Tonight! The Essential Fallacy Still Confounds Us! The Neil Garfield Show 6PM EST

Thursdays LIVE! Click in to the Neil Garfield Show

Or call in at (347) 850-1260, 6pm Eastern Thursdays

Here is what almost everyone is getting wrong and why it matters:

In the run up to the mortgage meltdown, investment banks were described as taking foolish risks, buying loans that were likely or even guaranteed to fail. It’s true, some investment banks that were not in on the grand scheme did exactly that and Lehman might have been one of them, Bear Stearns another.

But for the TBTF banks it was a different story. They were not lending money nor buying mortgage loans. They were funding the origination of loans likely or guaranteed to fail with incoming investor money that was intended by the investors to buy good quality loans that were seasoned by some period of time in which payments were made by the borrower. They were purchasing loans the same way. And they were not buying derivatives, they were selling them. SO the entire “bailout” was a farce. There were no losses.

Why does this matter?

Arguing what I have stated above will not get you anywhere in court. In fact, you might even lose ground to a judge who views you or your lawyer as a conspiracy theorist. So don’t do that. Remember that anything you affirmatively allege or assert, you then must prove by competent and substantial evidence that you don’t have and you probably never will have. reference to newspaper articles, especially if they are opinion pieces will only dig your hole deeper.

So what then?

If you understand the basics outlines above and apply logic then just knowing what happened can lead to victory in court and often does.

For regular readers of this blog you know that I have continually distinguished between the money trail and the paper trail. This is the difference between truth and fiction, respectively.

We know that there is no evidence that could support the assertion or even the implication that the originator loaned a penny if (a) it was a thinly capitalized broker or “originator” or (b) the loan occurred at the peak of the mortgage meltdown in 2004-2008, or both.

We therefore know that that anyone who claimed to be a successor to the originator did not purchase the loan. Hence they could not be presumed to own the debt. And without ownership of the debt, there can be no enforcement of the mortgage under existing law although there could conceivably be  path to enforcing the note for a personal judgment.

So tactically this suggest that you vigorously pursue a discovery strategy and trial strategy that shows that the lawyers for whoever was named as having initiated the foreclosure did so knowing that the named claimant/entity either did not exist or did not own the debt. This is easier than you might think. By drilling down to the finer points of your defense narrative, you can accomplish a lot, but it takes thought, and preparation of discovery, trial objections and cross examination.

Also remember that you are fighting a battle that can be and often is won against the banks. You don’t hear about homeowner successes because nearly all of them are “settled” under seal of confidentiality, putting the home at risk once again if confidentiality is breached. Translation: Once the banks are convinced the homeowner is going to win, they pay the homeowner to shut up.


6 Responses

  1. Did you ever read the definition and restricted use of Federal Reserve Notes (FRNs) written by Congress and approved by the President? This is still law. Tell me how YOUR daily use of FRNs complies with you “making advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents – and for no other purpose”!


    Since Congress went to the trouble of differentiating “lawful money” from FRNs, have you ever tried to collect on the promise that “They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand at the Treasury Department of the United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, or at any Federal Reserve bank” ?

    It may be that OUR use of FRNs is either not contemplated in law – OR that somehow we have unknowingly subscribed to be “Federal Reserve Agents”…

    12 U.S. Code § 411 – Issuance to reserve banks; nature of obligation; redemption

    Federal reserve notes, to be issued at the discretion of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the purpose of making advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents as hereinafter set forth and for no other purpose, are authorized. The said notes shall be obligations of the United States and shall be receivable by all national and member banks and Federal reserve banks and for all taxes, customs, and other public dues. They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand at the Treasury Department of the United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, or at any Federal Reserve bank.
    (Dec. 23, 1913, ch. 6, § 16 (par.), 38 Stat. 265; Jan. 30, 1934, ch. 6, § 2(b)(1), 48 Stat. 337; Aug. 23, 1935, ch. 614, title II, § 203(a), 49 Stat. 704.)

  2. Making Sense of the Federal Reserve

  3. Are we still beguiled into believing that our “Credit Score” is a measure of how much more debt we can we can personally shoulder? I ask you to consider that the “truth” of calling it a “credit score” is an indication of how much more of your birthright allowance as a citizen, guarantor and surety of the federal government’s debt under the 14th Amendment is available and can be lent to private financial institutions, most specifically the Federal Reserve Banking cartel, collected by private banks under US franchise at the Federal Reserve window in the name of the United States of America, simply upon your “application” for a loan or credit card, not even its consummation, using your birth certificate (name and DOB) and SSN for what the banks call “a loan” TO you instead of FROM you.

    I put forward this thought – that the US is bankrupt, the Treasury Department is insolvent, and the last ditch effort to keep our economy afloat is to leverage the personal wealth and personalty of the American People themselves, and by doing so, we remove control of all our private property from us into the hands of those who have wished for and striven since our independence to take back control of our private lands and continent and render us again serfs under their lordship.

    Please think about this and research for yourself – it is not conspiracy theory…

  4. cal dreamer, it was a nightmare. My attorney suspended, and I, too, failed. Don’t be too hard on yourself: they had it all planned this way. The conspiracy between banks, judges, lawyers, circuit courts, it’s all a big fu*%&#@g game with these people, and they’re winning.
    We’re just the occasional “fly in the ointment”.

  5. Since 2013 i have been a faithful follower of this site and am grateful for all i have learned and because of it i had a unlawful detainer reversed and remanded in san diego appellate court with instruction to vacate the ud judgement. Why, because bank did not have substitution of trustee. They also have never provided a transfer or anything showing they have a beneficial interest. HOWEVER, ON REMAND
    they submitted a substitution of trustee and the judge granted a summary judgement and evicted us.
    Long story short, i couldnt get tge opening brief done on my own (had lawyer 1st time) and so appeal dismissed.
    So like you say above, even with clear evidence, goodluck.

  6. They were buying already classified default debt and restructuring it. Too Big to Fail Banks were biggest buyers of default debt.

Contribute to the discussion!

%d bloggers like this: