From lying about her family history to concealing her multiple six-digit salary taxpayer-funded juice jobs, Catherine Cortez Masto seems content on basing her campaign around a fabricated image designed to mislead voters into thinking she’s qualified to be their next Senator. One of the many lies she is basing her campaign around is her role in the $1.9 billion dollar foreclosure settlement. On the trail she has taken responsibility for securing the settlement, most recently yesterday at a rare public speech:
“Cortez Masto Lies About Her Role In $1.9 Billion Foreclosure Settlement Again”
But in 2012, while still serving as Attorney General, Cortez Masto described her role very differently, denying to have had any major involvement. In three separate interviews, she refused to take credit, claiming that “the cake was already baked” by the time she got involved in the negotiations.
Why did her story change between 2012 and today? Either she was lying then or she is lying now, but the only thing that has changed is that now she is running for Senate. Lacking any serious accomplishments, Catherine Cortez Masto is content with simply inventing them so she can sell a fabricated image to Nevada voters. Her attempts to rewrite history show that she cannot be straight up about who she really is and she cannot be trusted with representing Nevada in the United States Senate.
Cortez Masto In 2012:
Conceded the settlement was not worth much to struggling Nevada homeowners. Q: “So, for homeowners who have been through the ringer on this whole foreclosure crisis, is this settlement worth it?” Masto: “If you look at it from that perspective, no. And keep in mind, when this settlement came to Nevada – for a lack of a better word – the cake was already baked. I mean all the terms were already set into it.” (KRNV, Catherine Cortez Masto Interview, February 17, 2012)
Revealed she did not help negotiate the settlement, which was “already baked by the time we got it.” Masto: “Let me just say, I didn’t help broker this [settlement]. The only thing I brokered was the Bank of America piece of it. The other part of the global settlement, cake was already baked by the time we got it to make a decision whether we were going to sign on or not. I wasn’t part of that.” (KRNV, Catherine Cortez Masto Interview, February 18, 2012)
Claimed she tried to get involved in yearlong settlement negotiations but “was not allowed to participate.” Q: “You were not part of the year-long [settlement] negotiation. Madame Attorney General, no state has been hit harder by the foreclosure crisis. There may have been no state that has had more bad behavior by some of the actors in this than Nevada. And, yet, you’re not in the middle of the negotiations. Explain to people watching how that can not be?” Masto: “Not for a lack of trying. There’s a multi-state process that occurs. And, in this case, there were some lead states that made the decisions who would be part of this executive committee and who would not. I had asked to be a part of it, and was not allowed to participate.” (KRNV, Catherine Cortez Masto Interview, February 22, 2012)
Could not answer why negotiators signed off on the settlement because she was not part of the process. Q: “So why did everybody sign off on this [settlement]? Masto: “I can’t answer that. I was not part of the negotiating team.” (Nevada Newsmakers, April 4, 2014)