FOX2 NEWS IN ST. LOUIS FEATURES FORECLOSURE DEFENSE ATTORNEY RUSTY REINOEHL

FOX2 NEWS IN ST. LOUIS FEATURES FORECLOSURE DEFENSE ATTORNEY RUSTY REINOEHL

LINK HERE… http://www.fox2now.com/news/ktvi-contact2-foreclosures-halted-100610,0,3185038.story

Contact 2: Foreclosures Halted

By Bonita CornuteFOX2now.com

10:37 PM CDT, October 6, 2010

ST. LOUIS, MO (KTVI-FOX2now.com) – Three of the nation’s largest mortgage lenders say they’ll hit the brakes on foreclosures. Its a temporary halt, but its great news if you live in illinois. Missouri residents may not be so fortunate. There are already over eight hundred foreclosure sales scheduled between October 13 and October 25 in St. Louis City, St. Louis County, St. Charles County and Jefferson County.Nationally, one in thirty two homes is in some stage of foreclosure. That’s according to Corelogic out of California. They do real estate analysis. Some of those proceedings will be suspended for about a month in states where a lender goes to court to foreclose. The lawsuit includes statements from bank workers explaining why the homeowner is in default.

Rusty Reinhold, a foreclosure defense attorney, explains it this way, “They were sitting in an office somewhere signing documents without determining whether they were true, where they came from.”

Sign Up For Daily Newsletters From FOX 2

Some observers call them robo-signers.

Three major lenders, Bank of America, GMAC and JP Morgan Chase bank, say they need to check the affidavits and paperwork filed in 23 states.

“Basically the person filing the affidavit in support of either the lawsuit or the motion for summary judgment has no knowledge of whether the bank is or isn’t the holder of the note but is saying they are, the bank has no way to prove that they are the holder of the note. So one way or another the affidavit’s are not legally sound.”

A fourth lender, Wells Fargo, issued a statement saying it would not suspend its foreclosures. Regardless who your lender is, if you live in Illionois foreclosures are done through the courts. Its a judicial state. Missouri is not. So the suspension has less impact in the show me state.

“The deed of trust has wording in it that allows lender to foreclose should the homeowner go into default which means in Missouri all they have to do is publish notice that the sale is going to occur and send a notice certified mail to the homeowner and they ‘re able to go in and have a non judicial sale…called a trustee sale.”

There’s no way to know how many other lenders will follow suit. Call contact two if you have a consumer question. The number to call is 800-782-2222. Operators take calls monday through tursday from 11am until 1pm.

ARTICLE FROM HIS BLOG HERE……

Author’s Editorial: How Do Recent Foreclosure “Freezes” Affect Your Pending Foreclosure?

How Do Recent Foreclosure “Freezes” Affect Your Pending Foreclosure?

By now, if you are reading this, you probably realize that two major lenders in the U.S., Ally Financial, which is GMAC Mortgage, and JPMorgan Chase Bank have suspended their foreclosure efforts in 23 states across the country.  These states are all what are known as judicial foreclosure states, meaning the lender must file a lawsuit and be granted an order by a judge to allow them to sell the property at a foreclosure sale.  These suspensions and freezes have been done because the banks have all but admitted that they filed dubious documents with the various courts in support of their Complaints, Petitions, or other filings they filed to foreclose on properties.

Essentially, the banks have admitted that they employed “robo-signors” who signed off on Affidavits or other supporting documents used in the foreclosure process, either without knowledge of the actual facts of the case stated in the Affidavits, or that the Affidavits themselves included incorrect or untrue facts.  This is a huge problem, namely, because these were sworn documents, filed in a court of law, attesting that all of the facts stated were true.  This could be tantamount to committing perjury.

These Affidavits were not only the basis of the Complaint to Foreclose, but also in support of Motions for Summary Judgment when a homeowner retained an attorney to defend them.  To put a number on the people who have lost their homes due to these dubious, untrue documents would be impossible, it may number in the millions.

Now that these two banks have frozen their foreclosures in judicial states, at least a few of the homeowners are safe, for now.  But what happens to those homeowners who have already lost their homes due to these types of foreclosures? What happens to those homeowners who are facing foreclosure by different lenders, such as Bank of America, Citi or Wells Fargo? Better yet, what happens to the homeowners in non-judicial states, such as Missouri, who are still being foreclosed on? The short answer is, we don’t know, the long answer, at least in my opinion, can be found below.

Homeowners already foreclosed on:

Despite what many may think, homeowners whose home or property has already been foreclosed upon and sold, may still have claims against their lender.  In some cases, these claims may even be able to overturn the sale of the property and reinstate an owner’s rights.

Most states have what is called a right of redemption law, which allows a homeowner to repurchase their home or property for a certain period of time after the date of the sale, if the buyer of the property was the lender or investor.  Therefore, if the property was purchased by the lender, or by the investor (typically Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac), the homeowner may be able to get title to their property, even after the sale.

With the latest “admissions” by some lenders that the signing party on Affidavits filed with the court in support of foreclosure, the claims for fraud against these lenders by homeowners who have already been foreclosed on will skyrocket.  It will be extremely difficult for a lender to come back and argue that they did not defraud their customer (the homeowner) and/or the court by filing these documents.

Additionally, a homeowner who has already lost their home to foreclosure may have claims for negligence, breach of contract, or wrongful foreclosure against a lender who has already sold their home at a foreclosure sale.  Again, these claims relate back to the averments and assertions made on behalf of the lender to the court.  Claims that the foreclosing party was the holder of the note, or that they were assigned an interest in the note may prove to be false.  These types of statements, when false, give rise to a multitude of claims against the lender.

While these will not always be enough to return a house to its previous owner, they may be enough for a significant damages award to be rendered against the lender.  These damages awards may be enough to get a homeowner who wrongfully lost their home, a fresh start monetarily.

Homeowners facing foreclosure by other lenders:

The first thing for these homeowners to do is to watch the news and see if, or better yet, when, their lender declares a halt to foreclosures as well.  With the recent media surrounding the foreclosure freezes by Chase and GMAC, it is only a matter of time before other lenders follow suit.  It is not like this problem which caused the freeze is unique to only Chase and GMAC.

In addition to keeping their eyes peeled for their lender to join the parade, homeowners facing foreclosure in a judicial state by a lender who has not yet frozen their foreclosure process, is to file an Answer or Entry, or to retain an attorney to represent them.  If you fail to appear before the court by the required date, you may waive your defenses, or even potentially other claims you may have against the lender.  The worst thing you can do is fail to Answer or Appear in time and be held in default.

If a foreclosure is already in the process, an Answer has been filed, and a homeowner is currently facing a Motion for Summary Judgment, the best answer is to contact an expert who can inspect your loan documents for errors, and who can testify as to why your lender’s supporting Affidavits or exhibits may be false.  While it is fairly limited as to who may be an expert on this, there are many people out there who have already been qualified by the courts to testify as to these issues.  If you hire an expert, they may be able to create a question of fact to defeat summary judgment.

With the recent mess created by Chase and GMAC stopping foreclosures, there should be an increased level of judicial scrutiny when a lender files for a foreclosure.  However, the fact may be that many judges and courts do not even know that this is an issue.  Many people do not watch the news, read the paper or surf the internet on a daily basis.  Therefore, it is the job of attorneys, and homeowners representing themselves pro se to inform the court, or their individual judge of these issues by filing motions or requesting judicial notice of the issue.  Unless your judge knows of these problems the banks are having, they will continue with business as usual.

Homeowners in non-judicial states:

Homeowners facing foreclosure in non-judicial states face the largest hill to climb in defeating a foreclosure and protecting their homes.  This is because in a non-judicial state, the lender does not need to file a lawsuit, or any type of court document or proceeding, in order to foreclose.  Instead, the lender simply must publish notice of a pending sale and notify the homeowner according to the rules of their individual state, and then conduct a sale of the property.

However, that does not mean that a homeowner has no recourse.  Again, just as with homeowners in judicial states who are facing foreclosure from a lender who has not yet halted their foreclosure efforts, the first step is putting the court and judge on notice of what is going on.  Many of these judges may already be aware, but it never hurts to let them know again, and make sure they know that the lenders in other states have stopped foreclosures, but are still proceeding in your state.

If you can get a court to take judicial notice of the fact that lenders are filing false Affidavits in other states, or have done so in the past, especially if that is the same lender foreclosing on you, then it may raise the bar for them in an unlawful detainer action.  An unlawful detainer is essentially a suit filed to allow the lender to evict.  In a non-judicial state, typically, a lender cannot evict the occupant of the house without filing a court action and being granted an order, just like a foreclosure in a judicial state.  However, it is almost never the actual lender who purchases the house at the Trustee’s Sale, instead, it is the investor, either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac.  Therefore, the lenders have every incentive to go through with foreclosures in these states, as they will almost never have to affirm that they were the holder of the note, or that they had any interest in the property at all.  Therefore, the lender is at very little, or no risk, when foreclosing in a non-judicial state.

However, homeowners still have recourse against these lenders following the sale.  A suit for wrongful foreclosure may, and should, include allegations that the lender was not the note holder, or did not have an interest in the property giving them a right to foreclose.  In support of these allegations, the lender’s admission that they were filing false documents to foreclose when they had no interest in other states may be judicially acknowledged.

It is my belief that the happenings in judicial states will come to bear, and will bear great precedent, for wrongful foreclosure actions in non-judicial states as well.  These admitted mistakes or frauds committed by banks in judicial states will be firm evidence, or at least cast a shadow of doubt on the lender’s ability or right to foreclose.  If the bar is raised on the lender’s burden of proof, they will oftentimes not be able to meet that burden.  Therefore, wrongful foreclosure suits should be more effective than ever in non-judicial states based on these recent developments.

Additionally, just like a homeowner who has lost their home in a judicial foreclosure, a homeowner whose house was sold at a Trustee’s Sale may have numerous claims against the lender for damages.  Claims such as fraud, negligence and breach of contract also exist in these cases.  The only claim that these property owners would lack is fraud on the court, because there was no court to perpetuate a fraud on.  However, that claim would arise the moment the lender files a false or misleading Affidavit or other supporting document with the court, in defense of a wrongful foreclosure claim.

Conclusion:

Despite the belief by many homeowners and others, there are defenses against foreclosure other than filing bankruptcy, settling up with the bank, or walking away from your home.  There are numerous defenses, mostly based upon errors made by the lenders in the lending process, or the chain of title of the loan.  These defenses change depending on the state the home is located in, and the individual foreclosure laws of that state.

The one thing that every homeowner facing foreclosure can, and should do, is speak with an attorney as soon as they are notified of a foreclosure action.  An experienced, knowledgeable, foreclosure defense attorney can analyze the situation of each individual homeowner, and determine what defenses they have against a foreclosure.  If a homeowner has already been foreclosed on, the attorney can determine what viable claims they may have for damages, or even for overturning the foreclosure sale itself.

The author, Rusty Reinoehl, is a foreclosure defense attorney with offices in St. Louis, Missouri.  He is engaged in helping homeowners defend their houses and property against wrongful foreclosures throughout Missouri and Illinois.  He operates the blog http://www.stlforeclosuredefense.wordpress.com and can be reached at stlforeclosuredefense@yahoo.com.

20 Responses

  1. anne,
    i understand how you feel. i have the same feeling about our government not doing enough to protect us homeowners in this foreclosure fraud. i have been prosecuting my case as pro- se and believed me i’ve seen it all. from prejudice and biased judges, from lawyers who look at you because you represent yourself i proved them wrong, because i did not quit in pursuing them regardless of what the judges decisions. i have 4 pending federal case in northern ca, one was dismissed with prejudice by summary judgment, but i filed a notice of appeal, then the 3 other is still pending. i had my hearing last week and i guessed the judge handling my case is interested in hearing my case in regards to robo- signing. hope. i would be able to allow to have discovery.

  2. Lisa D.,

    Thought so – love that movie.

  3. ANONYMOUS,

    You’re exactly right, It’s the Trusts and the Servicers that need to be stopped.

    Save Ferris is from the 80s movie “Ferris Beuller’s Day Off”.

  4. Lisa D.,

    Nothing yet. What is Ferris?? No one is answering this question. Am I missing something??

  5. I once had faith in our system. I knew that here and there inequities and injustices occur. But I naively felt that if something was wrong it could be set right.

    I no longer believe that. I do not believe there are judges out there in nonjudicial states just waiting for the chance to help those who would be foreclosed on.

    I do not trust our government, I don’t even like our government.

    I love the people of this country who are trying to do the right thing. But I’m starting to feel we are outnumbered.

    I sit in amazement watching the clueless or the ones advocating giving aware more of our control as people. I fight it, I fight the lies. But I’m getting tired. I have no idea how this will end but right now its a disaster and a shame on our government.

  6. ANONYMOUS,
    US Bank, NA and Wells Fargo Bank, NA – “trustee” banks … anything yet – (save Ferris)???

  7. Can anyone tell me what US Bank, NA and Wells Fargo Bank, NA – are doing? They are named on so many actions. Is anything happening with these “trustee” banks????

    Thanks.

  8. As if they, the poor bankers, aren’t having a bad enough time of it lately, along comes this from Christopher Whalen:

    Neither Pelosi, most members of Congress nor the vast majority of Americans understand that the real crime by the Big Five banks is not the failure to perfect the loan documents on a mortgage a decade ago, but the active steps being taken today to prevent millions of American households from exercising their contractual right to refinance their mortgages when interest rates fall.

    The focus by Washington on the very real mortgage foreclosure mishaps committed by many lenders is the functional equivalent of putting Al Capone away for tax evasion. The real, continuing act of racketeering and criminality being committed by the Big Five banks is the cartel behavior which prevents home refinancing for performing borrowers and also renders Fed monetary policy largely ineffective. Instead of suing American Express (AXP), the Department of Justice should be suing the Big Five for anti-trust violations, price fixing and criminal RICO. Until the blockade erected by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to prevent refinancing of performing mortgages is removed, Fed monetary policy will be stymied and no amount of QE will be effective in stabilizing much less re-inflating the U.S. economy.

    http://us1.irabankratings.com/pub/IRAMain.asp

  9. Thought you might be interested in this too,

    Foreclosure Fraud – Fighting Foreclosure Fraud by Sharing the Knowledge
    Twitter RSS

    * Home
    * About
    * Contact
    * Depositions
    * Foreclosure Support
    * Judicial Foreclosure
    * Message Board
    * Resources
    * Securitization
    * Videos

    False Statements

    Posted by Foreclosure Fraud on October 8, 2010 · 1 Comment

    False Statements

    Bryan Bly
    Green Tree Servicing, LLC
    Bill Koch
    Law Offices of Marshall Watson
    Nationwide Title Clearing
    PNC Bank
    Richmond Monroe Group
    Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.

    Action Date: October 8, 2010
    Location: Palm Harbor, FL

    On October 7, 2010, PNC Bank reportedly announced that it was suspending foreclosures for 30 days. An examination of the Affidavits and Assignments filed by PNC shows why it may have decided on this action. For documents needed to foreclose, PNC relied heavily for the last two years on Nationwide Title Clearing in Palm Harbor, Florida and Select Portfolio Servicing in Salt Lake City, Utah. Nationwide Title Clearing (“NTC”) was one of the first companies to come under fire for using robo-signers.

    Bryan Bly, the most famous robo-signer at NTC, signed thousands of Assignments and Affidavits as “Vice-President, PNC Bank, as successor by merger National City Bank, successor by merger Harbor Federal Savings Bank.” On many documents, an Ohio address appears underneath Bly’s signature. Bly, however, was never a Vice President of PNC. This was just one of the many titles Bly used so that NTC could produce documents needed for foreclosures.

    On other documents, during the same time period, Bly claimed to be Assistant Vice President of Select Portfolio Services; Vice President of Citi Residential Lending; Vice President of Suntrust Mortgage; and Assistant Vice President of National City Bank. In interviews, Bly admitted that he did not have time to read the documents he signed. Despite claiming to be an officer of Select Portfolio Services, Bly is not listed as an officer on the records of the Florida Secretary of State.

    Despite listing addresses in Ohio and Utah, Bly’s signature is always notarized in Pinellas County, Florida, the actual location of NTC. Bly’s many titles are often notarized by the same notary who claims to have personal knowledge that Bly is, in fact, an officer of these many companies. PNC also regularly used Select Portfolio Services (“SPS”) in Salt Lake City, Utah as a servicer.

    Bill Koch of SPS has the same problems as Bly – using too many titles and signing thousands of documents each week. Bly also signs for Green Tree Servicing, LLC, but the Green Tree address is listed as c/o NTC in Palm Harbor, Florida.

    In recent months, PNC has also regularly used Richmond Monroe Group in Missouri as its servicer. The frequent signer for Richmond Monroe Group is Renee Durham who is identified as “officer.” It is very unlikely that PNC can review all of the foreclosures with questionable documents in 30 days. In Florida, PNC has most often used The Law Offices of Marshall Watson, a law firm under investigation by the Florida Attorney General, to foreclose.

    ~
    Lynn Szymoniak
    http://www.FraudDigest.com

  10. **NEWS JUST OUT ON: http://www.barchart.com

    BofA halts foreclosure sales in 50 states
    ALAN ZIBEL – AP – 1 min ago

    FILE – In this July 13, 2010 file photo, Bank of America’s headquarters are shown in Charlotte, N.C. Bank of America Corp., the nation’s largest bank, is stopping sales of foreclosed homes in all…
    Related Stocks
    BAC – Bank Of America Corporation
    Sym Last Chg Pct BAC 13.34 +0.03 +0.23%
    PNC 53.37 +0.27 +0.51%
    JPM 39.57 +0.05 +0.13%

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Potential flaws in foreclosure documents are threatening to throw the real estate industry into a full-blown crisis, as Bank of America on Friday became the first bank to stop sales of foreclosed homes in all 50 states.

    The move, along with another decision on foreclosures by PNC Financial Services Inc., adds to growing concerns that mortgage lenders have been evicting homeowners using flawed court papers.

    Charlotte, N.C.-based Bank of America Corp., the nation’s largest bank, said Friday it would stop sales of foreclosed homes in all 50 states as it reviews documents used to process foreclosures. A week earlier, the company had said it would only stop such sales in the 23 states where foreclosures must be approved by a judge.

    “We will stop foreclosure sales until our assessment has been satisfactorily completed,” company spokesman Dan Frahm said in a statement. “Our ongoing assessment shows the basis for our past foreclosure decisions is accurate.”

    Bank of America did not disclose how many homeowners would be affected.

    State and federal officials have been ramping up pressure on the mortgage industry over worries about potential legal violations amid growing evidence that mortgage company employees or their lawyers signed documents in foreclosure cases without verifying the information in them. Also Friday, Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn, the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, said he would hold a hearing on the issue next month.

    “American families should not have to worry about losing their homes to sloppy bureaucratic mismanagement or fraud,” Dodd said. “Regulators at the federal, state, and local levels have a responsibility to uphold the law and protect consumers from unfair foreclosure, and lenders have a duty to not cut corners around the law.”

    A document obtained last week by the Associated Press showed a Bank of America official acknowledging in a legal proceeding that she signed thousands of foreclosure documents a month and typically didn’t read them. The official, Renee Hertzler, said in a February deposition that she signed 7,000 to 8,000 foreclosure documents a month.

    Earlier in the week, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., urged five large mortgage lenders to suspend foreclosures in Nevada until they have set up systems to make sure homeowners aren’t “improperly directed into foreclosure proceedings.” Nevada is not among the states where banks had suspended foreclosures.

    Also Friday, PNC Financial Services Group Inc. said it is halting most foreclosures and evictions in 23 states for a month so it can review whether documents it submitted to courts complied with state laws. An official at the Pittsburgh-based bank confirmed the decision on Friday, which was reported earlier by the New York Times. The official requested anonymity because the decision hasn’t been publicly announced.

    PNC becomes the fourth major U.S. lender to halt some foreclosures amid evidence that mortgage company employees or their lawyers signed documents in foreclosure cases without verifying the information in them.

    In addition to PNC and Bank of America, Ally Financial’s GMAC Mortgage unit and JPMorgan Chase & Co. have announced similar moves in the past two weeks.

    In some states, lenders can foreclose quickly on delinquent mortgage borrowers. By contrast, the 23 states use a lengthy court process. They require documents to verify information on the mortgage, including who owns it.

  11. Holy crap! BoA is proving my case for me! Full speed ahead!

  12. Thank you Anonymous,
    Also , latest from the 4closurefraud.org

    PalmBeachPost.com
    By Kimberly Miller
    Palm Beach Post Staff Writer
    Florida foreclosure firm’s title insurer won’t insure firm’s foreclosure titles

    The title insurance arm of one of the state’s largest foreclosure law firms is refusing to cover properties foreclosed on by its own attorneys citing potential defects in court filings.

    New House Title, which is owned by the same people who run the Tampa-based Florida Default Law Group, sent notice to a Boca Raton real estate attorney Wednesday that a 2009 foreclosure was off limits.

    What Attorney Robert Feldman found interesting in New House’s denial for the Deerfield Beach condominium is the foreclosure was handled by the Florida Default Law Group.

    “It is somewhat surprising that now they won’t even insure their own work,” Feldman said.

    The New House email faults JPMorgan Chase for the rejection.

    Chase is one of three national lenders, including Ally Financial Inc., and Bank of America, that has suspended some foreclosure proceedings to review and correct flawed documents that may have been used to take people’s homes.

    “We have become aware of potential defects with affidavits submitted by the servicer, JPMorgan Chase or an affiliate, in foreclosure actions, which raise concerns about the insurability of the title of the subject property,” said the e-mail sent by Fran Morrison, a closing processor with New House Title. “Until these defects have been remedied, we are unable to proceed with the sale or closing of the foreclosed properties.”

    Title insurance protects homeowners against financial loss from defects in the title, liens on the title or if the title is not what it is represented to be.

  13. Just a thought – how come US Bank, N.A. and Wells Fargo Bank, NA – both named “trustee” on numerous foreclosure actions – are not part of the halting??

    Most foreclosure actions are done under the name of the trustee for certificate holders to some “trust.”

  14. BofA, PNC Announce More Halts in Home Foreclosures
    Published: Friday, 8 Oct 2010 | 11:17 AM ET Text Size By: CNBC.com with APDiggBuzz FacebookTwitter More Share
    Two big banks, Bank of America and PNC Financial Services Group, announced further cutbacks in foreclosures, the latest fallout from flawed paperwork in the foreclosure process that has become a major obstacle to the housing market’s recovery.

    Fuse | Getty Images
    ——————————————————————————–

    Bank of America [BAC 13.47 0.16 (+1.2%) ] announced Friday that it was extending its current halt to foreclosures to all 50 states, while PNC [PNC 53.40 0.30 (+0.56%) ] said it is halting most foreclosures and evictions in 23 states for a month so it can review whether documents it submitted to courts complied with state laws.

    PNC becomes the fourth major U.S. lender to halt some foreclosures amid evidence that mortgage company employees or their lawyers signed documents in foreclosure cases without verifying the information in them.

    Two other companies—Ally Financial’s GMAC Mortgage unit and JPMorgan Chase [JPM 39.69 0.17 (+0.43%) ] have announced similar moves in the past

  15. Jon Stewart Taking on the Big Banksters.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/08/stewart-banks-foreclosures_n_755527.html

    watch the video it is very funny

  16. Bank of America has now extended their foreclosure moratorium to ALL 50 states – not just the 23 judicial states: http://www.housingwire.com/2010/10/08/bank-of-america-halts-foreclosures-in-all-states

  17. .PNC halting foreclosures in 23 states for 30 days
    PNC halting foreclosures in 23 states for a month, the 4th major lender to suspend process

    Share
    retweet
    EmailPrint..Companies:Bank of America CorporationGMAC LLC 7.375% Notes due 8/8/2JPMorgan Chase & Co..Alan Zibel, AP Real Estate Writer, On Friday October 8, 2010, 10:55 am
    WASHINGTON (AP) — PNC Financial Services Group Inc. is halting most foreclosures and evictions in 23 states for a month so it can review whether documents it submitted to courts complied with state laws.

    An official at the Pittsburgh-based bank confirmed the decision, which was reported earlier by the New York Times. The official requested anonymity because the decision hasn’t been publicly announced.

    PNC becomes the fourth major U.S. lender to halt some foreclosures amid evidence that mortgage company employees or their lawyers signed documents in foreclosure cases without verifying the information in them.

    Three other companies — Ally Financial’s GMAC Mortgage unit, Bank of America, and JPMorgan Chase have announced similar moves in the past two weeks.

  18. Lucy

    Bill went to Pres. on Sept. 30th. They were scheduled to adjourn on Oct 8th – but, informally adjourned early. Ten days from from Sept. 30th is 9th or 10th of Oct. Ten days does not included Sundays – so maybe the 11th.

    Thus, Pres. did not sign during the technical adjournment (8th) – so think it is save to say – not law – for now.

  19. WE NEED FACEBOOK PAGE BY GARFIELD

    This is one big mess that it looks like is getting messier.

    Bottom Line the Government is somehow involved in a big Ponzi Scheme and doesnt know how to get out of it?

    What is going on with the Title insurance companies?

    NEIL GARFIELD AND CO. THANKS FOR THE SOCIAL NETWORK PAGE.

    WE NEED FACEBOOK THAT IS WHERE ALL THE ACTION IS

  20. Can somebody explain “pocket veto” in depth?
    Is this another trick or not?

    Senator Harry REID who many believe is the hidden backer of the Digital Robo-Signer’s Bill, apparently didn’t technocally adjourn the Senate. This leaves open the possibility that the big banks can sue after the election and get a court to rule that the legislation became law without President Obama’s signature, since the Senate wasn’t actually adjourned.

    The Pocket Veto coupled with the fake adjournment may be the ultimate double cross and Sen. REID’s parting gift to the big banks which put him in power.

    After announcing that it was vetoing the bill, but actually only sending the legislation back to Congress unsigned, President Obama has left open the possibility that the bill will become law anyway through this devious trick.

    No one ever recalls a President pretending to veto a bill by sending it back to the Congress when the Senate wasn’t actually adjourned!

    Get the word out!!

    Reference:

    Article I, Section 7.
    All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other Bills.

    Every bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a law, be presented to the President of the United States; if he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the objections at large on their journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent, together with the objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a law. But in all such cases the votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and nays, and the names of the persons voting for and against the bill shall be entered on the journal of each House respectively. If any bill shall not be returned by the President within ten days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the same shall be a law, in like manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their adjournment prevent its return, in which case it shall not be a law.

    Every order, resolution, or vote to which the concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the same shall take effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the rules and limitations prescribed in the case of a bill.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: