COMBO Title and Securitization Search, Report, Documents, Analysis & Commentary EDITOR’S COMMENT: While I commend the reporting and the acts by Judges, lawyers and government officials, they still don’t “get it.” The presumption is that the homeowner owes the money that the servicer says is due. That is a lie. Thus the assertion that the homeowner is in default is also a lie and so is the amount claimed as due in principal. They continue to ignore that this was NOT a transaction between the borrower and the loan originator. It was a transaction between the homeowner and a remote undisclosed lender who had no connection with the loan originator.
In between the these two real parties in interest were multiple players who assumed liabilities they never intended to pay and who assert claims to which they are entitled to nothing. Dozens of terms, conditions, parties and counterparties were added to the transaction between the homeowner and the investor. To cover their tracks these parties did pay some of the time and in some cases paid everything due to the lender, thus extinguishing the original transaction and maybe giving rise to a new obligation — but in most cases they waived subrogation and do not have any new asset or obligation in exchange for what they paid. They did this because they were being paid ridiculously high fees to look the other way.
These payments are presently allocated to NOT the lenders’ accounts (for the investor lawsuits), not allocated to the obligation owed to the lender, and not allocated to the individual borrower accounts claimed by the creditor’s agent to have justified the sale of mortgage backed bonds. Without crediting the borrower with payments made through loss mitigation contracts, the claim of default and “you owe the money” are false. It is simply not true that “the borrowers owe the money.” They only owe, if anything, the amount of money due, less any offsetting claims they have as affirmative defenses and counterclaims. And the amount due starts with a much lower amount than the amount claimed by servicers because of the receipt by the lender (not the servicer) of loss mitigation payments.
———————————-
Jonathan Lippman, the chief judge of New York’s courts, ordered lawyers to verify the validity of all foreclosure paperwork.
J Boyco, Ohio: …lenders “seem to adopt the attitude that since they have been doing this for so long, unchallenged, this practice equates with legal compliance.” Now that their practices were “put to the test, their weak legal arguments compel the court to stop them at the gate,” the judge ruled.
Banks “have essentially sidestepped 400 years of property law in the United States,” said Rebel A. Cole, a professor of finance and real estate at DePaul University. “There are so many questionable aspects to this thing it’s scary.”
“The misbehavior is clear: they lied to the courts,” she said. “The fact that they are saying no one was harmed, they are missing the point. They did actual harm to the court system, to the rule of law. We don’t say, ‘You can perjure yourself on the stand because the jury will come to the right verdict anyway.’ That’s what they are saying.” -Katherine Porter, Prof U/Iowa
Robert Willens, a tax expert, said that documentation issues had created potentially severe tax problems for investors in mortgage securities and that “there is enough of a question here that the courts might well have to resolve the issue.”
Frederick B. Tygart, a circuit court judge overseeing a foreclosure case in Duval County, Fla., recently ruled that agents representing Deutsche Bank relied on documents that “must have been counterfeited.” He stopped the foreclosure.
Battle Lines Forming in Clash Over Foreclosures
By GRETCHEN MORGENSON and ANDREW MARTIN
About a month after Washington Mutual Bank made a multimillion-dollar mortgage loan on a mountain home near Santa Barbara, Calif., a crucial piece of paperwork disappeared.
But bank officials were unperturbed. After conducting a “due and diligent search,” an assistant vice president simply drew up an affidavit stating that the paperwork — a promissory note committing the borrower to repay the mortgage — could not be found, according to court documents.
The handling of that lost note in 2006 was hardly unusual. Mortgage documents of all sorts were treated in an almost lackadaisical way during the dizzying mortgage lending spree from 2005 through 2007, according to court documents, analysts and interviews.
Now those missing and possibly fraudulent documents are at the center of a potentially seismic legal clash that pits big lenders against homeowners and their advocates concerned that the lenders’ rush to foreclose flouts private property rights.
That clash — expected to be played out in courtrooms across the country and scrutinized by law enforcement officials investigating possible wrongdoing by big lenders — leaped to the forefront of the mortgage crisis this week as big lenders began lifting their freezes on foreclosures and insisted the worst was behind them.
Federal officials meeting in Washington on Wednesday indicated that a government review of the problems would not be complete until the end of the year.
In short, the legal disagreement amounts to whether banks can rely on flawed documentation to repossess homes.
While even critics of the big lenders acknowledge that the vast majority of foreclosures involve homeowners who have not paid their mortgages, they argue that the borrowers are entitled to due legal process.
Banks “have essentially sidestepped 400 years of property law in the United States,” said Rebel A. Cole, a professor of finance and real estate at DePaul University. “There are so many questionable aspects to this thing it’s scary.”
Others are more sanguine about the dispute.
Joseph R. Mason, a finance professor who holds the Louisiana Bankers Association chair at Louisiana State University, said that concerns about proper foreclosure documentation were overblown. At the end of the day, he said, even if the banks botched the paperwork, homeowners who didn’t make their mortgage payments still needed to be held accountable.
“You borrowed money,” he said. “You are obligated to repay it.”
After freezing most foreclosures, Bank of America, the largest consumer bank in the country, said this week that it would soon resume foreclosures in about half of the country because it was confident that the cases had been properly documented. GMAC Mortgage said it was also proceeding with foreclosures, on a case-by-case basis.
While some other banks have also suggested they can wrap up faulty foreclosures in a matter of weeks, some judges, lawyers for homeowners and real estate experts like Mr. Cole expect the courts to be inundated with challenges to the banks’ actions.
“This is ultimately going to have to be resolved by the 50 state supreme courts who have jurisdiction for property law,” Professor Cole predicted.
Defaulting homeowners in states like Florida, among the hardest hit by foreclosures, are already showing up in bigger numbers this week to challenge repossessions. And judges in some states have halted or delayed foreclosures because of improper documentation. Court cases are likely to hinge on whether judges believe that banks properly fulfilled their legal obligations during the mortgage boom — and in the subsequent rush to expedite foreclosures.
The country’s mortgage lenders contend that any problems that might be identified are technical and will not change the fact that they have the right to foreclose en masse.
“We did a thorough review of the process, and we found the facts underlying the decision to foreclose have been accurate,” Barbara J. Desoer, president of Bank of America Home Loans, said earlier this week. “We paused while we were doing that, and now we’re moving forward.”
Some analysts are not sure that banks can proceed so freely. Katherine M. Porter, a visiting law professor at Harvard University and an expert on consumer credit law, said that lenders were wrong to minimize problems with the legal documentation.
“The misbehavior is clear: they lied to the courts,” she said. “The fact that they are saying no one was harmed, they are missing the point. They did actual harm to the court system, to the rule of law. We don’t say, ‘You can perjure yourself on the stand because the jury will come to the right verdict anyway.’ That’s what they are saying.”
Robert Willens, a tax expert, said that documentation issues had created potentially severe tax problems for investors in mortgage securities and that “there is enough of a question here that the courts might well have to resolve the issue.”
As the legal system begins sorting through the competing claims, one thing is not in dispute: the pell-mell origination of mortgage loans during the real estate boom and the patchwork of financial machinery and documentation that supported it were created with speed and profits in mind, and with little attention to detail.
Once the foreclosure wheels started turning, said analysts, practices became even shoddier.
For example, the foreclosure business often got so busy at the Plantation, Fla., law offices of David J. Stern — and so many documents had to be signed so banks could evict people from their homes — that a supervisor sometimes was too tired to write her own name.
When that happened, Cheryl Samons, the supervisor at the firm, who typically signed about 1,000 documents a day, just let someone else sign for her, court papers show.
“Cheryl would give certain paralegals rights to sign her name, because most of the time she was very tired, exhausted from signing her name numerous times per day,” said Kelly Scott, a Stern employee, in a deposition that the Florida attorney general released on Monday. A lawyer representing the law firm said Ms. Samons would not comment.
Bill McCollum, Florida’s attorney general, is investigating possible abuses at the Stern firm, a major foreclosure mill in the state, involving false or fabricated loan documents, calling into question the foreclosures the firm set in motion on behalf of banks.
That problem extends far beyond Florida.
As lenders and Wall Street firms bundled thousands of mortgage loans into securities so they could be sold quickly, efficiently and lucratively to legions of investors, slipshod practices took hold among lenders and their representatives, former employees of these operations say.
Banks routinely failed to record each link in the chain of documents that demonstrate ownership of a note and a property, according to court documents, analysts and interviews. When problems arose, executives and managers at lenders and loan servicers sometimes patched such holes by issuing affidavits meant to prove control of a mortgage.
In Broward County, Fla., alone, more than 1,700 affidavits were filed in the last two years attesting to lost notes, according to Legalprise, a legal services company that tracks foreclosure data.
When many mortgage loans went bad in the last few years, lenders outsourced crucial tasks like verifying the amount a borrower owed or determining which institution had a right to foreclose.
Now investors who bought mortgage trusts — investment vehicles composed of mortgages — are wondering if the loans inside them were recorded properly. If not, tax advantages of the trusts could be wiped out, leaving mortgage securities investors with significant tax bills.
For years, lenders bringing foreclosure cases commonly did not have to demonstrate proof of ownership of the note. Consumer advocates and consumer lawyers have complained about the practice, to little avail.
But a decision in October 2007 by Judge Christopher A. Boyko of the Federal District Court in northern Ohio to toss out 14 foreclosure cases put lenders on notice. Judge Boyko ruled that the entities trying to seize properties had not proved that they actually owned the notes, and he blasted the banks for worrying “less about jurisdictional requirements and more about maximizing returns.”
He also said that lenders “seem to adopt the attitude that since they have been doing this for so long, unchallenged, this practice equates with legal compliance.” Now that their practices were “put to the test, their weak legal arguments compel the court to stop them at the gate,” the judge ruled.
Yet aside from the actions of a few random judges, little was done to force lenders to change their practices or slow things down. Since March 2009, more than 300,000 property owners a month have received foreclosure notices or lost their home in a foreclosure, according to RealtyTrac, which tracks foreclosure listings.
What finally prompted a re-examination of the foreclosure wave was the disclosure in court documents over the last several months of so-called robo-signers, employees like Ms. Samons of the Stern law firm in Florida who signed affidavits so quickly that they could not possibly have verified the information in the document under review.
Lenders and their representatives have sought to minimize the significance of robo-signing and, while acknowledging legal lapses in how they documented loans, have argued that foreclosures should proceed anyway. After all, the lenders say, the homeowners owe the money.
People who have worked at loan servicers for many years, who requested anonymity to protect their jobs, said robo-signing and other questionable foreclosure practices emanated from one goal: to increase efficiency and therefore profits. That rush, they say, allowed for the shoddy documentation that is expected to become evidence for homeowners in the coming court battles.
For example, years ago when banks made loans, they typically stored promissory notes in their vaults.
But the advent of securitization, in which loans are bundled and sold to investors, required that loan documents move quickly from one purchaser to another. Big banks servicing these loans began in 2002 to automate their systems, according to a former executive for a top servicer who requested anonymity because of a confidentiality agreement.
First to go was the use of actual people to determine who should be liable to a foreclosure action. They were replaced by computers that identified delinquent borrowers and automatically sent them letters saying they were in default. Inexperienced clerical workers often entered incorrect mortgage information into the computer programs, the former executive said, and borrowers rarely caught the errors.
Other record-keeping problems that are likely to become fodder for court battles involve endorsements, a process that occurs when notes are transferred and validated with a stamp to identify the institution that bought it. Eager to cut costs, most institutions left the notes blank, with no endorsements at all.
Problems are also likely to arise in court involving whether those who signed documents required in foreclosures actually had the authority to do so — or if the documents themselves are even authentic.
For example, Frederick B. Tygart, a circuit court judge overseeing a foreclosure case in Duval County, Fla., recently ruled that agents representing Deutsche Bank relied on documents that “must have been counterfeited.” He stopped the foreclosure. Deutsche Bank had no comment on Wednesday.
Cynthia Veintemillas, the lawyer representing the borrower in the case, Patrick Jeffs, said the paperwork surrounding her client’s foreclosure was riddled with problems.
“Everybody knows the banks screwed up and loaned out money to people who couldn’t pay it back,” she said. “Why are people surprised that they don’t know what they are doing here either?”
Meanwhile, another judge on Wednesday indicated that the courts would not simply sign off on the banks’ documentation. Jonathan Lippman, the chief judge of New York’s courts, ordered lawyers to verify the validity of all foreclosure paperwork.
“We cannot allow the courts in New York State to stand by idly and be party to what we now know is a deeply flawed process, especially when that process involves basic human needs — such as a family home — during this period of economic crisis,” Judge Lippman said in a statement.
Filed under: bubble, CDO, CORRUPTION, currency, Eviction, foreclosure, GTC | Honor, Investor, Mortgage, securities fraud |
Thanks for the Posts, all seem helpful. When you have, A greedy Lender, Wall Street thieves, a desperate real estate agent and short sale brokers. And of cause paid criminals in Congress and the Senate, our problems are only the tip of the icing . America we are in trouble. Now not to sound tooo onesided, there are and have been many borrowers who have abused the system. But they are easy to dish out, compared to the lenders and associated thieves involved in this massive mortgage, foreclosure scam.
Recently, I read an article in the news where several Philippino doctors and accounting execs in Chicago, were arrested by the FBI for fraudulantly billing Medicare and Medicaid for nearly 222,000,000 dollars. They will of cause have to answer for their crimes. BUT WHAT THEY STOLE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING COMPARED TO THE MAJOR LENDERS IN THE FORECLOSURE, MORTGAGE AND SUPRIME LOAN BUSINESS. From what numbers I have seen, BOA’s toxic loans are in the billions, combine Wells Fargo, Citi Corp and JP Morgan we are looking at Trillions of dollars of Fraud, and it has crippled our economy somewhat. Add to that unemployment and distute homeowners in the 100 of 000’s and or millions. Where is the FBI to arrest these theives. Where are They? I am confident that their day of reckoning is near. Watch the knews folks, big take downs are coming! Its a Ponci scheme that will make Mr Madoff and these phillipino doctors look like small town crooks.
Yes, I agree with all of the above, lenders, liers, fraudulant executives, paid politicians, too big to fail, thieves, criminals, spies, terrorists, Service people, all fraudulently set up to STEAL LEGALLY.
This has been the norm for years and years. As Americans we have been kept in the dark about all of this so they can continue to steal from US. The banks and Investors are thieves and have no legal rights to be kicking people out of homes that have fraudulant paper work. It is my legal oppinion , that 90 % or more of all subprime loan transactions before 2009 are flawed and should be written off as fraudulant and the principle properties awarded to the borrowers. You lawyers who profess to be experts at this should already be filing on this. I believe there is also millions to be made for you in this. But ultimately, millions of Americans and homeowners will benefit from it. And I know it will actually help our economy.
I came across some interesting discoveries as I was going through the public records the other day looking over the foreclosure list of homeowners that are in pre-foreclosure, defaults and the REO takeovers here in Southern California-San Diego.
Some of the public records now shows MERS as the Lender and on some foreclosed properties it says “UNKNOWN LENDER”.
Since the Lender on the public record is listed “UNKNOWN LENDER” I think it fair to presume that there was never a loan?? (actually true and a fact if you’ve done your checks) no loan–therefore, should be no foreclosure sale?
However, the house now sits empty and staked on the front lawn of the house is a realtor’s sign that says “FOR SALE”! Whose the crook here? The greedy real estate agent and their broker or the alleged bank? Agents are actually claiming they have a contract with the Bank to sell the property when they don’t. So people do your checks!! and tell these agents they are criminals for aiding and abetting the thieves being thieves themselves.
I would like to see all real estate agents and the REO Managers who should know better be punished for their crimes as accessory and co-conspirators of the crimes with all the foreclosure mill attorneys out there. The law says they are not excused from these criminal acts.
If anyone would like to download the 500+ page Policy Manual for the San Diego County Recorder’s Office you can log in to my site at: Scribd.com Search: “June Reyno” and you’ll find it.
If you are having trouble downloading, feel free to give me a call 858-361-2399.
BTW , I discovered a house in Oceanside California and performed a cursory investigation in the public record on the foreclosure sale-public auction.
Interestingly, Wells Fargo Bank paid $87,000 in-house bid back to themselves on auction block and is now listing this same house in the open market for over $430,000–looking to make a $350,000++ profit from some new unwary innocent buyer coming in with loads of cash as down payment on probably on a new FHA Loan for exactly the price the REO Asset Property Manager is listing it for with hundreds of thousands more in profit from its’ re-sell value. As if members of Congress haven’t a clue they are doing this right? Sure they do.
What this new homebuyer doesn’t know is that the title is actually clouded because the previous occupants/grantors-mortgagors probably never ever intended to abandon or leave their house and home. They walked away thinking it’s their fault when nothing could be further from the truth. So title is potentially clouded. Appearances can be deceiving.
I called the Wachovia REO Agent in Texas for Wells Fargo Bank a week ago to inform him of my discovery and he has not returned my call. Not surprised. He will probably be hearing from the California State AG next I’m sure. The State AG has his number. Cooperation is slow here in San Diego but I think we’re making some headway with the Judges and officials to investigate the fraud. Long time overdue for San Diego.
I talked to the listing real estate agent for the property to share with her my discovery of the fraud and made it known to her that the once homeowner occupants that lived in that house (they were evicted June 2010) were stripped of over $400,000 in equity. The news I got back from this agent was that she would pass the news on to her broker. I have not heard from broker and don’t expect to hear again. I suspect they managed to sell the house and has actually been sold to some unwary new homebuyer despite the warnings. And, if they were smart hopefully backed out of the deal and decided not to promote the fraudulent sale by Wells Fargo and Wachovia.
Doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure this one out.
My county is holding property tax sales right now, they have a way of freeing up the property for sale and giving a Quit Claim Deed to the new buyer.
It wipes out any old ownership issues and makes it possible to get a clean title, at least that is what I understand it does.
Anyone know if this is right, does this method work?
Can the local governments do this and free up the houses to be sold fairly and legally?
This is taken directly from the county treasurers page:
“Please Note
In accordance with the General Property Tax Act, Public Act 206 of 1893, as amended, MCL 211.1 TO 211.157, (“the Act”) the property offered for sale was foreclosed for unpaid delinquent real property taxes. Pursuant to the Act and by Judgment of the Wayne County Circuit Court, Case No.09-014685 PZ., redemption rights to the properties have expired and fee simple title to the properties has vested in the Wayne County Treasurer, in his capacity as the Foreclosing Governmental Unit in the County of Wayne, and all liens against the properties under Michigan law, except for future installments of special assessments and certain liens recorded by the State of Michigan, were cancelled. All existing recorded and unrecorded interests in these properties were extinguished, except visible or recorded easements or rights-of- way, private deed restrictions, or restrictions or other governmental interests in these properties imposed pursuant to the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, Public Act 451 of 1994, as amended, MCL 324.101 to 324.90106. It is the responsibility of prospective purchasers to research the existence of any liens or encumbrances not cancelled by the Act or Judgment of the Court. Prospective purchasers are also responsible for examining the title, location and desirability of the property to their own satisfaction prior to the sale. ALL PROPERTY IS SOLD “AS IS”. The Wayne County Treasurer makes no guarantee, expressed or implied, relative to the title, location or condition of any property. Please Note: As the Foreclosing Governmental Unit, the Wayne County Treasurer now offers the property for sale to the highest bidder.”
Shock! Banksters need more time to throw people out of their homes!
FHA needs to change the RULES because FRAUDCLOSURE is getting a tad more complex?
——————————————————————————————
MBA WANTS FHA TO REVISE PENALTIES IN FORECLOSURE TIMELINE
by JASON PHILYAW
Thursday, October 21st, 2010, 4:23 pm
The Mortgage Bankers Association wants the Federal Housing Administration to revise the penalty structure for mortgage servicers who fail to begin foreclosure proceedings by the federal deadline.
MBA officials want the FHA to implement a “more equitable” penalty for missing the deadline to make it more attractive to service FHA loans.
In a letter to David Stevens, assistant secretary for housing, and commissioner of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the MBA said servicers are already squeezed by the six-month deadline to initiate foreclosures, which has been pared down over the years from a previous deadline of 12 months.
“This change has provided HUD with significant cost savings, but has increased the risk for servicers that must now manage loss- mitigation and foreclosure time lines concurrently,” according to the MBA.
The association wants a maximum penalty of 30 days of interest for each month the initiation of foreclosure is delayed because of the “increased complexity of managing both the loss mitigation and foreclosure timeframes and their competing objectives.”
HUD currently curtails debenture interest when a servicer doesn’t begin a foreclosure within six months of default. The MBA feels the penalty is arbitrary and in need of revision.
I tell you why, becasue they collect insurance claims that way, it is that simple.
we should all write to the courts and demand they throw the book at banks who come to court with lies and don’t even give homeowners a chance to to modify the loans. why do banks prefer to foreclose or short sale, when they can help families stay intact simply by restructuring the loan! its not that hard just do it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130729666
This one makes one feel that no matter what, the end for the poor homeowner will come…
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/10/21/130731352/foreclosure-defense-a-strategy-based-on-banks-losing-the-paper-trail
Interesting read…
The U.S. economy is already crushed.
Gary Anderson,
Correct – thank deregulation – banks asked for it from Congress – and got it.
And, Katherine M. Porter is correct – “The misbehavior is clear: they lied to the courts,” and…”We don’t say…‘You can perjure yourself on the stand because the jury will come to the right verdict anyway.’
Not only this – but borrowers lost the opportunity during this time to rectify the situation with their true creditor – because that creditor was concealed. Mr. Geithner – do not tell us that home owners will be foreclosed upon because they are already in default for “18 months” – they are in default because of many reasons – including fraud – and the inability to pay their true creditor because that creditor is fraudulently concealed – and inability to record any mortgage payments due to the fraud – and inability of fraudsters to provide valid and legal mortgage title. Anything paid by anyone during default period (and even before)- will NEVER be accurately recorded. You will always owe to the undisclosed party – who, Mr. Geithner, you are covering up for. .
When you take the policemen away, the underwriters, you are going to have a free for all. The policemen watched out for the interests of the banks. For the banks to get rid of these policemen is proof that the ponzi housing scam was preplanned and that borrowers are victims of a sophisticated scam.
I realize we have a national problem occurring with fraudulent documents, REGARDLESS of what BofA claims publicly, especially for its CountryWIde-originated loans.
My concern is that what progress is occurring in SOME states or PARTS of some states, there is no real progress being shown in other states such as California, DESPITE the documents such as assignments having GLARING PROBLEMS that are identical with cases in NY that STOPPED foreclosures.
When are things going to move in the favor of the equitable application of the law throughout this country? Even when the state laws differ, these mortgage documents still DO violate the state laws. The bigggest difference in CA seems to be based on the JUDGES. In this state, the judges do not want to hear that there is any question of the borrower still owing. They do not want to acknowledge that there are credits from insurance. The mindset of the judges is that they want to ‘punish’ the borrowers whom they presume to still owe. Those judges are also presumng that the pretenders bringing action are entittled to the property. They do not want to hear any arguments to the contrary. Just move on, next case.
More Documentation on Bogus Loans
The Market Ticker ® – Commentary on The Capital Markets
Posted 2010-10-21 11:56
by Karl Denninger
in Foreclosuregate
More Documentation on Bogus Loans
Oh my….. more herpes!
Richard M. Bowen, former chief underwriter for Citigroup’s consumer-lending group, said he warned his superiors of concerns that some types of loans in securities didn’t conform with representations and warranties in 2006 and 2007.
“In mid-2006, I discovered that over 60 percent of these mortgages purchased and sold were defective,” Bowen testified on April 7 before the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission created by Congress. “Defective mortgages increased during 2007 to over 80 percent of production.”
EIGHTY PERCENT?
read the rest.
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=169874
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article23522.html
Mortgagegate Could Crush the U.S. Banking System
Housing-Market / US Housing Oct 15, 2010 – 06:18 AM
By: Money_Morning
Housing-Market
Diamond Rated – Best Financial Markets Analysis ArticleShah Gilani writes: What most Americans don’t know about ” Mortgagegate” is that “robo-signing” of foreclosure documents is the tip of the iceberg.
The breadth and depth of this newest mortgage crisis is so dangerous that the U.S. Federal Reserve last month pre-announced another potential round of quantitative easing (pundits are calling it “QE2”) to address “potential negative shocks.”
Dear Mr. Garfield,
in three plus years you have been in the forefront of this and the message has not stopped or changed.
they did committ a crime that for the large part will go unpunished. you and about this and will continue to do so.
we need to go to the next level, we need to start illustrating, creating the images that will demontrate all the unclean hands, the UPL, the concealment, conspiracy,the theft of our dreams and hopes, this fraud is a financial holocost (i know kt is mispelled) where millions of American families will never recover.
We now understand that we do not have a class system here, we have a cast system, a financial apartheid where the financiers and their supporters, the political class, are the privileged ones, the untouchables, the unprosecutable, the to big to mess around with.
they can forge, steal, cheat, lie, without consequence. they can create, promote and collapse pyramid schemes without being brought to justice.
they can buy politicians, they can send emisaries to talk and meet with the staffers at congress like MERS is doing as we speak, to get legisLation passed to legalize fraud in America.
we the American people as spendable, we are to these politicians and felons simply discardable commodities not worth recycling.
Our government has chosen who they will support and defend and we the American people are not in the picture.
I only wish I was wrong!