there never was any collusion between the Trump campaign and Hillary's long-time partners in the Russian government and busoness community.
Oh, but the DOJ's Inspector General is going to a grand jury soon! Now we'll hear of actual misdeeds.
2
"As the hedge funds and the Hannitys have thrived, many others find themselves unable to afford homes. There has been a pickup in construction and sales recently, but demand still outstrips supply. We’ve only recovered two-thirds of the construction needed to catch up with the increase in new households, according to Robert Dietz, chief economist of the National Association of Home Builders."
Wondering if anyone actually read that paragraph before publishing it. Demand = people desiring to purchase, not people who cannot afford to do same. Assuming the second half of the paragraph is accurate, the shortage is in homes, not people "able to afford" one.
2
Now we get critics in the media saying-- ain’t if awful all this corruption? While the grifters are crawling out of woodwork that has been primed for this. It’s not fashionable in current politics to care about affordable housing for the masses.
But what did they expect when a country turns it’s elections over to the richest mega donors funding? Legalized corruption becomes a political norm, and our politic culture just adapts and goes downhill.
A NY Gop congressman recently said his funders told him, if he doesn’t pass that tax bill, don’t bother calling them again.
Richard Painter, Bush ethics lawyer, now running as a Democrat, wrote that the NRA, and other corporate funders are running a “protection racket” that politicians must kow tow to or suffer consequences.
The grifters are mainstream---they see the green light, and they think only chumps would not take advantage.
So we get a grifter president and his family, his media, and his lawyers. The obstacles were long cleared for them. And the media are only appalled at the results, while they ignore the cause---that we have the world’s most expensive and profitable elections.
Why is our media afraid to speak out on this? They profit from the big money system of campaign advertising, that’s not even allowed in other democracies.
12
No plan, no wide, imaginative, benevolent policy that puts average Americans first.
No way to achieve that good goal till laws and regulations are crafted to benefit good Americans rather than just a few people who think they are acting like good Americans.
Tilting everything your way because you can or because a compromised politician set it up for you in a mutual back scratch arrangement is common.
But it's destructive.
There will be a revolt against our paid-for current version of democracy.
The whole rotting structure we have now will be easy to tumble. It's foundation is weak.
Nearly everyone in this country has had it with the money in our political system.
Only the Hannitys and his privileged poodle friends like their pampered status.
Enjoy it while you can.
The rest of us are restive.
And, no, it won't be Trump leading our charge.
7
It is amazing what a wonderful ROI/lousy reputation exists for those in the Trump orbit dabbling in real estate. Son-in-law Jared Kushner has a horrible reputation as a landlord for his thousands of rental properties.Trump's father was blasted by federal authorities for discriminatory practices. Scott Pruitt is a successful player too ( as long as he has a lobbyist nearby to assist with the shady financing). Just yesterday, this newspaper revealed Michael Cohen's suspicious multi-million dollar real estate deal transactions. And then there is the president himself serving the Russian market (with questionable property values) in South Florida. Now we find that Sean Hannity (the president's favorite TV personality) is gaming the real estate market too.
It sounds like a wonderful racket to be in.....
7
If the investors (including Hannity) who ultimately bought the properties for sale post-2009 had refrained from investing in properties, the housing collapse would have lasted for a longer period of time and been more severe. The former owners who lost their properties in 2009 didn't lose their properties because investors subsequently bought them post-2009. They lost their homes because they could no longer afford their loan payments during the period of time leading up to 2009.
2
Two questions for Mr. Saporito:
1) Exactly why would a bank "unlawfully bully into foreclosure" a homeowner who is making their payments? Would not the bank do better by continuing to be repaid, vs. taking a loss?
2) Exactly how does an investor buying distressed property harm homeowners? More buyers increase property values, which is exactly what a homeowner would want.
While it's true banks and Wall Street did many wrong things before, during and after the mortgage crisis, Saporito is more interested in painting cartoon images of conservatives he dislikes, than explaining basic economics with any clarity.
5
To the 1st point, you would think that is true. But it isn't how it works. There have been a few homes in my area that were taken over by the banks. Yet for years they held them, not even attempting to sell them. Which has to cost money. Maybe they can get a write off in taxes, that would be my guess.
2nd point It is the renters and people who wish to own who get hurt now. Both can't afford the rising costs. Also the fact that people were induced to buy houses they couldn't afford using mortgage rates that were not fixed. They bought the house with a low rate, then the bank raised the rate to where the payment was way more than the owner could afford. So in the end, the owner had the house repossessed by the bank, who could then resell the house. That is how homeowners got hurt.
The economics were clearly laid out and I am not an economist and could understand what he said.
It was the fact that conservatives complain about the government, but use the government to profit themselves. Their hypocrisy is appalling. Hannity is constantly complaining about the government, yet uses it to make himself richer at the expense of others.
11
Hannity may be a side show, but the NYT must expose the main show. It’s corporate control of our election campaigns, aided by the Fox News Gop state run media influence on political norms.
How was Fox allowed to get so big? In the ‘90s both parties colluded, to use an apt word, to repeal long-standing anti monopoly laws for media. The rw then built up Fox so it redefined what’s left/right/center in politics.
Sure, Trump put Goldman Sachs in his cabinet. But what about past presidents, even our esteemed Obama? After the biggest crash since 1929, he put Wall St in his cabinet--- R. Rubin and L. Summers, etc. See Rubin’s recent op ed and the critical comments.
The big banks recovered nicely from the Crash but no one was prosecuted. Our 2016 Democratic candidate used various excuses to oppose restoring the sensible FDR bank regulations that her husband & GOP had repealed.
This all sends a message to the powerful, giving a green light to legal exploitation for profit, as the elites fund our elections. As their profits rise, so do their mega donations to the nominees we must vote for.
This system is protected by the Supreme Court’s whopping lie worthy of a Trump, that billionaire/corporate money is Free Speech per 1st amendment. This legalized corruption shuts out the voice of We the People as polls prove—the whole purpose of having a democracy.
This op ed just laments the destructive effects, using 1 notorious person. That's a distraction from the causes.
4
So, it would have been better if Hannity, hedge funds, etc didn't buy those properties? Better to have let market prices keep crashing absent any market stabilizing biyers?
1
Just noting the hypocrisy of the hannitys who complain about government and then profit off of government.
Plus while they bought the houses, they priced them out of reach for most people, which causes a housing problem.
Hannity wasn't stabilizing the market, he was taking advantage of people losing their houses. Those people still lost their home. What hannity did was profit off their loss.
4
Can the NYT report where these properties are?
I'd like to know if Hannity is joining Jared Kushner as a slumlord in my home town, Baltimore.
I'd like to check the addresses in any bad landlord reports I can find. Is he part of the lawsuits against Kushner and the reason why his business partners names aren't being made public?
Maybe those of you who live in the NY City area can keep an eye out.
Let's make sure Hannity gets everything he deserves for "helping to solve the housing crisis".
4
I object to the NYT characterizing Hannity, Mnuchin, et al. as vultures.
The hill behind our house is a nesting site for turkey vultures. They are a joy to watch soaring on a Spring wind.
Hannity, Mnuchin, et al. are maggosts who have dined and thrived on the rotting corpse of middle class America.
8
For all of you, who are disturbed that Hannity is taken to task for simply trying to make a little easy money. You are missing the point. Mr. H. fights any effort by those who would ask the government to aid citizens who are struggling, or who need help be it health insurance, job or economic security , or housing. Yet Hannity uses programs that government insures and subsidizes. This costs the taxpayers of this country money. Simple as that. If Hannity was assuming risk and doing this without government aid , bless his heart. But he isn't , so Hannity just shut up when some family needs SNAP aid to eat and go to work, or CHIPs to insure their kids.
12
Another absurdly arbitrary scribble from a contributor to the Times editorial board. Sean Hannity had nothing to do with the housing collapse. He might have benefitted from it, but so have millions of Americans who bought a home since that event. I spend an essential $7.50 from my Social Security every month to read the Times. It would be significant to me if the editorial board could find others less infected with Trump Derangement Syndrome.
3
You missed the point, they didn't say he caused it, just that as a hypocrite about government, he was using government programs to profit himself while complaining about government programs.
7
Let me guess.. Sean did all this on behalf of the, "Forgotten Man!" Thanks Sean .. You are a real Patriot!
2
"It is ironic that I am being attacked for investing my personal money...." If you're investing your personal money, Sean, then why the shell companies to buy the properties? Pay your fair share of taxes like a good MAGA citizen!
12
I have total contempt for Hannity & Mnuchin due to their exploitation of low income households who do not have the means to buy in a fair market
But let's also place blame where blame is due and a really huge chunk of blame for this situation is owned by Obama, Geithner and Bernanke
They gave the bankers who trashed the economy bonuses because if the bankers did not get their bonuses they would take jobs elsewhere - a lie worthy of Donald J Trump
Unlike the car companies from which the government took equity & shared in the upside the banks had cash shoveled into them without any meaningful restrictions or conditions on use
That cash went straight to the hedge funds, private equity etc who then scooped up houses for far less than cost of construction which set the stage for Hannity Mnuchin & the rest to do what you now complain of
Obama Geithner & Bernanke could have kept millions in their homes by sharing in the appreciation in those homes as a basis for doing so but made a deliberate & knowing choice not to do so
Obama Geithner & Bernanke presided over & directed one of the greatest transfers of wealth ever in U.S. history & greatly exacerbated income inequality & accelerated it even more
So in this one area really no difference between Trump Obama W & Clinton as the have directed the U.S. into becoming a 3d world country
3
Many of those people lost their homes before Obama was president. Over 7 million had lost their homes before the elections took place.
It was the Bush bailout that allowed the bankers to give out large bonuses to the bankers. That happened also before Obama was elected.
But then I have heard republicans blame Obama for Katrina happening during his presidency, even though Bush was president. So facts don't matter.
The housing bubble crash happened under Bush's watch, way before Obama became president.
7
Extremely hard to do voter registration in Georgia apartments because "corporate" always forbids it. I guess Hannity and his ilk are to blame.
It's rich that he says he is "investing in" these communities. More like "extracting from" these communities.
Alas, it seems the surest way to wealth for the untalented and unscrupulous, preying on the poor.
7
Another sickening example of the corporate-ization of America. Basic human needs like food (Whole Foods) and housing (example of Hannity LLC) have been turned into commodities for LLC's and huge corporations to get rich on - with the government's blessings and assistance.
5
This story aside - the sub-headline on the homepage - "As the Fox News star has thrived, many Americans find themselves unable to afford homes or pay the rent" is really cheap. Congratulations you made Hannity a sympathetic character; and that's a tall order!
No one is ever supposed to be successful??
"Local man has the nerve to eat a sandwich while millions of Americans struggle with hunger" !!
5
How is Hannity being made sympathetic? The article shows how he preyed on the people losing their homes while he profited from government programs while he complains about government. It's called hypocrisy.
61
I don't care for Hannity nor his smug sense of hypocrisy. He will be on the air tonight, making light of those individuals who can't pull themselves up from the bootstraps and get off the dole but then wants his Section 12 funding check from his tenants to come in every 30 days. Since Hannity is not the sole hypocrite, I am willing to give him some leniency. It's this two-faced screaming at the system but on the back side taking advantage of it, that makes we wish for a functional government that could work towards solving our Country's issues.
4
Anyone who's ever suffered Hannity's shtick--not looking simply to affirm their political views, anyway--already knew what a sleaze he is. But it's instructive, if we are trying to figure out how a sleaze soul mate like Trump could get elected president, to understand how Hannity can say whatever he wants (invest in minority communities), do the opposite (prey on minority renters and evict them at 4 x the rate of the previous owners), and come out not smelling like raw sewage to his supporters. It certainly helps when you have your own worldwide news network, right Mr. Murdoch?
Forget the center ring and the multiple daily side shows that the Trump circus vomits out into the media. Maybe the question isn't what happens to Trump, but whether democracy survive this blind faith in demagogues.
3
Another Trump crony who's a truly despicable predator, as well as a liar and utter hypocrite?
Shocking, simply shocking!
4
Smarmy...isn't that the word that comes to mind when thinking of Sean Hannity the slum lord.
7
LLC's people are rich, pay little or no tax and vote (R) and call liberals snowflakes. These people who have "made it" financially, will spawn the next generation of self-absorbed, entitled spoiled brats- wash and repeat.
5
Sean Hannity is a liar, a hypocrite, and a truly horrible person.
7
However, there are still tens of millions of highly luxurious houses in the US, and they all have people living in them. Evidently, there are large number of people in the US who can afford a very nice place to live.
3
Yeah, and expect us great unwashed deplorables to subsidize their property taxes and mortgage debt on April 15.
1
The American way.
Hannity was one of three clients of the President’s lawyer/fixer, Michael Cohen.
Hannity said he and Cohen talked primarily about real estate. Cohen is being investigated for financial crimes.
Trump made his money through shady real estate deals, exploiting US bankruptcy law, and stiffing contractors.
It’s no wonder Hannity trivializes his relationship with Cohen and is such a staunch defender of Trump. Looks like there are plenty of quid pro quos in this nasty triumpverate.
3
This is click-bait. Hannity isn't responsible for average Americans not being able to buy homes. And by all means let's ignore all the filthy rich democrats who talk the talk while flying in private jets and buying carbon credits so that we can concentrate on one easy target from the wrong side who has nothing personally to do with anything.
5
The Federal government foreclosed on individuals and on banks that went broke. That government then sold properties in lots to people like Hannity at 10 cents to 50 cents on the dollar. The original owners were never offered a deal like that.
I'm not mad at Hannity, but my rage for the government is extreme.
Yeah, same government that facilitated the collapse...
5
Distressed properties are a noose around the neck of any community, nullifying tax assessments, bringing property values down further and an eyesore for sure. Hannity and others (including myself), buy properties through financing, spend a lot of time, money and effort to restore them, usually in distressed areas. Taking a risk, recouping expenditures and making a profit (while providing housing that wasn't there before) is business pure and simple. What is wrong with that?
6
Did you read the article about how he made those homes unaffordable to most people?
1
Ultimately, if people want affordable housing, they need to get out and vote to put people in office that will work to that point. Hannity tries to undercut the democratic process through his Fox program of fear. Voters need to see past the Fox garbage.
10
Many of the five million homes foreclosed on where stolen using fake paperwork forged by the banks.
It was the greatest theft of American middle class wealth in the history of this country. These people should have been brought to the gallows but our Republican president Obama refused to bump off his largest contributors.
1
Oh, just stop it. Mr. Hannity can make a determination of what he considers "prudent," and Mr. Saporito can cease the cheap shots at someone engaging in perfectly legal business activities. Come the revolution, Comrade Bill can dispense his brand of social justice. Until then, he can continue to accumulate Sanctimony Points to his heart's content.
5
Oh the hypocrisy. Hannity rails at the government and then uses the government to get rich.
Sure it's legal, doesn't make it moral though. It just shows how the laws are set up to benefit the rich.
1
To the madding crowd, the truth is you can’t trust what you read in the news. But a pack of dog whistlers continually gets attention, especially when it comes to labeling those lazy welfare queens and latte-drinking liberals. The crowd cheers a derisive “Pocahontas” and drowns out the truth of fights fought for them.
The right wing is not likely to care “Mnuchin picked at the carcasses” of the Great Recession or recoil at the gall of federally subsidizing Sean Hannity. For reasons I find unfathomable, these people don't want to even acknowledge the hypocrisy of “perfectly legal” means Hannity used to get federal funds for his use. Round and round it goes as this administration ushers in more legal ways to enrich the rich.
7
This editorial perfectly sums up everything that is wrong with liberalism. Hannity and "people like him" are evil simply because they worked hard and made money. Hannity comes from nothing and everything he has he got for himself. He is an American success story and should be celebrated. And hes a commentator, not a journalist.
5
Worked hard? He took advantage of people who were on hard times. And made a profit off of it. And used the same government he constantly derides to help him make money.
1
So, back in the 80’s we switched over to a service based economy. This was a reason to justify corporate leaders from outsourcing every job they could. Now 30 years later Walmart is the nation’s largest employer. How many part time workers at Walmart can afford to buy a house for $125,000.00?
We are exactly where we were supposed to be. Just remember, whenever it gets better for some people, it also gets worse fr many others.
1
Hannity is just another capitalist trying to make a living of the backs working stiffs. No wonder he and Trump are friends. Birds of a feather stick together.
10
"Once again, average Americans struggle, while guys like Mr. Hannity thrive.". and guys like John Stewart create a 12 acre farm sanctuary.
7
and dont for get jared another nice landlord.
6
Sean Hannity's Guide to Real Estate: This neighborhood is whites only, folks, but I can overcharge you for some dump on the "wrong" side of town and collect a government subsidy.
He seems to think he can manipulate realty as shamelessly as he does reality.
7
He is a true republican. Feed at the federal teat, get unfair advantage, and tell everyone else to get out, and practice rugged individualism. These deficit spend like drunken sailors, hoggers of the governmental teat, souls sold to the religious right, want to live Mayberry, with guard dogs and barbed wire separating them from those they do not like. He is, more than anything else, a republican stereotype. When we figure out that he has been harassing women, stealing money, and doing drugs, we will have to further confirm his status as a bible thumping republican.
138
What he's doing is legal,period! Unfair advantage?,I don't think so! Capitalism,try it! It works.
1
Tell me how well it works for the other 99% after the class war fool.
You should not be attacking Hannity!!! He is taking advantage of the tax laws and HUD access that everyone else with substantial cash can and do use to invest in real estate. Im also confident Hannity is also taking advantage of significant tax credits for investing in low income housing projects which house a predominant number of Section 8 tenants! Yes he is providing a much needed investment in this area!!! The questions is whether he is transparent in his opinions broadcasted through his FOX microphone to the rest of the poor shnucks who watch and support him!! With a net worth in excess of $75 million. He not one of "us", "you" or "then". He represents less than .001% of the 1% of the wealthiest Americans. I do not begrudge him or his wealth, but I do begrudge his hypocrisy and double standard to which he preaches!!!! Just one more "Do as I say, But not as I do". The bigger question, is why do we put up with this!!!!! He's just like those conservative republicans whose family values' govern everything in their professional lives, except their girlfriend's need for an abortion, their boys friend's exploits, their mistress' photos, and their sexual assault life styles! Agh!!!
75
Perhaps it's time to take a closer look at the laws that made it legal. The laws written by lobbyists of rich bankers. Perhaps you could educate yourself on American History and you will soon realize this is exactly the kind of practices that led immigrants to flee Europe and sail to the Americans to search for financial and religious freedom. Financial slavery is just as real as labor slavery.
4
Please don’t hide behind the smear Hannity slant.
There are fundamental causes behind the housing crisis. None that Hannity created or caused.
How many in management at the Times have portfolios investing in the same?
How many inside the beltway?
If you are going to smear a conservative please be honest and print “He doesn’t believe what I do and therefore must be an evil man”
3
It was never stated that he caused the crash. It was stated that he profited off of it. And used the government which he constantly complains about to make his money.
Most people call that hypocrisy.
Do tell Mr. Hannity... what is the dollar value of the subsidies, guarantees, insurance that YOU received FROM the government (a.k.a taxpayers)?
Ya lousy “Welfare Queen!”
... and if it was all above-board, and fit nicely with your worldview, why weren’t you braying about it non-stop on Fox and extolling the virtues of what you were doing – and the ‘Big Gubmint!/Deep State!’ guarantees/subsidies that lessened the risks to your bottom line and allowed you to engage in this ‘humanitarian‘ effort?
H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E.
: ) L
6
In the accompanying photo he looks just like a mega-church pastor fraud.
3
In other news Sean Hannity hates your guts just as much as you hate him. So what ?
1
More class warfare and wealth envy from the NYT.
If he donated every cent he has to the Salvation Army
I bet you folks would accuse him of trying to buy
influence.
1
The snobbery of the NYT! What a miracle! We know that the stocks they own are spotless! We know that the world that that they own have no stink to them! The world is filled with sadness. Only this sad paper blames everyone else!
3
And the liberals don't want to think about how a million and a half legal and illegal immigrants coming into our country every year are raising the prices for rent and housing.
Do you mean as he's thrived on lies and hate talk on Fox Entertainment we should pay attention to Hannity's sideshow of real estate holdings? Gosh, I'm on overload as it is! I can barely stand to read all of your article!
1
Pretty innocuous investment for a person of those means... And socially conscience as well...
I was waiting for a bomb that he invested with Russian oligarchs and made billions... He invested in low cost housing and fixed it to rent it out... Wow, pure evil... :))
Tomorrow we're going to have an article about Pelosi, Schuman, Feinstein et al?
Don't we NYT?
A hit piece by Saporito. I guess he doesn't like Hannity. But what does that have to do with real estate, "journalism" (Saporito's "journalism", that is) or federal policy. Hannity's investment is small potatoes in the overall scheme of things, and is consistent with federal policy (pushed by Democrats) to encourage investment in distressed properties. Is Hannity's evil the use of legal limited liability companies to hide his identity? Is that Saporito's complaint. As a hit piece, it is rather pathetic.
1
Why are rich opportunists getting their claws into HUD $$$ that is for low-income Americans??
1
I'm not a Hannity fan, but this is embarrisingly petty.
1
Buried in a lot of unfair criticism here is the irony and hypocrisy of Mr Hannity benefiting from a Government program (regardless of whether it protects lender or borrower both parties benefit) is breathtaking. Of course he would just say it’s legal and smart, while looking down on, say, a food stamp recipient.
3
Hannity is a convenient target but he's just being a rational investor.
Another outrageous conflict of interest on Hannity's part - his support of the right's and Trump's so-called "tax reform." Advocating for tax cuts for the rich is advocating for himself. By promoting Trump (which is what he does - he's more a communications consultant than anything like a journalist), he's promoting his own self-interests. He will get even richer on this last tax bill, and the lower 80-90% of us will pay the debt.
2
Don't people usually advocate for their own interests?
“. . . using $17.9 million in mortgages subsidized with insurance from the Department of Housing and Urban Development . . ."
The benefit of the insurance accrues to the lender (in the event of default) not the borrower (the allegedly vulturous Hannity). And wasn't the purpose of the HUD insurance to support the market for distressed properties that lenders generally did not want to lend on so that someone would buy them and thereby avoid communal decay from abandoned property?
Since Mr. Hannity elected to conduct the investments through various LLC's is it likely that he had to sign personal guarantees for the loans? Likely, I would think. So if it turns out whoever talked him into this highly leveraged non-diversified position misjudged the market (happens all the time) and the properties end up under water (loan to value exceeding 1.0) then what will happen to Mr. Hannity?
Pondering that thought may shed some light on your bias.
3
I can't stand Sean Hannity, but as I read this piece, I was increasingly unsure about the moral case it tries to make against him.
He buys property and raises the rent. So?
Now, if he owns property and bullies tenants into illegal foreclosure, that's another matter. If he is a terrible/unresponsive landlord, that is another matter. If he's involved in setting up mortgages to folks who clearly don't have the means for both a reasonable down payment and the ongoing monthly payments, that should be made illegal.
But, the charge here mostly seems to be that he puts a lot of his money in rental properties and wants to see if he can fill them at higher rental rates.
Again, so?
4
Look, Hannity is a creep. I do not care if
it is legal to rip off poor people using
the stacked deck against them, it is wrong.
He has money that he could invest in
something that is less cruel. Honestly
would many of commenters here really
have the stomach for such an investment?
I would not do it, I do not care how fabulous
the potential return would be. I love
how because of the immigrant problem
we cannot even build new homes. Bald
bald in your face bad guys stealing and
dealing gleefully. Hannity obviously does
not believe in hell, unless it pays well.
3
Hannity, Trump, Mnuchin are bottom feeders who exploit the poor to enrich themselves. They rob the hoods under the mantle of altruism. They have been exposed for what they are. And no matter how much they lie, only idiots are buying their propaganda. Like the cancer that they are they will suffer the grave consequences for their greed.
4
Should have included kushner on your list
1
My bad. Carson for sticking it to the poor and Pruitt and Cohen, and Sessions for lying.
Trump, Hannity and their evil bedfellows think the world is divided into two groups: themselves and suckers, a group giving birth every minute.
Because they are white, male and entitled (forgive the redundancy) they believe in a meritocracy. In their fictional world, fueled by much golf and backslapping, those who suffer deserve it. Their world motto is "you get what you deserve and you deserve what you get."
Whether the Bush phenomenon of birth on third base and thinking "I hit a triple!" or believing their conspicuous success is due to intelligence and hard work, they are disgustingly delusional.
Trump, Hannity, "Dr." Ben, Cohen, Mnuchin and and and and are bottom feeding scumbuckets who will eventually be relegated to the dustbin of history.
3
If you don't have the guts to go buy a broken down house in a questionable part of the city and turn it into livable space, then you aren't even qualified to critique on this forum.
1
The NYTimes is guilty for bringing us Trump- and guilty for helping him by silencing educated and thoughtful readers- You are as guilty as Trump.
This man is a joke. He is a tick, a blood sucking parasite ... Firmly imbedded in the posterior of his host..And like his corrupt host,, is incapable of truth or honesty. The only thing we can be sure about whether it's real estate or business of any kind, the goal benefits him and only him..
3
What a garbage article. The very first thing that prospective real estate investors are taught is to form a separate LLC for your RE business. Whether you form one for each property, one for rentals and one for rehabs, is up for debate.
If you don't have the guts to go buy a broken down house in a questionable part of the city and turn it into livable space, then you aren't even qualified to critique on this forum.
How low will the Times go? Are they going to find another conservative somewhere and publish "My God, this guy has all his assets in gold!!!!!!! He must be a crook!!!" or "My God, this guy has all his assets in golf courses, he must be a crook!" or "My God, this guy has all of his investments in Amazon stock, he must be a crook!"
Give me a break. Just because a right wing nut that the left wing nuts love to hate invests in real estate on the side doesn't make him a crook.
3
It's about hypocrisy and exploitation
Stop wasting space on this parasitic Fool. Seriously.
3
Maybe Hannity learned his skills from Jared Kushner, another slumlord. I truly wish there was a hell to accommodate these guys.
3
Bill -- after this obvious hit piece, do you still call yourself a journalist? Or a "journalist?"
Here's a hint. Option 2 fits the facts. This article had no supporting info. You didn't say for example how much market rates have gone up where Sean has his apt, or how much he spent on revitalizing them.
And what did Hannity have to do with the real estate melt down in 2008-2009? Why conflate?
And are you his financial adviser? Do you know what his portfolio looks like?
This is "fake news."
3
This is the deal we've made since Reagan. The Republicans attempt to completely remove all government programs designed to moderate the devastating effects of income inequality. As an alternative, they allow parts of those programs to exist as long as they get a cut to profit from. Their "free market solution" is privatizing programs that benefit schools, housing, infrastructure, and healthcare in a manner that guarantees that the well-connected will get to skim a healthy portion off the top. Then blowhards like Hannity - when they're doing the populist thing - rage against crony capitalism.
8
Trump University; Trump Steaks; Trump Water; Jared's Evictions; Hannity's Govt Subsidized RE Ventures; Mnuchins Foreclosure Schemes. What do they all have in common?
Profiting off of the little people, the gullible, whom they believe they can take advantage of. Hillary was right about Trump's overtures to the 'deplorables' She just didn't see that Trump had learned how to exploit them because of a long history of doing so.
7
Has anyone considered that one reason for the surge in profiteering through scorched-earth buying and selling of real estate is because there aren't enough decent paying jobs to go around? It's just one more way for a person to get rich by exploiting the poor.
5
The lose capping of deduction for state and local taxes almost entirely affects peopling making over 100k a year. Most making less that take the newly increased standard deduction and are unaffected. Hardly the people you are claiming concern about over their loses from the houses crisis.
1
It is unfortunate that you can't truly grasp what you are trying to use as justification for your criticism. Please try to get your facts straight so you might attempt to piece together a coherent argument.
1
I would be interested in a follow up article to see whether the LLCs controlled by Hannity et. al. also are a beneficiary of Section 8 Housing programs as well as other Federal tax credits that Ben Carson is considering revamping to require only individuals who work would qualify for Section 8 housing subsidies.
4
Housing policy in the US is in desperate need of reform to create new homeowners rather than renters. Most importantly, we need wages to be high enough so that more people can afford to purchase their homes, instead of large corporations buying them.
I agree with other comments which point out that the main purpose of this article seems to be to smear Hannity. Lets pick apart the laws that are decreasing homeownership instead of trying get readers to rattle off mean things about one man who followed them.
For me the editorial lost a lot of credibility with this paragraph: "Mr. Hannity joined this flock of vultures in 2012, buying distressed properties using limited liability corporations — shell companies that are often used to hide the real ownership." Nefarious by association to... LLCs? That is like saying: "Hannity uses automobiles, which lead to thousands of deaths every year". If you were to start a small business, an LLC is likely a good choice of ownership structure and has no connotations of obfuscation or immorality.
32
Except that a lot of people like Hannity are using LLCs as shell companies with no transparency, and just got a big tax cut this year. And Hannity promoted Trump and his tax cut. I think the author was targeting primarily people who benefit from buying up real estate anonymously while the banks get bailed out of any responsibility for reckless and predatory lending.
19
"If you were to start a small business, an LLC is likely a good choice of ownership structure and has no connotations of obfuscation or immorality."
Except for the part where he's doing this for housing. In a sane world, housing laws would require landlords to have someone on contact and accountable for the actions of themselves and their staff; in the real one, the landlord is already in Bermuda and planning their next gentrification. LLCs, as their name betrays, are specifically designed to further prevent such accountability,[1] and gentrifier-landlords like Hannity and house-flippers like Michael Cohen adore them as crime vehicles—it keeps them rich, and allows them to attack normal people and keep them homeless without consequence, so that the GOPers can call them Lazies who don't work Hard Enough.
Just one more reason the housing "free" "market" must be evicted to make way for a housing RIGHT.
[1] Some *voluntarily* accept responsibility once called out by non-corporations on creepy "social media" marketing sites like FaceTwit, but strictly as a consequence of wanting those channels to be clear of those pesky "dissatisfied consumers" so they can falsely advertise in peace.
6
If we have a problem w/ LLCs, then we have to be precise about the nature of the problem and how it relates to the specifics of the LLC definition. I'm sure there are loopholes that should be fixed, especially in the case of landlords/slumlords. Since these ownership structures are used by both republicans and democrats for this purpose, lets not make this a partisan or Trump related issue by getting Hannity involved (unless we can show that LLCs/shell companies are used by Repubs more frequently).
i.e. many of the corporate agents of gentrification in our native NYC are probably Democrats who identify as Liberal. As evidenced by his legal usage of Dem endorsed funding programs, there is no significant association between Hannity's ideology (which I can't stand) and these practices.
Sean Hannity may be a poster child for this real estate game, but he is a very minor player. During the recession the Blackstone Group, other private equity funds and real estate investment groups purchased hundreds of thousands of foreclosed single family homes, took them off the market, and turned them into rentals. This removal of a large stock of homes from buyers has inflated today's prices across the country. When the inflated prices go high enough, these rental may be put back on the market. But this real estate game might contribute to another housing bubble, with a market collapse. Under the new tax law, individual home owners can only deduct up to $10,000 in state and local taxes. But the investors owning and renting large real estate holdings can deduct all the property taxes from their costs!
3
Articles like this need to be published more often to explore these policies; that while legal are the real scandals, not whether Trump slept with other women. Since a lot of the anger directed at Washington had to do with the housing crisis and economic meltdown it seems many of the victims voted into office the very group that caused it. The Trump sideshow covered up the real issues. No wonder Hannity adores the president - his wealth mentor with, we may learn, help from Michael Cohen.
What needs to be discussed is whether this activity is part of free market capitalism or more sinister forces manipulating policies to profit from them.
6
Affordable housing or the lack of it is one of the crimes of the century. Does Hannity care? Why should he when he can make a lot of money?
7
I figures that this viewpoint is coming from Mr. Saporito, a contributor to the editorial board. As others have said, what a ridiculous article and cheap shot hit piece. And, of course, no mention of the Clinton era pressure on banks to grant mortgages to people who were not qualified!
3
22% of home mortgages during the years running up to the collapse were for investment purchases. An additional 14% were second homes. Speculators and prime borrowers w/ good credit scores defaulted at higher rates than ever before. Commercial borrowers defaulted at higher than before rates. Sub-prime borrowers defaulted at the usual rates for sub-prime borrowers. There were more of them because less regulated investment banks, hedge funds, 'other' lenders were throwing cash around. Not because of regulated depository banks.
6
Yep, just about every Presidency has contributed to deregulation that has turned poor people into pockets to be picked.
And Hannity spent a lifetime supporting that deregulation. In order to line his own pockets.
If you are concerned about the harms of deregulation, a song sung tirelessly by Hannity, why are you so determined to hold him blameless?
3
I'm not a fan, but this is a blatant cheap shot. Hannity did what many folks did after the Great Recession in the field of real estate. While what he did may not agree with the tastes of ethical business folk, it was entirely legal. Why doesn't Saporito call out some really serious "bad actors" like those who thrived at Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan during and after the 2008 debacle?
3
Here's a cheap shot: A dozen GOP senators who voted 12/17 for the special tax cut for Real Estate Shell Companies (a provision of Trump Tax inserted by Orrin Hatch - GOP) are investors/owners of 30 Real Estate Partnerships generating income via rent and interest. Hundreds of Millions of $. 1/4 of all GOP voting Senators giving themselves and Hannity and Donald et al a large chunk of corporate tax breaks. Welfare.
7
If Sean Hannity was worth a thousand times what he is now, I still wouldn't trade places with him, if I had to be him. Sure, he's got a lot of money, but, it's all dirty. Every last cent of it.
And having a soul is way out of his price range.
He is the perfect example of a hollow man. A shell made of greed and avarice.
Too bad moral degeneracy isn't illegal, because the entire GOP apparatus would be in prison where they belong.
14
Don't be suckered by this opinion piece. Bill Saporito has taken perfectly innocent actions, and he is spinning them to make them sound sinister.
SAPORITO: "Mr. Hannity joined this flock of vultures in 2012, buying distressed properties..." TRANSLATION: Vultures are people who risk their own money to buy properties in a depressed market and so who help to stop the slide in/stabilize property prices that had been in a freefall.
SAPORITO: "Hannity and the hedgies avoid the risks, and seek superior returns on investment, by raising rents. With supplies tight in many areas, they have pricing power." TRANSLATION: Hedgies ACCEPT the risk. If they have guessed wrong, property prices don't rise and the "hedgies" can't raise rents or sell the properties above cost. They likely lose money because they have to make mortgage payments. Having pricing power just means that demand exceeds supply. If that happens, the hedgies win their bet, and market rents rise. If that doesn't happen, ... well, they can lose their investments.
SAPORITO: "Rents went up an above-average 50 percent in five years at one of Hannity’s Georgia housing complexes..." TRANSLATION: Hannity's bet paid off -- but don't believe Saporito if he implies that no owner ever loses money on a real estate investment.
4
... the home-building industry “still needs some 200,000 workers, with some of that shortfall no doubt linked to...”
... wages?
: ) L
3
Apparently, this is standard operating procedure in the administration: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/23/magazine/jared-kushners-other-real-es...
3
Mr. Saporito says that homeowners were "unlawfully bullied into foreclosure". No, that is patently false. Homeowners who were current on their mortgages were not forced into foreclosure, with rare exceptions, which were mistakes. Homeowners who were delinquent were forced into foreclosure by their own actions. This idea that borrowers have a legal right to pay less than what they owe and keep their homes in malignant, and will continue to haunt us just as much as those banks who gave and packaged financially unsound loans.
The author also refers to rent increases of 50% over a few years. There is the law of supply and demand, as rents could not go up by that amount were there a supply of apartments to move into. Unsurprisingly, the author apparently does not believe in it. In addition, God forbid that a landlord evict people behind on their rent. The Times bizarrely believes that to be an outrage as well. He also manages to throw in the mandatory support for open borders and illegal alien amnesty, which is apparently a prerequisite for working at the Times.
This piece is nothing less than a hit piece on someone with whom the Times disagrees. It is a disgrace to the editorial board of the Times.
Hannity is just perpetuating the party line: people like him who use government or other people’s money to get richer see themselves as “smart,” while poor people who do these things are “takers.” Corporations who take advantage of subsidies, laws that limit competition, or who “leverage” cheap debt are fine, but not poor or moderate income individuals. It’s a similar story with many older Republicans who preach freedom and self-reliance while happily living on the dole of Social Security, Medicare, pensions and various other special tax breaks. These folks will, of course, tell you that they’ve(!) earned these benefits while railing to deny them to others under the rubric of “massive public debt.” It’s both sick and logically untenable, but they somehow seem to keep getting away with it.
15
Do I sense a bit of ironic outrage here? Things that are legal are not always moral as the rich have the power to take advantage of loopholes in laws and the weaknesses in markets to make a bundle. These tihings always hurt the poor and middle class as their vulnerability and disadvantaged position makes them targets for exploitation. The vultures always smell blood no matter how distant.
So income inequality grows as multitudes lose their homes and their saving to real estate scavengers and others limp along with multiple low paying jobs and stagnant wages. But the real tragedy is that the entire government controlled by Republicans cheers these vultures on with the scrapping of programs meant to protect us from these depredations such as the Frank bill. The spirit of Trump haunts everything.
11
It is unclear what the author's position is on "mortgages subsidized with insurance from the Department of Housing and Urban Development". Are they good because Hannity is publicly against them or are they bad because he is privately using them? Or the only thing that matters in the equation is that he is a hypocrite? I don't really care what he is, I care about changing housing policy...
1
I know you need to take on (and hopefully destroy) every high profile conservative on the American scene but going after Sean Hannity is ridiculous.
We know that the liberals are searching desperately to dredge up and criminalize Trump and his every supporter
for anything they can find--business, personal, etc.
but linking Sean with the reverberating financial messes of the past is a dumb stretch.
Raising rents in an ever-changing economy is an occupational hazard and Sean, of all people, would not be one to hurt his fellow citizens.
Sorry, in this dark, cynical age, he stands out as a genuinely good person and it accounts for some of his lasting success.
1
Apparently it still needs to be pointed out that just as Hannity's predatory on people's anxieties, fears and hatreds, he's predatory on poor people's need for homes.
And willing to grab full advantage of programs taxpayers paid for, too.
What was that Trump bit about his massive debts--nothing's better than gambling with other people's money?
11
We will continue to live this nightmare summarized nicely in this "Hannity hypocrite, no really" piece, as long as we fail to grasp the power of the "gut instinct" in voter preferences (polls) followed by actual voting behaviors (elections).
Too many of us NYT commenters, read with our hearts open, think with our brains on, and questioned authority instinctively long before Fox News polluted the airwaves with emotionally charged smoke screens exhaled by Hannity and other "journalists" to hide the naked greed and the ongoing safety net demolition derbies under Republican "leaders."
We no longer have to wonder how our wealthy country is descending down so fast into oligarchy and postmodern serfdom. We are "competing in voting booth" against the plurality of voters whose "gut instinct, emotional centers" routinely override their own good hearts and keen minds. (Read Jonathan Haidt.)
This November, if we do not get our message out about what we think is going on, into readily digestible, easily understood "correctives" to the garbage offered by Fox News and other "fact busters", as "nutritionally complete" when in fact it is empty of true sustenance, who will help us?
4
As one involved in real estate investment, albeit on a much smaller scale, the predatory and shady nature of real estate investments (think Russia, eastern European, foreign plutocrats, the casino mob influence, myriad bankruptcies, compromises of all kinds, fleecing creditors), is to fleece renters, shareholders and creditors who have lost a fortune. Those public to private, back again to public, collaborate with Wall Street, bribe the rating agencies. The consequence is that homes are foreclosed, communities gentrified, tent cities expand. Its called freedom but what it is --crony capitalism, absent of scruples that could be lead to a death of democracy if not more effectively regulated.
5
Not a surprise that a fake journalist for Fox would be up to his ears in slum lording as well.
Tie it up with all the sanctimonious religious talk bow and you have the kind of guy that Jesus threw out of the temple in a fit of rage at the rank hypocrisy.
May he reap what he sows.
22
It's curious why after Cohen's revelation of Sean Hannity as a client, the supposed client quickly disown the lawyer. The Times had an impressive investigative reporting of Cohen's dark business deals. Among others, into Russian mob and cash dealing of real estates. At the same time the Post has a feature of Trump's highly questionable real estate dealings in cash. Hannity for the record admits Cohen 'advise' him about real estate. Looks like there's a tangential story about this three individuals. Especially how odious they defend each other before in media then now, abruptly disown each other incredulously before legal scrutiny.
6
Hannity is the Tokyo Rose of the Trump administration. He's a traitor driven by greed and amplified by a hatred for democracy and freedom.
12
Large institutional investor buying of single family homes has been going on for years. Sean Hannity is just one of hundreds or even thousands of individuals involved. Don't pretend that there are no blue collar workers benefiting from this investment. Small business people who are tradesmen of all kinds are doing the rehab work on these properties and making good money in the process. A lot of these houses were horribly neglected, even vandalized, after the crisis. The money invested is improving neighborhoods. Would the writer prefer that these investments and improvements did not happen and the houses sat in disrepair? That's just stupid.
4
Just another Good Samaritan, expecting nothing in return for that $17 million in taxpayer-backed loans, I take it.
I hope I can be there when he has to 'splain to Jesus.
4
What does Hannity have to do with the housing collapse? I can't stand him, but if you've bought a home since the collapse you have benefited from that collapse. I honestly don't see the moral connection. You're not being fair. The hypocrisy of using government programs and then mocking others who actually need them is fair game, but you've muddied the water with your red herring.
55
of course there is no moral connection -- but the left (and you may be one) is on the ad hominem attack against anyone who disagrees with their POV.
The hypocrisy is that Hannity preaches he is "one of us", when he is very far from that. Was everything he did legal? Maybe. Was it morally OK? A lot of it was not.
8
Since when is being a journalist writing hit pieces against an individual investing his own money?
This an example of the clear bias that Hannity rails against in the "liberal media." You're feeding into it.
Maybe your own job title should be in quotations as well.
8
Since when is a piece very clearly labeled “Opinion” considered journalism?
6
Because it's not his own money, it's borrowed from we Taxpayers. He's as much a Welfare Queen as any he rails against.
Santosh -- spot on. I've written the same thing but the thought police haven't posted it yet.
Real Republicans do not hate the government at all, that is just red meat for their misinformed voters. They see the government as an endless supply of easy money, I've never met a staunch conservative businessman that was not trying to do some work for the government he supposedly hates.
11
The problems for people of unaffordable homes and real estate--again--goes back to the duel trends started in the 1970s: the beginning of the exorbitant rise in real estate (values) prices, combined with the leveling off of wages and salaries of ordinary Americans. This is the origin of our homelessness problem.
We don't really have control over wages and salaries, not even a planned economy can provide that. The best we can do is raise our individual prospects as much as possible, largely through education.
I think this is a strong argument for government paying for four years college education for everyone in the country, or at least students. Combine this with the forgiving all current student debt and we would go a long way towards helping people and the country as a whole to live well.
There are other aspects to helping people in respect of housing and real estate. Mainly, people do not know enough about real estate. A good thing would be for people to learn group real estate development techniques starting with lessons in electives classes in high school. Then people would know how to combine their efforts together to build an apartment complex to provide them all with residences. That is hard and risky to do if you don't know what you are doing. But learn to do it, and you can defray problems later in life.
"...goes back to the duel trends started in the 1970s." The U.S. exited the gold standard in 1971 - the catalyst for both the trends which you bemoan.
2
NONE of what Hannity has done (which the author points out is all perfectly legal) would've been possible without the actions of the U.S. Federal Reserve in the form of Quantitative Easing (money printing). The Fed purposely reflated the housing market with $4 trillion in new money, benefitting the Mnuchins and Hannitys of the world. The "problem" of these robber barons could've been eradicated easily at the source. The solution to vast income inequality is simple - stop the money printing and let rich people fail.
8
There's plenty to criticize when it comes to Sean Hannity. This doesn't really fall under that umbrella.
Yes, gentrification hurts poor people, in the sense that chronic problems (distressed homes) are transformed into urgent ones (homelessness) through eviction. And yes, this is a problem in need of a public solution.
That solution is not going to come of "shaming" property owners into renting below what people are willing to pay, and certainly not below the costs associated with construction. The fact is, lots of people own property, and for most of them their property is the only major asset they own, and everyone who owns property wants that property value to increase. As long as those elements remain true, the real estate market will continue to function as all capitalist markets do.
Attacking Sean Hannity for participating in the real estate market is silly. If he didn't own these properties, somebody else would, and they'd almost certainly do the exact same things he's doing.
You're better than this, NY Times. This is borderline clickbait.
5
Cool!. If you promote the Donald, you get to go see the Michael, you get a little advice about real estate, and you get some government-backed loans, buy up some rental property, then raise the rent. And the best part: the government pays the rent. No questions asked!
And, until those other Feds raid the office, you know, those crooked ones from the FBI and Justice Department, no answers are needed.
This is how America Returns to Greatness!
4
good heavens, what a poor and slanted piece of 'reporting'. Using a limited liability company, or a shell company as the article says, was a wise way to purchase these properties, as the use of llc's is a wise way to form most small companies today. But to add on that llc's are often used to hide identity is just sleazy. And almost every land lord raises rents every chance they get, and to suggest that Mr. Hannity did something dubious is coloring the basic operating principal of real estate investing. And just now, land lords do have pricing power it is true, but it is hardly illegal or immoral as suggested. And frequently, land lords do not have pricing flexibility, which is why rental property is risky and often a chore. As PK says below, just because you don't like Hannity, try to write an informed article, not a sleazy slanted piece.
3
tates creat LLCs, so they should cure the problems. Prohibit LLCs from renting property. Or at least require any LLC that does rent property to list the individual owners.
7
Vulcanalex, the many are the 40 million Americans who live in poverty. Only 1 in 5 who qualify for a housing subsidy ever recieve one. Housing subsidies are not free rent, they are currently 30% of income, Carson wants to raise that to 35%. The many are the tens of millions who live in metropolitan areas and earn less than $22 per hour. Rent has risen in these areas by 50 to 64 percent over the past 10 years while income is stagnant for the poor and middle class.
We are in the midst of a housing crisis that has been further inflamed by wealthy selfish men like Hannity and Munchin.
16
When telling the tale of the real estate meltdown, we shouldn't leave out that AIG slapped AAA ratings on numerous toxic mortgage bundles and collected their vig without setting aside ANY money to cover their liability. When the entire grift collapsed the tax payers had to bail everyone out, even paying the AIG execs their ill gotten bonuses for their "efforts".
5
Sean Hannity is totally lacking in self-awareness. He is self-righteous and indignant - another "victim." He is morally bankrupt.
9
I have never watched Hannity. I don't watch Fox. But I do believe Hannity has repeatedly said he is NOT a journalist. He is a commentator.
The snark from another commentator from a competing media company is pure hypocrisy.
Unless you know more about Hannity's other investments than you are letting on you are not qualified to call his housing investment risky. You don't know he's piling into a single asset class.
Moreover, your synopsis of the entire housing crisis being an result of predatory lending, reckless Wall Street banks and vulture hedge funds is revisionist at best.
The Fed printing money and knowingly pumping it into the system was a huge part of the problem. Even bigger were irresponsible borrowers looking to get rich off cheap money. Why no snark pointed at Greenspan or $35,000 a year secretaries looking to flip $700,000 McMansions?
The constant disparagement of Goldman and that Mnuchin worked there is a joke. Clinton, Bush II and Obama's inner circles were replete with GS alums. Hillary earned a lot of money speaking to GS. Why is it only when a Republican worked there is it a problem?
GS is referred to as "the Harvard" of investment banks. But "Journalists" never pick on Harvard. Why is that? Most of the Goldman guys went to Harvard. Why don't NY Times "journalists" ever attack that institution?
Here's why... People go to Harvard so that they can get a job at Goldman Sachs.
Goldman Sachs is the Harvard of Harvard.
4
Maybe it wouldn’t be so bad if Hannity wasn’t pigging out at the very Taxpayer Trough he so eagerly derides as a “journalist”... or if you find that term unsavory, we can just go with propagandist - without the quotes...
10
@Johannes, you have to remember it's ALWAYS different when a democrat does it. It's called a free pass.
5
Hannity isn't the only vulture who swooped in after the collapse in order to turn some easy profit. I won't fault him for that. What DOES rankle me is his disingenuous attempt to frame his land grab in altruistic terms. Baloney, Sean. Tell the truth, as difficult as it is and as odd as it may feel: you saw a quick buck and dove in. While you're at it, you can acknowledge that upping rents and evicting the tenants who can't pay isn't in the altruism handbook, either. And that's okay: it's not against the law to be greedy. Just don't clutch your pearls and try to sell yourself as someone who is not.
14
Seany-boy, the issue is not that you "invested" in housing, but 1) that you used the GOVERNMENT subsidies you spend your air time deriding and 2) you then took advantage of the times to raise rents for people already in distress. No one believes you did it out of kindness - it is pure, unadulterated price gouging in order to make money off of people in a bad situation. For that you are rightly seen as just another hypocritical, morally corrupt right winger.
13
This business of using shell companies (including foreign ones) to hide ownership of homes must end. Come clean about exactly who owns what or lose the title. Come on, Congress, this should be an easy lift politically. It's far more important to make it possible for people to buy their own homes than it is to provide financial instruments to the rich.
8
What is "many". None of the people I know can't afford housing, and many poor people get it for free or really cheap. Now I can't afford the housing I would desire, but that is the situation for almost everyone.
Exactly who do you know? You don't know people renting a room in suburban house (under the table) because they can't afford anything else (and the people who own the house can't afford it on their own). You don't know any young adults who had to move back with their parents because they can't afford the rent, never mind buying a house? You don't know people with a hour+ commute because they can't afford a place where they work? Exactly who do you know?
16
If you really believe that poor people get housing for free or really cheap I suggest you try getting on a list for subsidized housing and get an idea just what a truly poor ( and working!) family would get and how long the wait is in many places. I think you might find it isn’t as easy or as helpful as you seem to imagine.
17
Free housing? It's clear you don't work with the homeless.
7
RE: "Sean Hannity pouts that he’s not getting credit ..."
Sound familiar? Aggrieved. Not fair. Not enough credit. They are all against me. I don't have all that I should.
These seem to be common themes among the conservatives no matter how much they've attained. From Trump on.
And the other theme? To pointedly avoid the point and twist the hypocrisy on its ear. "It is ironic that I am being attacked for investing my personal money..."
4
Mr. Hannity and the people who oversee the Hedge funds and
private equity firms have money and power. Get use to it. Just be thankful that you have a roof over your head and you can feed the kids. At least for today.
1
Radical right -wing radio,Fox News has become synoymous with hypocrisy. A search for Hannity's credentials will yield nothing.
6
Hannity runs an opinion show. He has no more need to put quotation marks around the word journalist than the highly partisan op-ed and editorial writers do who work for the Gray Lad, WAPO and MSNBC.
Meanwhile, HRC and Bill live in splendor in Westchester Ct. Obama builds himself a mansion. Al Gore lives down by the sea. On and on. And you thought only greedy Republicans made money?
Further. To be fair --- something Times writers are seemingly incapable of -- why not detail the rent increase you talk about in Hannity's apartment complex? What were the rents when he bought it? How much did he buy it for? How much has he spent on renovations? Is he asking a fair market price for what he is offering? It is quite possible that there is nothing sinister in raising rents if you've improved the product and if the overall market is going up.
And despite all evidence to the contrary, you don't believe the tax cuts are going to help anyone but the wealthy? Instead of just repeating that tired liberal talking point -- how about some facts?
And if you are complaining because you aren't wealthy,change jobs. Or do you think only Hannity has made money on TV. How about Rachel Maddow and the progressive crew that brings a stew of anti Trump goo every night? They make pretty big bucks don't they?
Nothing Hannity is doing is illegal is it? So why the ad hominem attack? Jealousy?
Or perhaps you should start calling yourself a "journalist."
6
Talk about hypocritical and duplicitous. Hannity, and his ilk, powerful while using government programs that they denigrate to prey on the poor and middle class. Hannity is a con-man and liar like Trump.
9
This piece sounds like a hit job, not news.
You may not like Hannity's policies, ravings, or the fact that he supports Trump, but the fact remains that he has done nothing illegal or immoral in buying up distressed properties through LLCs and then renting them out. As others have pointed out, he would be a fool not to charge what the market will bear. Furthermore, as a rental property owner myself, I know the myriad of headaches that can come with low-income renters.
I have a real issue with the statement the author makes about homes becoming less affordable because of the limitations on the mortgage interest deduction and the state and local taxes. This is the kind of thinking perpetuated by Democrats and Republicans that have landed millions of Americans in trouble. The decision on how much house one can afford should not be based on tax deductions; it should be based on what the monthly mortgage payment is going to be, and what portion of your after-tax income that payment represents. The biases in the tax code for home ownership distorts this calculation and gives people the sense they can afford more home than they really should buy. It's about time these biases were corrected.
54
The immoral part _is_ debatable.
You only get to pick one. You can either underpay people and subsidize their housing, health care and child care. Or you can pay them a living wage so they don't need these supports.
To both systematically underpay people so that they cannot afford essentials of living is called slavery.
We shouldn't do it.
30
I have a real problem with paragraph 2. The mortgage interest deduction was presumably agreed by Congress and incorporated into the tax code at a time when the encouragement of social good (creating a secure living space for a family) by taxation policy was felt to be valuable. How quaint that idea seems now. Buying a house in a very long term commitment, buyers had reason to expect that Congress would understand that and not change the rules in the middle of the game. Sadly they were deluded. Likely as a result, foreclosures will rise- the Mnuchins of this world will reap the benefit, the housing market will weaken and rentiers, like Hannity, will flourish. Oh what a surprise.
20
He may not have done anything illegal, in a world of legislation shaped by big banks and big investors, but that doesn't mean it is not immoral. The way the rich manipulate the stock and capital markets, to the detriment of the working classes amounts to predation.
23
As much as I despise Hannity, the claim that limited liability companies are a shield to true ownership is simply flat out false. Do your homework. LLC's are set up in real estate to protect investors, like in any other investment, from personal liability, not to hide ownership. In real estate it is common to set up single purpose entities as owners of a particular real estate venture for the sole purpose of limiting the liability of an investor to the real estate itself (other than if an investor has to guarantee a real estate loan). To say the least, I find the op ed piece misleading and I urge the writer to go find another way to trash Hannity. It's not that hard.
3
Hannity and Trump consult all the time. He's a member of Trump's Kitchen Cabinet.
From there, things only get worse.
1
The rank hypocrisy of folk like Hannity, those who slam government subsidies and then use them, is stunning. But I suppose this sort of thing is not rare, and even though I have no time for Hannity and his band of kooks at Fox, as long as he is following the law, leave him be. Getting wound up about him accomplishes little.
The way to erode the support for him and politicians who support raiding the public coffers in the form of tax cuts but hen use federal money themselves is to offer solutions that voters will see as valid. Attacking the likes of Hannity in the press is a waste of time: he will simply play the victim card, decrying the liberal media or the Justice Department or whatever. Ignore him. The real punishment for Hannity and his crew is a lack of attention. I suspect his ratings went up when he was connected to Michael Cohn.
Broadly, the Democrats are walking into a trap set by Trump: they are wasting their time harping on the Russia investigation and Stormy. Most voters don't care, even if that is quite sad. Instead the Democrats should suggest real solutions. The GOP and Trump have no agenda, even though they control Congress and the White House. Point out that lack of leadership.
Hannity will seem significantly less important. Let him bang his gong. Does it make noise if no one listens?
Hannity is among those who are a menace to this country. He's one of the cheerleaders for Trump who can do even more damage. When will we be rid of people who thrive on exploiting and dividing? It is heartening to know about our culture that many objective, well-credentialed polls show that a majority of citizens support real "change you can believe in"--many of the policies proposed by Bernie Sanders. (Look them up!) Yet the con artists continue to fool just enough of those people you can fool all of the time. It takes a majority of followers and leaders with integrity--both--to make that change for the better. We have the willing followers, but where is our Lincoln now?
To those out there who voted for Trump believing the swamp would be drained, this is all you need to know about those you put in office. They are using government programs and you, while you can still afford the rent, to enrich themselves and their friends, like Hannity, all while shrieking to you about Crooked Hillary, Rod Rosenstein, and Robert Mueller:
"Housing Secretary Ben Carson suggested tripling the rent of people getting federal subsidies, an interesting anti-poverty solution. This while the Joint Center for Housing Studies at Harvard reports that 11 million renters are still “severely burdened” by housing costs."
1
Good article. Predatory capitalism at its most evil. Economically crush people 1997-2007, then steal their homes and raise their rent and evict them 2008-2018. Make money on the one side, make it on the other side as well. No matter how much damage it does to people and their lives and our country. It takes a certain kind of amoral person to do this. You can find them everywhere these days. Sad but true. Just look on Fox News, at the Treasury department, and in the White House.
When they get called out for their amoral, unethical, and destructive behavior, they lie and deny it, they blame someone else, and play the victim. And nobody holds them accountable, because those that can are also amoral and have gulped down the Kool Aid.
This is the type of person who now runs the country, and the world. Is it any wonder we are in the mess we are in?
"We will not survive the 21st century with the ethics of the 20th." - Rush Kidder
243
If you are not willing to invest your money in a shell of a house in a broken down area of the city and convert into livable space at the prevailing market rates, then you have no business commenting on this article.
1
When during the Presidential campaign Trump admitted probably not paying taxes, and his supporters thought this was a good thing, that signalled a very different understanding of how government works than I am used to. I suppose the rest of us are chumps for not 'outsmarting' or expliting the system like Trump and Hannity. 'Gone are the days of compassionate conservatives it would seem.
8
Since he did pay federal income taxes, and surely pays a lot of real estate taxes your comment is built on inaccuracies.
You have no evidence, (zero, zilch, nothing) to back that up....
1
Tom, unless you can provide real proof and not what you've seen on Left Wing television the not paying taxes part is a lie.
1
Hannity Schmannity. 22% of homes purchased in 2006 were speculative investments. 14% more were vacation/second homes. The spike in defaults was clustered in the mid range of credit scores on 2001-7 initiated mortgages - prime borrowers who were looking for a quick buck during a boom, often mis-stating their residency intentions when borrowing. Big over-leveraged commercial groups also defaulted at higher rates. Hannity and the other vultures deserve to lose their shirts. But not on camera, please.
2
The magic of the marketplace always seems to work best for the magicians.
7
It doesn't take a lot of words to describe the sociopathic behavior of this man. "Shameless" will do.
12
60 Minutes just did a segment on the price gauging on an obscene level by drug companies. Congress made it illegal for American buyers of drugs to negotiate lower prices, large buyers of drugs have to pay a company in business to do the negotiating. Turns out the largest business that does that also owns companies that benefit from HIGHER prices . It stinks to high heaven. One drug can be manufactured for $1. The current owner of the drug bought out the closest competing drug, which cost $33, took it OFF the market. Current price now, $40,000 for one dose.
Privatize, pass laws making it impossible to go bankrupt for little guys and student loans while guys like Trump do it all the time. Wall St. ruins the country, we bail them out, and they scoop up cheap real estate abandoned by every day people screwed by the corruption.
Ayn Rand took Soc Sec and Medicare, Hannity government loans, politicians are bought and sold to allow greedy men to lord it over us, and the laws favor the rich. The fix is in! When will the BIG STORY be told every second, instead of gossip about tweets and porn stars.
The whole system is rotten, this is precisely what happened to Rome. Republic to dictator and corruption, decline of morals and citizenship, and rampant cruelty in the elites. Lies, greed and hypocrisy abound.
Hannity typifies today's lies, corruption, self pity, infantile behavior and delusion, bereft of any decency.
26
The crash of 2008 destroyed the lives of innocent millions. Yet, the perpetrators of the crash walked away with wrist-slaps and then they were back to business as usual. They crashed the housing market and then swooped in and vacuumed up the housing stock, turning individuals and families from home owners to merely renters. They are parasites.
Hannity is merely the latest symptom of this disease, though it infects vast areas of our society- the financial industry, the Republican party, various cabinet members, and even the White House. It is despicable and inexcusable.
I'm in my late 30's and owning a home feels like science fiction. Many older Americans believe that they'll be able to sell their houses at exorbitant rates in the future, but to whom? This is all yet another salvo in the war on the middle class by the political and economic right. Soon, we'll all be nothing but desperate renters, filling the offshore accounts of these neo-slum lords. Unless we wise up and start voting Democratic from here on out, for a generation at least.
18
Weren't the Democrats in power when the very banks who caused the crisis were bailed out? And when Glass Steagall was repealed?
A little more on the Federal subsidies Sean Hannity is milking while he and his ilk of bad housing debt vultures feed off the rest of us would have been nice.
12
If you want to serve landlords, speculators and the 1%, keep things the way they are.
If you want affordable housing: (1) remove tax write-offs for ownership anything over 1 home and 1 vacation property (2) for apartment building owners (1) remove any tax write-off for vacancy (2) calculate property taxes based on an established $XX/square foot - raise taxes on units which rent over that set amount by a linear scale; reduce % tax for units which fall below that $XX/sq ft/yr line - and exclude any unit below a certain minimum sq. ft. size (3) same for retail rental space: no tax break for vacancies.
10
There's probably plenty of lending practices to fault (and certainly plenty of falsehoods to talk about from Hannity), but this editorial strikes me as the kind of overreach costs the NY Times credibility with swing voters.
He saw an investment opportunity and jumped on it. So what?
8
An arch conservative using "mortgages subsidized with insurance from the Department of Housing and Urban Development" doesn't strike one as the least bit hypocritical after castigating those for taking government handouts?
Or that as "journalist" he didn't disclose his relationship with Cohen? Or that he hid his ownership?
1
If he were a lawmaker that created the program, or if the program was available to him only because of his connections or inside knowledge I would find it disturbing.
But of all the reasons for disliking Hannity, this doesn't even move the needle.
Many of us take advantage of various programs that are subsidized. I have about a million dollars in SBA backed loans for a self storage business. Granted, unless I default it really doesn't cost the SBA a dime, in fact it makes them money on the fees I paid.
Horrible, horrible man, that Hannity! Those supporters of Trump & him who watch Fox religiously must have no knowledge of the Fact Check sites that will mostly disprove what they spew daily!! It's disgraceful what lies & distortions are put out!
14
So the trump-era con is still thriving. Let's hope the folks in the RED STATES who can't afford homes are able to read and have managed to find their way to this editorial. Certainly, Inanity isn't about to plug it on his news program. The crooks/hypocrites are always pointing their fingers at the other guy, while their free hand is filling up their pockets from the cash drawer.
14
Well he is certainly not a journalist. Not sure what he is? Toady? Flunky? Lackey? He is certainly not a man.
14
The real issue is criticizing government give-aways, while at the same time feeding mightily at the trough. Hypocrites!
18
Hannity is surely a hypocrite, disingenuous, Not a journalist and a truly overall horrible person, however; nothing inherently wrong with investing in multifamily real estate or using an LLC to do so as this article seems to imply
7
Why am I not surprised. I'm sure the editor of Pravda was equally well rewarded by his boss in the Kremling for spewing out a daily dose of propaganda. However, some of Hannity's more honorable colleagues are beginning to notice the "stink" emanating from the White House.
6
Sean Hannity is a hero. He is living the American Dream.
God Bless him.
Sean, is that you?
2
His American Dream is other Americans' nightmare.
That's the American way.
3
Hannity is a pseudo-journalist who exploits his ill-acquired properties to stick it to the poor, shameful all around but he'll deny the glaring hypocrisy by 'looking the other way', as usual, distracting us by his fierce support of another crook in real estate, Donald J. Trump. 'Stick it to the poor' seems the common denominator of these poor rich thugs in our midst. Nothing to be proud for. Even less to brag about.
12
The main thing the Trump presidency has shown is the rank hypocrisy and greed that seems to be pervasive now in our society and especially prevalent in Trumps inner circle.
just the fact that Trump can lie like he does, not have to show any financial records and still has a strong following is more a reflection of our society rather that a corrupt, incompetent president that he is. Hannity is just another example of Trump's enablers.
Trump not only bends the rules of decency and integrity he shatters them, yet he is still president.
I'm afraid that the office of the President of the US has been damaged for good and will never be the same again.
136
Plenty of greed percolating in tony liberal enclaves such as UWS, Park Slope, Bowery washed away East Village.
3
There is always a chance that people will come to their senses. However, the longer they wait, the harder it's going to be to fix things when they do. And in the case of things like climate change, it may actually be too late when people finally wake up and say, "Oh!".
This is a particularly rough time for America though. And I think we have some very dark days ahead. I just hope that people wise up before it's too late.
When I think about the potential of the human race, and juxtapose that with who and what Sean Hannity is, well, let's just say it's pretty disheartening.
11
@Sean
Greed knows no political bounds, but, it certainly hangs out with one party a lot more than the other. And that's a fact.
I thought Trump only hires the best. I thought only Trump alone could fix things. So how come none of these geniuses realized tariffs would raise prices for struggling Americans? Thanks for making a new house even more unaffordable.
8
It's all very simple to me.
As an "entertainer", Mr. Hannity's rants are void of any connection to reality. They generally deride something he finds "offensive", and usually end with a "solution" so simplistic even the least informed on the issue give it little credence.
With regard to the "general welfare" of the people, Mr. Hannity has demonstrated, by his actions, that the most important person in his life is........well, Mr. Hannity!
5
It's funny, even inmates in prison understand that corrections officers are not their friends and the best they can hope for is an uneasy truce where they won't be abused.
3
Thank you for telling it like it is so extremely well.
7
The majority of big ticket sales in NYC all come from LLC's. So what's the point? Hannity is just more adept at playing the system that is perfectly legal. Don't like the laws? Get rid of the lawmakers.
4
This isn't about Hannity, or an indictment of the GOP. If honest, it's an indictment of government policies that have for decades enabled the well-heeled to take advantage of housing pluses and minuses.
If the NYTimes were honest, they would document that as many Dems are taking advantage of the same shell game. If they were really honest, they'd publish a list of shell companies and LLCs that are located in Europe and Australia, and China, and India. The rich in those countries own hundreds of thousands of homes in the US which they mostly rent. There is no transparency thanks to the decades of legislation created to enable this nonsense.
All this, while we head into the next housing crisis (and student loan crisis) as our kids cannot find a house to buy for any reasonable price. This isn't about Hannity, this is about the failure of DC to enact legislation that prohibits this nonsense. Legislation that neither party is interested in - check out Congress members and their investment portfolios?
7
http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/republican-senators-will-save-m...
International Business Timer: 12/18/17 Alex Kotch, David Sirota, Josh Keefe: "When the U.S. Senate took up the final tax bill Tuesday, more than one-quarter of all GOP senators were voting on a bill that includes a special provision that could give them a new tax cut through their real estate shell companies, according to federal records reviewed by International Business Times.
The provision was not in the original bill passed by the Senate on Dec. 1. It was embedded in the final bill by Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, who is among the lawmakers that stand to personally benefit from the provision.
In response to Democratic lawmakers who have slammed the provision as a lobbyist-sculpted giveaway to the rich, Republican Majority Whip John Cornyn promoted on Twitter a column by Ryan Ellis, a registered bank lobbyist who has been working to influence the tax legislation and who has defended the provision.
More than a dozen Republican senators (along with their spouses) hold financial interests in over 30 real-estate-related partnerships — worth as much as $117 million in total. Most of the holdings are income-generating investments — and those holdings together produced between $2.5 million and $15.1 million in rent and interest income in 2016, according to federal records."
3
Funny how easily a quick google search is all it takes to debunk every "both parties are the same" argument. Let's hope the right wakes up and realizes that in conservative politics, if you're not the one working someone over you're the one being worked, but I won't hold my breath given their track record.
Look, I can’t stand Trump or Hannity. But for the most part, they were smart about investing in real estate and the use of leverage, and the very liberal tax laws that allows them to write these investments off over time, increasing the return on assets they invest.
There is nothing wrong with that and certainly nothing illegal. Hannity is not responsible for the extreme lack in available housing, for purchase or rent, and he’d be nuts not to charge what the market will bear.
And while I agree it’s risky to not have a diversified portfolio (real estate, stocks, bonds, cash, and others), when did real estate ever go down and stay down for long? It is almost always a good investment, for the simple reason that supply is and always will be restricted.
You can find other reasons to attack Hannity as a yes man for Trump, and the fact that he is light years away from being a “journalist”.
But his investing savvy, there’s just nothing to criticize here.
13
Unless he had inside information about Carson's plan to raise rents...
8
You have some valid points in general. But the point of the article was that Hannity acts like a mouthpiece for the downtrodden, criticizes many of the subsidies he took advantage of and lives the life of an elite. If he kept his mouth shut and just made money then OK, but he does not.
12
I'm no fan of Sean Hannity, but something must be said. It is not a picnic being a well-intentioned owner of distressed properties. The tenants cannot be counted on to pay their rent, and to evict someone takes months, costs several months' rent in attorney fees, sheriff's fees, etc., and requires repairing the damage some do on their way out the door to take revenge. After subsidizing failing properties for a while, the natural instinct is to put some money into them, lure reliable, well-behaved, paying tenants and charge more to pay for the improvements. That is sometimes the only way to make a reasonable return, even with all of the tax benefits.
9
the problem with "reasonable return" is that most owners want that to be a monthly salary on the backs of renters. Property owners need to get a job too and treat property investment like a CD at the bank--it matures in 30 years.
3
Everything you say is true, which is why I do not invest in distressed properties. The gains can be great but the risk is immense.
I can't speak for "most owners," but then neither can you. All investments compete for funds. At the least, a reasonable return on distressed property is what one could obtain on risky bonds for the same investment. After expenses, it is hardly a monthly salary.
I don't understand how Republicans get elected. They hate taxes so much that they cut healthcare and education funding. They persist in threatening Social Security. They loosen regulations and encourage financial institutions and corporations to take chances that the rest of us will end up paying for. They're happy to jeopardize our clean air, clean water, national parks, and even the global climate for the sake of short-term profits for pollution-heavy businesses. It's as if they believe that only the wealthy deserve to have homes, health, and a hopeful future. But if you want a gun to defend yourself from that immigrant family down the block, they're on your side.
141
They get elected because they can fool most of their uninformed voters most of the time - and they spend tens of millions to do so.
9
Republicans get elected because millions of people are able to simultaneously believe that aborting a fetus is a mortal sin but allowing people to own assault rifles they use to mow down 58 people at a concert is a sacred right protected by the Constitution. They get elected because millions of people think it's just fine for the President to cheat on his third wife but an abomination if two men want to declare their love for each other in a marriage ceremony. They get elected because millions of people are convinced public school teachers are getting a sweet deal because they have health insurance and a pension but it's fine for Scott Walker to give a giant corporation $4 billion in tax breaks so they'll build a factory he can feature in his re-election campaign. I could go on, but what's the point. As long as hypocrisy and illogic are alive and well, Republicans will keep on winning elections.
21
What a charmed life he leads. Not even his most ardent fans would argue with the fact that he is of average intelligence at the very best, he just knows how to dogwhistle a segment of the public, a very large segment.
38
Why does it matter how intelligent he is?
1
Beyond the fact that it should not matter how intelligent he is---the fact remains that he is intelligent enough to understand what people are thinking. Moreover, he has the ability to communicate with them.
In our bottom line obsessed culture, the bottom line is that intelligent or not, Hannity has been able to parlay his talents into a multi-million dollar fortune.
That in no way distracts from his being a greedy and terrible person.
If you ever have the opportunity to shake hands with Mr. Hannity, make sure to count your fingers after.
He's a thief hiding under the cloak of being a Journalist only when it serves him.
74
"If you ever have the opportunity to shake hands with Mr. Hannity, make sure to count your fingers after."
Why would I ever want to shakes hands with Hannity?
2
Sean Hannity, sycophant and slum lord . I'm surprised that he is not part of Trump´s cabinet .
265
He already has an administration job as Communications Director.
21
Why slumlord? He's buying up distressed properties and renovating them. There are plenty of ordinary citizens doing the same thing? Watch any HGTV show and see for yourself.
5
He could be since he has a desk in the 'white house'.
12
Nice editorial. Reads like it was written by a jealous rival.
10
I read the NYT to avoid seeing or hearing about Hannity.
23
Why should hypocrisy get in the way of a fast buck - eh Mr. Hannity?
75
How typical of this duplicitous man. Decry the system on your Faux News show, and rip off the rest of us with your private life. Typical Republican, these days.
298
what a guy!!!
4
Sean Hannity will spend eternity in hell for his evil ways.
16
Sounds like sour grapes.
Anyone is free to make investments and buy real estate as they see fit in the hoes of making a profit.
I don't see the point of the article.
18
Sean Hannity invest in real estate. So? He choses in invest in apartment buildings that need some fixing up and that cater to the working-class demographics of simple southern towns. Again, so what? None wrong, unethical, or nefarious about that. Like most prudent real estate owners, he invest via LLCs (Limited Liability Companies) to likely limit his liability rather than hide his identity. Here again, so what?
Sean Hannity's manipulative conspiracy-peddling and his contribution to lowering the nations's collective civility make him a hypocrite and world-class tool. I see no reason why Sean Hannity's real estate investments are not worth whining about. Indeed, this article's strained indictment of Hannity's investment choisce, just seems to lead credence to the rights's poor-little-us complaint that they are under "attack" by the oppressive "mainstream media" (whatever the hell that is).
9
I live in Santa Rosa where thousands of our homes burned to the ground from last October's devastating fires. The housing shortage is unbelievably bad...to the point where large numbers of people have to rent dwellings far from their work places. But no breaks for these victims - rents are soaring due to the exploitation of greedy property owners. No mercy. No compassion.
I am not surprised that Hannity is among the low-life's taking advantage of the bad fortune of others. It seems consistent with his propensity toward lies and his manipulation of what is real and factual. Do you remember the time when he was asked what his relationship was with Cohen? His answer implied that he had rather informal conversations re real estate. At the time, red flag images appeared in my mind's eye. And now? Well, they are still there. Think about it...Trump, Cohen, Hannity, and Giuliani. Quite a notorious quartet playing with people's lives.
172
I'm a property owner. I was poor when it seemed everyone was lusting for Prada and using home equity to overimprove their kitchens. I worked really hard and I bought properties to rent for profit. I have no plans to price them below market rent. If i want to do that, I'll start a nonprofit.
I'm not unsympathetic to the people set adrift by the housing crash. At the same time, I don't feel responsible for cleaning up the mess. This was not an act of God.
I earned my money fair and square. I made (mostly) sensible decisions. I haven't ever done an extensive remodel on a home I lived in. I've never had a new car. Some of the same people who over-borrowed against their homes are still buying new cars and looking down their noses at mine. We can blame Hannity for many things, but not this.
9
"rents are soaring due to the exploitation of greedy property owners. No mercy. No compassion."
Rents are soaring due to basic supply and demand. Property owners would be fools not to charge what the market will bear and make a profit. They are not non-profit entities, and should not be judged as such. Compassion and mercy have no bearing on the decision of what to charge as rent.
Out of curiosity, have you ever owned a rental property?
4
Mr. Hannity has a huge amount of disposable income and a steady gig at Fox. Banks would bend over backwards to lend to someone like that. Best of all, he has connections to all the real estate mafia who get the lowest prices, and in Cohen's case, flip to some LLC to triple his initial investment in just a few years, and launder money for an Eastern European crook.
Big surprise, Hannity admitted to only talking to Cohen about real estate.
7
“The Republican tax overhaul, which cuts taxes for the wealthy, will make it harder to afford a home. It slashed the number of people who can use mortgage interest deductions and limited to $10,000 the deduction for state and local taxes.”
Actually, across the U.S., 25 percent of taxpayers claim the property tax deduction. Across all taxpayers, the average deduction is $1,250, but among the 25 percent who itemize, the average deduction is close to $5,000. So how is this hurting the middle class?
3
"Across all taxpayers" averages everyone from Greenwich, CT to Flyspeck, AK. There are numerous parts of the country (West Coast, Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, Houston, Dallas-Fort Worth, Chicago, etc) where property taxes are considerable, and in some places such as New York and others, hefty state and local taxes. The $10,000 cap is way under what many taxpayers shell out for state and local taxes, not to mention property tax. There wasn't much public noise about this last month, but next April, 2019, when the new caps are in place, I expect a public clamor for Congress to change this.
15
Have I missed something? Is not our government elected and paid to protect its constituents from the people who are systematically fleecing and bankrupting us? Where are our honorable office holders?
Pardon me for being so naïve.
This is the dismantling of trust and the destruction won't stop until voters turn around its direction.
26
"where are our honorable office holders"....
I almost fell of my chair laughing. We elected one of the best fleecers in history to the White House and now we wonder why?
2
It is all about greed. The Republican Party represents the 1 percent and their tax scam favors them totally.
The elimination of local and state deductions will hurt middle class home ownership but will not harm the ruling class at all and will increase their power. To the extreme right greed rules! They have created a system that concentrates wealth and manipulates it with LLCs and financial derivative products to reduce risk to the privileged few and use tribalism and propaganda masters like Sean to maintain political control. Just a wonderful future for them but not for the average citizen who are duped and clueless.
21
“Mr. Hannity’s all-in exposure to real estate might not be prudent. Piling into a single asset class is risky.”
The asset class that Mr. Hannity has bet his shirt on is Donald Trump. We’ll have to wait and see what happens when the wheel stops spinning.
15
Vultures circle, that's what they do. In nature, they take care of cleaning up carcasses so that I don't have to. In business, they create the carcass, then scoop it up. I prefer the real, ugly bird to the sharply suited human variety.
The fundamental change in American business is that we used to demand that business serve the consumer; now we allow and encourage them to prey on consumers. And those with the least power, we prey on the most. We gouge them for everything, feeding on desperation. Terrible car loans to get transportation to work, because work is a requirement for government assistance; pay day loans; predatory housing loans, rents, and if you are Jared, lawsuits for back rent and fees for leases that were ended with mutual negotiation.
Am I surprised that Hannity sees gouging the poor as good business? Am I surprised to see the sun come up?
26
Where is there anything in this article about gouging the poor? These are buildings that were already in lots of trouble, none of it Hannity's doing, and their only way out is for investors like Hannity to invest in them. He may make a profit on his investments, but when the Saporitos of the world start investing in the hope of losing money, I'll take this more seriously.
3
Profiting off other people miseries is the way the republicans live life. They are experts of creating nothing and making money out of nothing. In the end leaving the world more depleted for having lived lives without any purpose except that of making money. The very same people who assure us they are moral and religious people while at the same time breaking commandment after commandment and worst of all spitting on the 'Golden rule" and every other teaching of Jesus Christ. They better pray they never meet him face to face
Matthew 6:24...."you cannot serve both God and money". So the question is: do the republican really believe in God, do the republicans really believe in Jesus Christ.
When evil people are not punished, this weakens religion, because the people see that evil goes unpunished and they begin to doubt. This too, the republicans have given us. We might be living in the most irreligious time in the history of this country, with fewer Americans believing in organized religion. When evil people thrive, when ignorant people do the devils work without knowing it, because the lust for money unknowingly does the devils work, they unknowingly promote a system of belief that being good is for suckers, and breaking the rules gets you ahead in life. they certainly do not do good with their money, unless many mansions and many mistresses is doing good in their eyes.
We wait patiently for good news.
28
Wait, do you think this article really tells us anything we didn't already know about an employee of the 'Harassment Factory'?
3
A lot of "average Americans" struggle more than necessary because of their support for Hannity and his ilk. I'm waiting for them to see the connection but I'm not holding my breath.
78
The financial mentality of Hannity, Carson and trump create the basis for housing policy that hurts not only the poor but also the middle class. The more money they can put in their pockets is what drives them. The ultimate goals of raising rents, kicking families out of their homes, while setting up shady companies to hide money and avoid paying taxes are examples. During the financial crises as millions lost homes and jobs the banks destroyed the lives of so many families there were those with the help of our government, just waiting to pounce. Hannity is just one of them.
189
Apparently you weren't alive when Clinton stated that everyone needed to own a home and Andrew Cuomo then head of HUD made a mess of things, and FANNIE/FREDDIE fallout. Sure it's all Trump's fault and Carson AND Hannity. Wow, just wow.
3
@Margo-In the US home ownership has been touted ever since they invented mortgages in the early 20th Century. Those whom you mention in your anti-Democratic post are hardly guilty.
Sean Hannity is not just a sideshow. The misinformation he peddles on a daily basis is one of the factors leading to the destruction of this nation. Like yelling fire in a crowded theater, at some point the lies of infotainment should become actionable treason.
73
“Mr. Hannity’s all-in exposure to real estate might not be prudent. Piling into a single asset class is risky.”
The asset class that Mr. Hannity has bet his shirt on is Donald Trump. We have to see see where the wheel stops...
6
Sean Hannity is, in practice, pretty much what he abhors on the airwaves. He finds his safe space with mortgages back by HUD (not that there is anything wrong about that by itself), then acts like those special snowflakes he despises when he's called on it.
I'm center right, I can see what Hannity is. I'm just stunned so many continue to drink his brand of laced Koolaid. Is it Stockholm syndrome? I'm not sure I understand it.
41
All true enough, but let's not forget the miserable record of Obama in all of this. His remedies for homeowners after the crash were an absolute joke, leaving millions stranded, while he made sure banks were restored whole. And tellingly, what did he do within two weeks of leaving office? He went on a whirlwind billionaire groupie tour, shamelessly snapping selfies with his buds along the way. There's your Democratic Party folks, don't delude yourselves. With friends like that, who needs Hannitys?
3
Either you do not remember or you disapprove of the HARP Program, which, counter to your claim, allowed millions of homeowners to stay in their homes, even though they were underwater and paying high interest rates. I won't remind you of the details of this program. Maybe you should look it up.
Additionally, you have also conveniently forgotten that, had the banks not been bailed out, the entire American banking system would have fallen off of the proverbial cliff, taking the U.S. economy, and probably the rest of the world's with it. Everyone held their noses when it was done. Or, maybe you are in favor of economic Armeggedon.
Your comment falls into the Very Short and Selective Memory category of Republicans, where not only your memory has become faulty, but you count on the collective faulty memories of the rest of your group.
10
Revisionist history much? Recall it was Rick Santelli’s rant on CNBC in Feb. 2009 that launched the Tea Party under the banner of, “Why should I bail out my neighbor’s mortgage?” after the Obama White House had proposed the specific relief you are denying. No, it was the Republican Congress that shafted the individual homeowner. And then helped their buddies like Steve Mnuchin and Hannity profit while selling the future Trump voters a bill of goods. That you appear to have swallows hook, line and sinker. Sad.
11
Since when is investing in distressed real estate, turning it around and renting it at market something to look down upon? It’s not! Blaming an investor because some people can’t afford homes is ludicrous. What is he supposed to do, rent them below market? Are you kidding?
69
That really wasn't the point of the piece -- it has more to do with the duplicitous nature of Hannity, et al -- and their disdain for government programs that are supposed to give the poor and underprivileged a leg up and end up giving the very wealthy Hannity even more money. Hannity hates these programs when they are used for the poor, but not when he takes advantage of them. Great piece NYT --
113
When the 'market' is stacked against the average person and instead fixed and tilted towards the investor class so that they can have more and more and more of the money in society in their pockets, that is when it is something to look down upon. So stop trying to kid us about what really goes on.
81
This real estate became distressed because some Finance people ripped off poor people, making them even poorer. There needs protections in the USA.
39
This article together with other articles has highlighted a number of Mr Hannity's behaviors that demonstrate a well developed 'Me-First' mindset.
This mindset shows up in the following seven behaviors.
The first three form a sort of chant - Is I, Is E, Is O.
Inflated self importance
Inflated sense of entitlement
Indifference to the suffering of others
The next four are described by the mnemonic FIBS
You Flatter anyone who is important to you
You Inflate your own role in anything that has gone awry
You Break commitments rather like you break pie crusts
You Scapegoat when things go awry.
Together the mnemonic is Is I, Is E, Is O, FIBS .
There is value in recognising and naming the cluster of behaviors. People prefer not to work with these people. They have a visceral response and once they can see the pattern choose not to trust them.
Helping people to relate to their own experience is one way of helping them to make better choices not only who they listen to but who they might vote for.
Journey with courage and kindness,
Peter Rennie leadershipaustralia
2
Like many right wing talking heads, Hannity has monetized stoking fear, hatred, and jealously among Americans. No doubt many of his faithful viewers fell victim to the foreclosure crisis. While spending each day misdirecting their anger, he was picking their pockets. No wonder he’s Trump’s number one fanboy. Conmen of a feather.
18
Bill Saporito of the NY Times is right to put journalist between "" when he describes Sean Hannity. He is a politician pretending to be a "journalist". Period!
Also he is a typical Republican profiting from program that he denounces. The only program he supports and profits at the same time: tax cut. And by the way businessman (and in his case politician pretending to be a "journalist") invest money to make money not to make charity.
6
Whether he bought land or not. He was not honest or forthcoming about his interests while berating others.
He is a predator, not smart just greedy.
16
His looks seem to be vulgar. Why wonder that he acts the same way?
1
The government makes the laws. Individuals (including Mr. Hannity), are allowed to and even expected to invest in ways that they hope will increase their profits/wealth as much as possible, as long as they are following the law. I see nothing wrong with (1) opposing rules being passed by our government but then, once those rules have been passed, (2) figuring out how to best invest one’s money and build one’s wealth, WITHIN THAT SYSTEM OF RULES. It appears that Mr. Hannity IS working within that system of rules. It’s not an “either or” thing. Those who are attacking Mr. Hannity for this are simply jealous of his good fortune. I recommend that those who are in attack mode instead learn from his example and consider doing the same. And, I wish Mr. Hannity well in his business and other pursuits. (And no, I did not vote for Trump. I voted for Hillary).
1
@abc123 I think you missed the point here. There is no issue with Mr. Hannity investing as he did even taking the HUD subsidies. However, year after year Mr Hannity has railed against those very subsidies provided by democrats, that is the definition of hypocrisy. No wonder he didn't want his name exposed.
When you drain a swamp, you end up with muck, a medium in which entertainers like Mr. Hannity apparently thrive. Read the NYTimes' profile of the president's fixer (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/05/business/michael-cohen-lawyer-trump.h... and tell me Trump's supporters had this in mind when they voted for the man.
10
It is obscene how the wealthy take advantage of low income Americans. Foreclose or evict, buy distressed properties and/or evict, make a quick buck off the government while advocating destroying any sort of social safety net, rinse and repeat. Just how much money do rich people need? When broke and homeless hungry people finally revolt, then what? Shame on you Sean Hannity and as for our corrupt president he has no sense shame.
412
@Aquestionplse. If you purchased a property and had corresponding bills to pay (property taxes, insurance, utilities, etc) and then you had tenants who did not pay their rent for one month... two months... three months... wouldn't you then seek to evict that tenant?? I would think so. People buy properties as investments, seeking to make, not lose, money. That does not make them "evil."
6
When you buy hundreds of distressed properties to flip or evict with an eye toward gentrification, then borrow government backed mortgages and make modest housing out of reach for working poor, it makes you savvy?. When there are no programs in place so low income and young people can invest in their own homes or pay a reasonable rent, it makes it tragic.
1
Investing in property anywhere in any situation ain’t easy...In fact it can be an ongoing royal pain ...Dealing with renters and repairs...
There’s only one road to easy wealth...Bitcoin...
2
Guys like Hannity only pull the trigger when there’s blood in the water and their competition is unable to get financing themselves.
This is why the Gordon Geckoes of the world love the student loan business and pay day lending. They’re clueless cowards who are afraid of risk and of life in general.
A toxic version of revenge of the nerds.
Welcome to Schadenfreudistan!
12
I spent a 30 year career (yes, graduate degrees) professionally mitigating the damage these corrupt bandits are doing and people like this have the gall to publicly criticize the very programs, intended to help large numbers of Americans, that they have (criminally, in some cases lol) improperly exploited for their own inerests. No wonder Hannity didn’t want to be exposed as sloe-eyed Cohen’s buddy ... er, client. Hahaha.
56
I can't help but notice that this correspondent, who brags about spending 30 years helping people out against "these corrupt bandits", is afraid (as are so many other people commenting here) to give his right name.
1
I don't mind paying taxes to help improve opportunities for the poor, particularly for those who have in the past been denied equal access to the economy. I don't mind helping the elderly, children or chronically ill to get healthcare. I think education should be accessible to all. Children should not go without food, should have safe drinking water and secure home.
What I do mind is subsidizing the Hannitys of this world to be far richer than their labor and contribution to society indicates they should be. Certainly not with the help of my tax dollar. Let those guys swim in the free market and see how well their schemes work then.
486
I am no particular friend of Mr. Hannity, but in the interests of full disclosure, how about describing the real estate investments of the NYT owners, editorial board, editors, senior reporters, the Democratic Party leaders, et al.?
2
Years before Trump was even running for office
Trump was the laughing stock of a builders club I was a member of. He was perceived as toxic and only worth renting his name from with a strict hands off policy to prevent any input or control from the one currently known as POTUS.
Not paying subs gives the whole business a bad name and stiffing banks made it harder for us to borrow.
230
I live in a small town in Upstate NY. It's caught in a downward spiral with a rapidly declining population.
During the period after the economic collapse of 2008, a lot of people who lived here lost their homes. About 20% of the population moved away. A lot of them were young families who could no longer afford to live in a place with no jobs.
The people who bought those distressed houses were mostly local. They aren't rich, but what they are doing is pretty common.
They are renting the houses, but not investing in maintenance or renovation. The people who live in them have a lot of problems, mostly related to being poor. We have serious problems with drug abuse and petty crime.
You can see how the buildings are deteriorating. Some were showplaces in the last century, but pretty soon, no one who has any choice will want to live in them.
There are a lot of reasons why this community fell into decline. Changes in dairy farming, which was once the backbone of the economy, played a big part.
There were also changes that made the small businesses where people bought and sold things obsolete. Now we have to travel at least 20 miles to go to a Walmart or see a movie.
This pattern has been repeated all over Upstate NY. I see no one talking about creative ways to reinvent this region. And it didn't surprise me when people voted for Trump in 2016
129
Thoughtful comment. I hope it will inspire people who live in your region of New York to propose creative ideas for reviving the economy there, and to advocate for implementing their ideas.
48
Take a cue, my friend, and leave. It's never too late.
12
This is the same outcome in Hot Springs, SD. The timing was earlier than 2008, but the model remains the same. Good roads and big box stores, which are fantastically advantaged by pricing born of the global banking model (cheap imports), results in an easy drive done often. Local economy tanks, local businesses fold left and right, new local businesses fail in short order. Most employment is an hour and more away. Sooner or later the value of the local housing lags and every other failing condition follows in its wake -- less money for fire, policing, schools, parks, quality of life in general. Many, millions, in these in these smaller places think there is a future in America's failing small towns, but there simply is not.
Good roads are not going away. Globalization is not going away. The social safety net that can keep lagging towns limping along, aka infusing money where employment alone is an insufficient contributor to consumer buying power, is being eroded. For better or for worse, living in the smaller places, which in spite of everything I've written here, can be really wonderful, will soon cease to be an American option. Probably within a generation.
13
And … who really cares about what Hannity does? This kinda-sorta editorial simply follows a well-oiled path used by entertainers, which is to play to the chorus – just as Hannity does. Who does Mr. Saporito think he’s influencing? Those who listen to Hannity and might be impressed by what he says and does in his life? Trust me, those folks don’t read NYT kinda-sorta editorials, they buy the paper for the crossword puzzle.
I’m a moderate Republican who doesn’t watch Fox at all, much less Hannity. Mr. Saporito’s transparently ideological attacks against Hannity don’t move me an inch because I couldn’t care less about Hannity; but I’m sure they entertain the heck out of those in his own ideological bubble.
22
Mr. Luettgen,
You are probably correct about who reads and who doesn't read the NYT. But Fox News is not going to publicize that their star anchor is getting richer by using the HUD subsidies that he rails about during his broadcasts. So, a real news source needs to put it out there, with a nice picture of Sean, as click bait for Tea Party folks.
138
Every once in a while we should remember how many of the people who regularly rail against big government nuzzle up to the big government teat when ever they get a chance.
35
R.L. only reads NYT and does not watch Faux news!
4
Trump and Hannity. Two real estate goniffs in close proximity to each other. Fortunes completely dependent on borrowed money, largely of the government variety. Both of them spend large amounts of their time posing as staunch advocates of the free enterprise system and champions of the common man. Both are really set on making America great again for themselves by maximum avoidance of taxes. Their primary talents lie in trumpeting soothing lies through the airwaves. Ain’t we got fun?
424
Don’t forget about the apparent foreclosure king Mnuchin.
24