Bailout Treachery Sequel?

BUSINESS DAY | Five Years Later, Poll Finds Disapproval of Bailout

The simple answer is yes, there will be another bailout attempt and it appears likely that the Banks will continue to confuse things enough so that it again happens only “this time” there will be some “stern regulations”. The reason is not some esoteric financial mumbo jumbo, nor does it take brilliant economic insight — and shame on Democrats who “concede” the bailout was necessary. A little realism from my fellow Democrats in joining with Republicans on this pervasive issue might just be the stepping stone to loosening the idiotic gridlock being engineered by Republicans, who are dead right about the last bailout, and dead right about the next one.

The reason the attempt will be made is because the last one worked. The banks got trillions of dollars as compensation for creating the illusion that they had lost the entire economy. It was a lie then, it is a lie now and it will be a lie when they try it again. I agree that magicians as entertainers are worth whatever the market will bear. But I don’t agree that Wall Street bankers are entertainers and I agree with the vast majority of Americans who say the bankers or gangsters. They belong in jail. They won’t go to jail because of agreements made by law enforcement under Political pressure.

The last bailout worked because nobody understood securitization other than the investment bank collateral debt obligation (CDO) managers. If your sole source of information, analysis and interpretation is the perpetrator, it should come as no surprise that they lead you down a path that belongs in fiction, not reality. The result was we turned over the control of our currency to the bankers and we have never retrieved it. We gave them the country and indeed the world because our leaders were ignorant of the true facts and failed to ferret out the real ones, and therefore never had a chance to refute or corroborate the narrative from Wall Street.

Things haven’t changed much. Even the witnesses and lawyers for the banks in Foreclosures don’t understand securitization. When they say this is a Fannie Mae loan, everyone but me thinks that is the end of it. Nobody can answer my questions because they don’t understand them. Fannie is not a lender. If the statement is that “this is a Fannie Mae loan”, the question is how did it get that way? There are only one of two possibilities: (1) it was guaranteed by Fannie and then sold into the secondary market to a REMIC pool where in the master Trustee is Fannie and the individual trustee is the manager of the asset pool or (2) Fannie paid the loan or the loss off and is considered to own the loan even though the documents are absent showing the transfer. Either way you want to see reality — the movement of money to determine who is the lender, and to determine the real balance owed rather than the fabricated story of the subservicer.

So as long as ignorance prevails in government, there will be yet another bailout for losses that never happened on fictional transactions. Regulators will see no choice because they see no facts and have learned nothing from the last round of securitization. The new round is already underway and the stealing, lying, and treachery continues while pensioners’ money is flushed down the toilet for processing at the Wall Street money conversion plant where losses are turned into pure profit.

10 Responses

  1. I was in UD Court the other day and the attorney representing Fannie Mae did not even know what he was standing there for. We both stood in front of the Judge and neither one of us was saying anything. Then the Clerk for the Court got up and handed the Judge a paper. Then the Judge stated that they are saying you did not pay for your stay of execution. I claimed I did and showed the Judge the evidence. The Judge looked at it and the attorney for Fannie Mae stated that he thought he was in Court because I filed to “Vacate the Judgement”. I simply looked at the Judge…then at the attorney…took my papers and walked out. This is what we are going through in Court. Attorneys just appearing to get judgement with the help of Court Clerks….some due process….

  2. Hi Deborah. That sounds good, but where is the success? Did she take the “deal?” For me, the red flag is when a lawyer says, “its a good job you got me today because I tell you what im going to do…” it can’t be good. If she agrees to this, she is agreeing with the bank that she doesn’t own the house in the first place, and that the bank does. I have a bridge…

  3. “Paper is poverty. It is only the ghost of money, and not money itself.” ~ Thomas Jefferson

    “In the end all paper money returns to its intrinsic value: worthless” ~ Voltaire

    “Nations are not ruined by one act of violence, but gradually and in an almost imperceptible manner by the depreciation of their circulating currency, through excessive quantity” ~ Nicholas Copernicus, 1525

    “Gold is money, everything else is just credit.” ~ J.P. Morgan

  4. Why Judges Are Scowling at Banks
    Published: September 28, 2013

    LAST week, for the first time since the financial crisis, the government faced off in court against a major bank over lending practices during the mortgage mania. Lawyers for the Justice Department contend that Countrywide Financial, a unit of Bank of America, misrepresented the quality of mortgages it sold to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the taxpayer-owned mortgage finance giants, starting in 2007. Fannie and Freddie incurred gross losses of $850 million on the defective loans and net losses of $131 million, the government said.

    Bank of America disagrees. Its lawyers say that Countrywide did not defraud Fannie or Freddie.

    This case is undoubtedly big, but it is only one of many mortgage-related matters inching through the judicial system. And what is notable about some of the lower-profile matters is the tone and tack that federal judges are taking in their rulings. District court judges are not generally known as flamethrowers, but some seem to be losing patience with the banks.

    Who’s more credible here? Garfield who throws in his own conclusions based on… nothing he cared to quote or Gretchen Morgensen, who’s got it very right for years and, once again, quotes her sources?

  5. off topic but I have a sucess story (but depends how you look at it personally I think its fraud by concealment of the facts) a real estate lady quite weathy had home foreclosed- ahe was up to date with her monthly payment but fannie mae foreclosed, long story back n forth but she kept calling fannie and one time she got one of the attorneys ( “attorneys’) ans she said its a good job you got me today because I tell you what im going to do, you can buy back your home for current market value. needless to say done deal. got that story yesterday.

  6. agree with Christine on this. im just hoping and praying I get judges to take the goddarn blinkers off. we are all in this together, Tiabbis article tells you all you need to know, we must damage limit more of the same is not going to achieve it.

  7. Now that JPMorgan had enough and are sing like a bird, for a deal I would think that Sen Elizabeth Warren with the letter she wrote which an answer due tomorrow from Atty Gen Eric Holder, about the $37 billion owed the Federal Government by the banks for there fraud. I think was a big part in all the civil law suits and criminal activity, Sen Warren not back down on the Congress’s fight (her) to recover this money plus with the fact that she telling the regulator to release the names of the victims.

    So it look as if the banks are in need of protect now against a slow country of attorneys and judges who are finally getting that they been played, which works well for bank for these last 5yrs when the homeowner and there legal team where arguing the wrong point. However as human nature goes, what comes around goes around and still before the majority of the “they owed somebody crowd” who missed out on some of that $11 billion dollar JPMorgan cash will be wise to file whatever in the pile line now because they are trying to strike a one time fits all settlement that end the big money cases.

  8. Garfied,

    Care to cite your sources for such allegations? Mine tell a completely different story. And this is not a story about why one sold-out-and-paid-for group should be pinned by another sold-out-and-paid-for group: dems and reps have all enriched themselves shamelessly in that debacle.

    Anyone shortsighted enough to think that those who created the mess will fix it is seriously delusional. It is about to be fixed but certainly not at the level of this country and… sorry if half the country becomes tenant of the other, foreign-born investing half: that’s exactly what’s happening slowly… All compliments of the taxpayers and their refusal to unite and take action.

    Anything you stop feeding will die. For some reason, it isn’t sinking here. Go figure…

  9. Neil, after every one of your posts, I say “Thank you” for not only being aware enough to see the truth, but for staring at it. I too, will stare with you. -John

  10. The judges have pension plans, too. They are going to lose their pension just like everybody else. Time for them to wake up and rule against the banks/servicers. I have never seen so much fraud on the court in my lifetime.

Contribute to the discussion!

%d bloggers like this: