Friday, April 28, 2006

A Prayer (4/10/06)

Heavenly Father I call upon you as a weak child. Needing your strength, wisdom and understanding. I pray not for myself but for all those who have set their hearts toward truth and suffer. Encourage them as you have me. Open their eyes to see your provision. In mercy nurture them, shore up all their weaknesses. Bring them soon to their promised restoration. Confound our enemy and expose the folly of their wickedness. Deliver us suddenly in a way that can only credit to your honor, glorifying the Son. Establish the work we have done as a testimony to faith and to your faithfulness. Let this generation know that the God of ancient renoun is alive and well, is unchanged, remaining the same, and still has His word forever settled on earth as it is in heaven. Convert our accusers into witnesses, let them boast of the amazing work you have done. Give us our property and our liberty that we may bless our legacy and our neighbors. Create in our hearts a state of honor and thankfulness that we may never forget the source of our victory and blessing. When the curious question us let us proclaim it is the Lord. Many oppose this work and say hateful things, change their hearts before you change the circumstances that they may not be blind to your ways or your power. Give us all courage and endurance to finish. Give us justice even with these evil men for you rule and reign in righteousness. Thank you dear Lord. Amen

58 comments:

imbigo said...

Heavenly Father I call upon you as a weak child. Needing your strength, wisdom and understanding. I pray not for myself but for all those who have set their hearts toward truth and suffer.

BUT I'M SURE THERE IS A NAYSAYER OUT THERE THAT WILL EVEN PUT A NEGATIVE SPIN ON THIS PRAYER TO GOD! (OUR FATHER)

THANK YOU MY BROTHERS FOR ALL THAT YOU ARE GOING THROUGH AND ALL THAT YOU ARE DOING. CANT WAIT TO SEE WHAT HAPPENEDS ON THE NEXT COURT DATE!

MAY GOD CONTINUE TO BE WITH YOU!!!! GODS SPEED MY BROTHERS, SEE YOU VERY SOON!!!

BIG"O" 1+1+1=1

SEE YOU AT THE TOP!!!

GOD BLESS YOU ALLLLLLLLLLL

imbigo said...

Kurt said...

Heavenly Father I call upon you as a weak child. Needing your strength, wisdom and understanding. I pray not for myself but for all those who have set their hearts toward truth and suffer.

BUT I'M SURE THERE IS A NAYSAYER OUT THERE THAT WILL EVEN PUT A NEGATIVE SPIN ON THIS PRAYER TO GOD! (OUR FATHER)

THANK YOU MY BROTHERS FOR ALL THAT YOU ARE GOING THROUGH AND ALL THAT YOU ARE DOING. CANT WAIT TO SEE WHAT HAPPENEDS ON THE NEXT COURT DATE!

MAY GOD CONTINUE TO BE WITH YOU!!!! GODS SPEED MY BROTHERS, SEE YOU VERY SOON!!!

BIG"O" 1+1+1=1

SEE YOU AT THE TOP!!!

GOD BLESS YOU ALLLLLLLLLLL

1:27 AM

tcob247 said...

Imbigo

There is nothing negative to post about the part that you put on there.
That could be the prayer of any Christian
Nothing wrong with it at all

Later in his "prayer" kurt says..
" Give us our property and our liberty that we may bless our legacy and our neighbors."

If you make your mortgage payments you get to keep your property.

Or is that some kind of conspiracy?

prov1022 said...

Kurt prays,

"I pray not for myself but for all those who have set their hearts toward truth and suffer"

Thanks Kurt I pray strength for you also.

"Deliver us suddenly in a way that can only credit to your honor, glorifying the Son."

Glorify thy Name. Judge of all the earth.

"Let this generation know that the God of ancient renown is alive and well,"

II Cor.9:8-10 Justice, grace multiplied to you Kurt and Scott

"Create in our hearts a state of honor and thankfulness that we may never forget the source of our victory and blessing."

A thousand thanks Jesus forever and blessings mulipiled to you and all involed in the pursuit of truth and justice. Your prayer blessed my family and me. Your father answered my call promtly and said he could help me file the TILA report that I have. Thanks again.

prov1022 said...

TCOB247

If you make your mortgage payments you get to keep your property.

Or is that some kind of conspiracy?

I don't know. Could be. I'll let you know when I find out more. Things are often not as they appear. I'm listening to the "The American Nightmare" DVD now. Pretty interesting. I have a feeling it’s more of a cover-up and obfuscation of the truth.

son of a prophet said...

OK.

so this article DOES INdirectly relate to what is going on with waht the dg is doing.....
------------------------------------

Former Oregon Prosecutor Claims Americans Need To Fight Judicial Corruption Or Freedom Will Turn Into Slavery
Roger Weidner, a former attorney disbarred in 1997 for seeking the truth, has been jailed more than 19 times and illegally placed in a mental institution for wanting to expose judicial corruption.
29 Apr 2006

By Greg Szymanski



Roger Weidner, a former Oregon state prosecutor, claims America is making a steady transition from freedom to slavery, saying fighting judicial corruption is one way to return to a Constitutional form of government before it's too late.



And for more than 20 years, Weidner, 67, disbarred in 1997 from the practice of law in Oregon for trying to fight the corrupt system, has been asking one important question every single blacked-robed jurist has failed to answer:



"Your honor, is this a court of due process as prescribed by the U.S. Constitution!"



Almost like clockwork, Weidner says each judge refuses to answer, knowing the leading question opens up a judicial can of worms and court-guarded secret since the system, through legal technicalities, has become a biased administrative arm of the government set up to take away a citizen's right not protect them.



"The constitutional rights, guaranteed to the citizen by the sworn pledge of our publicly elected magistrates, have been shamelessly and treacherously stripped from the citizens of this great land by an arrogant and abusive judiciary," said Weidner this week on Greg Szymanski's popular radio show, The Investigative Journal.



"This judiciary has made our courts "safe havens" for thieves and a house of horrors for innocent citizens seeking to recover what has been wrongfully taken from them."



A former member of the 101st Airborne Division before graduating from Lewis and Clarke Law School, Weidner's fight against corruption began 18 years ago after he struggled to return the now-valued $100 million Kettleberg estate to its rightful beneficiary after it had been wrongly seized by an unscrupulous but well-connected attorney.



And for trying to get justice for his client, Weidner was repeatedly arrested, imprisoned, confined to an insane asylum, and finally disbarred. His story, as told to H. Hammond in a book called "The Weidner Method," is a real life testament to how the judiciary has usurped the law while replacing constitutional guarantees with a system in which judges rule by decree.



After fighting judicial corruption on every level in the 18 years since his "eyes were opened" in the Kettleberg case, Weidner has been jailed more than 19 times, including 70 days in a psychiatric institution for simply speaking out in courtrooms demanding judicial accountability.



"My overall goal is to restore Constitutional government to the people of Oregon and the people of the United States," said Weidner. "It's really very simple if people want to take back their country, they have to take back their court houses and this means descending on these corrupt judges by in a group revolt."

Speaking from the heart and trying to emphasize there is no hope of taking back America if there exists no place to obtain a redress of grievances, he added:



"It is my hope that Americans in every county in the country will converge upon their courthouses and use The Weidner Method to fight any kind of case. Throughout my 20 years of research about government corruption, The Weidner Method is the first solution I have ever encountered. If nothing else, it will expose duplicity and make the entire community aware of it, a necessary first step.



"The government should be restructured from the bottom up in cells of 10 families as described in the writings of Kelly Hoskins, author of the Hoskins Report. Senators should again be elected by state legislatures, illegal aliens should be incarcerated, deported and the borders sealed, no more foreign aid, fractional reserve banking should be outlawed, debtfree money should be issued by the Congress, solar technology, which was running factories 100 years ago, should be unsuppressed, natural healing should be unsuppressed, the truth should be unsuppressed, return of the media to the private sector-all of these and countless other issues can be addressed in the courtroom using The Weidner Method.



"According to history, when a nation is in transition from one form of government to a different type of government, as we are now making the transition from freedom to enslavement, there is a point in the struggle, a section of time, during which it could go either way. I believe we are presently teetering on that brink."



The method he has used for more than 20 years to help stop judicial corruption is outlined in his book and the major steps to follow, according to Weidner, are as follows:



Ask for permission to video the proceedings.



Use the Freedom Of Information Act to get your records. Anything with your name or your child's name on it belongs to you. (Gaston)



Bring crowds into the courtroom, the bigger the better.



Prep the crowd out in the corridor both to intimidate the guards and to focus the crowd's attention. Tell your supporters that when the judge tries to shut you down they should all say together, "Let him speak! Let him speak!" Remind everyone to pay attention in the courtroom. When they pay attention the guards back off. When they are distracted the guards move in.



Speak to the guards and police officers standing around. "Your guards know what's going on. These judges, attorneys and state agents are kidnapping these children, rigging elections." whatever your case is about.



Do not stand up for the judge if you know he is corrupt. Remain seated when he enters if you want to show that you know he is corrupt. Or, remain standing until he enters if you want to avoid making a show of respect.



Bring binoculars, opera glasses or telescopes into the courtroom to aim at the officers of the court for closer scrutiny, if possible. It intimidates them. (Editor)



Mentally discipline yourself not to think or react emotionally.



Make the record in the courtroom.



Stand up together as a group when the guards enter in a threatening manner. If the guards are threatening get their names.



Even if you lose, you win, because you are exposing the corruption. Exposure of their corruption and the rising up of the people is the only thing they fear.



Get your tapes of the proceedings from the clerk right away before you leave the courtroom so they won't be edited. (Gaston)



The worse that it is in the courtroom the better that it is because the story goes into the paper and people find out how horrible it was.



Every time a judge dismisses a case and you appeal it, file compulsory process into the Supreme Court and add his name to your racketeering complaint.



Publish the stories in the newspaper and in any other form of media possible.



Spread those papers around to every state office, every judge, attorney and govt. employee and the surrounding community to frighten the public officials and heighten public awareness. Don't forget the police and the courthouse guards.



Issue as many subpoenas as possible as often as possible. It makes them nervous.



Confront and loudly point out the crooks wherever and whenever you see them.



Do not hire an attorney. Be your own lawyer.



Don't give up. Be prepared for a long struggle. Once you begin you must keep the pressure on.



In brief, file a complaint, put it in the newspaper, come into court and make the record, prepare an affidavit, wait the 30 days, then come into the court and move for Summary Judgment.



Weidner is best known for helping Will and Pamela Gaston in their struggle to bring justice to Melissa Gaston, daughter of Will Gaston, who has been repeatedly abused by SOSCF officials, and others involved with her involuntary incarceration in the Oregon foster care system and adoption program.



"I am at war with this corruption", said Weidner. "As a lawyer and historian I am acutely aware that under our constitutional form of government the citizens are the sovereign political authority in this state and country.



"According to the Oregon Constitution and the U.S. Constitution before anything of value can be taken, by the courts in this state and county, from a sovereign citizen that citizen must be afforded "equal protection of law" and "due process of law." Due process being a fair hearing with an impartial judge."



Explaining the importance of following the impartial guidelinbes of the U.S. Constitution, he added:



"All individuals working for the government whether federal, state, or local, are public employees. If these employees are elected or given discretionary authority they are "public officials" who by law must take an oath of office to uphold and defend the state and federal constitution rights of the citizens of Oregon and the United States. Article 1 Sec. 1 of the Oregon Constitution provides: "We declare that all men, when they form a social compact are equal in right: that all power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety, and happiness; and they have at all times a right to alter, reform, or abolish the government in such manner as they may think proper."



"Article 1 Sec. 10 of the Oregon Constitution provides: "No court shall be secret, but justice shall be administered, openly and without purchase, completely and without delay, and every man shall have remedy by due course of law for injury done him in his person, property or reputation." The 5th Amendment to the US Constitution provides: "No person shall?be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law?" The l4th Amendment to the US Constitution provides: "?No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law: nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

against_the_odds said...

SoP, how about the link next time? Why can't you see that people here don't want to scroll through all of the text. PLEASE, just post the link next time. I'm asking PLEASE!

papa_dont_preach said...

prov1022, are you aware that you will need to file a federal law suit to fight the bank with the TILA findings (which means hiring an attorney)? Did they inform you of this? If you can't afford one, you will need to go it alone (could you if need be?).

son of a prophet said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
papa_dont_preach said...

Has anyone successfully established banking for their trust without being asked for the trustee(s) SS#'s due to the new patriot act requirements?

prov1022 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
prov1022 said...

Pa Pa Don't Preach

Yes I am aware that I need an attorney. I cannot do it myself. I need the financing at this time.

tcob247 said...

SOP

You are either stupid or cant read!

against_the_odds said...
SoP, how about the link next time? Why can't you see that people here don't want to scroll through all of the text. PLEASE, just post the link next time. I'm asking PLEASE!


Post the link idiot

If we are interested we will read it

Also,
Get your own blog
I'm sure you will have many followers

son of a prophet said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
mogel said...

The Dorean Process has already filed the "affidavit of truth" in the original presentment. This showed that the banks had no claim in your property, hence, have no legal ability to foreclose. This affidavit of truth, went unrebutted in the record. An unrebutted statement of truth stands as Facts. These facts have been submitted in the Federal Court records & do not go away for everyone to see. A huge reason why the Federal judiciary made a mistake to file criminal charges, now they must consider these FACTS.

Secondly, the affidavit of truth shows that each client is a flesh & blood person, endowed by constitutional rights, not the fictitious entities that the Federal Court is sueing for bank fraud. Clients in the process & Principals of the Dorean Group are sovereigns spoke of in the Supreme Court Case, Yick Wo vs. Hopkins, 118 US 356,370. That is why the Doreanites need not fear. This case concluded, "Sovereignty itself is, of course, NOT SUBJECT TO LAW, for it is the author and source of law, but, in our system, while soverign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself REMAINS WITH THE PEOPLE, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts." This Supreme Court case has NEVER been overturned & trumps any lower court case telling the lie that banks lend out their own assets. Such cases that we ARE NOT SUBJECT TO LAW include laws built upon presumptions & lies by the Court, including presumptions of Judge Alsup which include: (1) Nixon vs. Individual head of St. Joseph Mortgage Co., 615 F. Supp. 898 (CD. Ind 1985), (2) Theil vs. First Federal Sav. & Loan Assn'n of Marion, 646 F. Supp. 592 (N.D. Ind. 1986); In re Strickland, 179 B.R. 979 (Bankr. N.D. Ga 1995;, (3) Rene vs. Citibank NA, 32 F. Supp. 2d 539 (E.D. N.Y. 1999); & (4) Hinz vs. Washington Mutual Home Loans, 2004 WL 72939 (D.Minn. 2004). These are all cases where borrowers have lost in sueing their lenders, but these cases are meaningless.

Since the banks fail to validate the debt, the bank AGREES THAT OUR TRUSTEES BECOME AGENTS FOR THE BANKS. This is shown by the banks actions or nonactions of silence, ratification, manifestation & affirmance, the elements necessary to legally uphold the mortgages deed of reconveyances or mortgages discharges, hence no bank fraud. A good indication of this is the banks noncompliance to do the things necessary to cash the bond. With no bank fraud, all of the other charges fall by the wayside.

Title 5 USC says the bank can't steal your promissory note without consideration. The banks have never showed their consideration, nor can they show this in the Federal Court. In essence they CAN'T VALIDATE THE ALLEGED DEBT. The whole Federal Court case is based upon this presumption which is false that the lenders have an equitable interest or entitlement rights. This is why collateral estoppel exists since the Judge has no subject matter jurisdiction. The issues have already been settled BEFORE THE COURT CONVENED BY THE LENDERS SILENCE & ACQUIESCENCE OF THE PROCESS. According to the Dorean contract, we have all rights or ownership, titles & possession. There is NO DISCRETION FOR THE JUDGE.

Also there exists no contract or agreement with the Federal Court. Hence no jurisdiction by the Court & Court has shown no evidence to the contrary. Kurt has already made sure of this & has made no mistakes.

The Process has already given the banks a notice of default and time to cure this default. They have not responded. A final default has already been recorded, long before the Federal Court illegally convened.

The prosecutions failure to rebut on a point by point basis of the Dorean Process equates to stipulation of the facts that the court has failed to join an indispensable party, or proper party, failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, and lack of jurisdiction, that the Court is employing war powers against it's citizenry contrary to constitutions and Aggrieved Defendant's law is the law of his creator and is severable, not being a party to the body corporate. Wherefore in the interest of justice the court MUST DISMISS the case usa sponte. Any refusals to ministerial dismiss shows bias and prejudice and perjury of oath of office, causing an actionable injury to the Defendants through and by use of war powers.

The Plaintiffs, having received Aggrieved Defendant's Affidavits of Truth and Notice of Defaults and Notices to Cure, as filed in the record, and having failed to plead, with time now expired to do so, wherefore Plaintiff's is in final default. You see, this Federal Kangaroo Court proceeding should not go on and will not go on much longer.

Should things proceed much longer, I see the Principals filing a writ of Praecipe to the Court Clerk respectfully ordering to enter a default judgment against the Plaintiff and prepare a Certificate declaring that the Plaintiff has failed to join the correct party in this suit and therefore the case is dismissed for failure to state a claim and lack of jurisdiction.

Then I see the Federal Defendants filing a "writ of mandamus" if judgment is not entered in favor of the Defendants. This demands that the writ issue forth to mandate the ministerial duty of the clerk to enter the default immediately & the Judge to sign off on this. If Judge Alsup does not do this, due to his superior knowledge of the law, and his witnessing a constitutional wrong through fraudulent violation of rights, privileges and immunities, equates to felong perjury of oath, and injury to the rights of said Citizens consitutes an actional offense with NO IMMUNITY, by failure to act upon a ministerial duty.

Then I see the Principals filing a "motion to dismiss" which will say: "Without any appearance of an adverse party, where the Judge was not an impartial party, but also prosecution, which is a conflict of interests and gives rise to violation of due process rights of the alleged Defendants, who is now aggrieved because of such impartiality, and as such this court has lost immunity and any preconceived jurisdiction.

Further investigations show that there was no probable cause for the arrest and seizure at the time of such arrest and seizure. There was no disturbance of the peace, felony, or valid warrant for such action, leading to another cause against the Plaintiff and Officer for harassment.

Also the witnesses to the Federal Case against the Defendants come to Court with "unclean hands" due to their conflict of interest, so whatever they say is irrelevant. Witnesses are needed to convict, and with no credible witnesses, there is no bank fraud.

Defendants will motion the Court to dismiss the charges for failure to explain the nature and cause of the accusations, thereby leaving the Defendants in ignorance and without aid of knowledge to prepare a knowledgeable defense, and amounts to denial of due process.

So you see, this case will not proceed. The risks to Judge Alsup are too great. He knows that too.

Appearances like all of the hoopla of the Federal Court charges, all 68 of them can sometimes be intimidating on the surface, but when the curtain is opened, you will see that the wizard of oz is an ordinary man with a bald head, with no real power. His power comes from our ignorance of how things really are.

Looking forward to the victory celebration party & restoration that has been prayerfully & sincerely asked for in righteousness, in the name of God & through the power of Christ's will.

you will know them by their fruit said...

In respsonse to Kurt's prayer.

I have zero doubt the Lord's Will will be done.

Not Kurt's.

mogel said...

Fruity One said: "In respsonse to Kurt's prayer.

I have zero doubt the Lord's Will will be done.

Not Kurt's."

WHAT YOU FAIL TO RECOGNIZE FRUIT IS THAT HIS WILL & KURT'S WILL ARE ONE AND THE SAME, ON THIS ISSUE, NOT A SITUATION OF EITHER / OR--- AS YOU HAVE PRESUMED. MAYBE YOU WOULD LIKE TO QUOTE A SCRIPTURE TO VALIDATE YOUR POINT. OBVIOUSLY YOU CAN'T. I CAN QUOTE MANY SCRIPTURES TO VALIDATE YOU'RE FIGHTING THE WRONG ENEMY & IN ESSENCE YOU ARE BEARING FALSE WITNESS. THINK ABOUT THAT FOR A MINUTE. YOU WILL BE JUDGED FOR EVERY IDLE WORD THAT YOU SPEAK & YOU WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR YOUR FALSE AND WRONGRFUL JUDGMENTS AND YOUR NEGLECT TO BE RIGHTEOUSLY INFORMED.

tcob247 said...

"HIS WILL & KURT'S WILL ARE ONE AND THE SAME, ON THIS ISSUE"

WOW........

son of a prophet said...

as you may have noticed, because moogle has post relevant info on theis blog, i have considered to removing some posts that i had made earlier.

i have not however removed what i feel is an important post to be aware of on how to conduct oneself in a courtroom if one is ever unfortuanate enuf to find oneself there.

other than the subject matter, the conduct has many similarities to what k and s are doing/have done when facing a corrupt judge; stonewall him with truth that cannot be refuted.

tcob247 said...

"HIS WILL & KURT'S WILL ARE ONE AND THE SAME, ON THIS ISSUE"

WOW........

son of a prophet said...

check out....


http://famguardian.org/Publications/GreatIRSHoax/GreatIRSHoax.htm

son of a prophet said...

http://famguardian.org/
Publications/GreatIRSHoax/
GreatIRSHoax.htm

against_the_odds said...

SoP, THANK YOU SO MUCH BROTHER!!!!!!!!

WHOA Mogel, where the heck did you get this information? Kickin Butt and taking names.

dgwondering said...

Byron Gashler lied: "....The Dorean Process has already filed the "affidavit of truth" in the original presentment. This showed that the banks had no claim in your property, hence, have no legal ability to foreclose. This affidavit of truth, went unrebutted in the record."

It did not go unrebutted. It was ruled (among other things) frivolous. The presentment is utterly bogus and has been ruled as such by the courts in several cases.

Mr. Gashler is simply trying to perpetuate the mythology for his own motives and to perpetuate his supposed standing among the clients he lured into this fiasco.

papa_dont_preach said...

dgwondering, that's the best you can come up with, character defamation?

Try rebutting the stated details point for point and if you can prove them to be a fallacy beyond a reasonable doubt, then call Mogel on the carpet.

dgfloundering said...

papa_dont_preach said...
dgwondering, that's the best you can come up with, character defamation?

Try rebutting the stated details point for point and if you can prove them to be a fallacy beyond a reasonable doubt, then call Mogel on the carpet.

Sorry Papa, but this is the best I could do. Rebutting details would take some actual knowledge on my part, and since I don't have any knowledge or truth to contribute to a rebuttal, character assination is the best I could do.

neodemes said...

Yep, sounds really good, mogel.

Very nice presentation. Maybe you're right.

OR

maybe Dorean will have as much success as Sovereign Brenton

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Lex_Rex/message/214?viscount=100

[dgfloundering sez: "anonymously mocking people while typing one-handed is the best I can do".]

mogel said...

DG Wondering said: "The presentment is utterly bogus and has been ruled as such by the courts in several cases."

How was Judge Alsup's ruling made? Judge Alsup ruled AFTER the Dorean Group dismissed those Civil suits. The Judge had no business even ruling WHEN he did for the cases were voluntarily dismissed by the Plaintiffs before any ruling. The Judge didn't even have subject matter jurisdiction when he ruled on such, so his ruling doesn't count, since he ruled on no facts & no evidence, and no due process. This isn't how justice or truth is served. I would think he could be sanctioned for this. How ironic that he sanctioned the Dorean attorney, Mr. Spielbauer.

The Alsup Court is like one cheating in a race & then one saying, I'm faster & better than you are & citing that I won the face, & that's proof I'm faster than you are & neglect to tell the part that I shoved you down & tripped you so you couldn't finish the race so you could fairly compete. Who wants to win by cheating? Maybe that's your style. On what basis did Judge Alsup rule? He had no evidence presented that the presentment was bogus that was entered into the record. That's why it's called, a "fanstasy ruling". None of the points were even given the chance to be debated by the Plaintiffs & evidence considered. Was the Dorean Bond proven to be a fake by evidence, affidavits & competent witnesses? If not, the bond in essence paid off the debt anyway, so the alleged debt doesn't exist: UCC Title 13, 3603. Was that evidence considered in Judge Alsup's fantasy ruling? Was Scott's power of attorney established to be false & therefore unenforceable? No, none of these things were specifically considered. So if you categorically & generally say that the Dorean Process has been ruled to be totally bogus, you are the one sadly mistaken for the evidence & facts don't present that conclusion, counselor.

How is that even called due process when the Court plays unfairly? How can Judge Alsup therefore rule as such unless He is bogus Judge interested in his own agenda?

The problem is in the timing of all of this. I did not lie that the individual banks don't answer timely, so collateral estoppel applies for all of those clients irregardless of how you perceive the Courts have ruled. The banks individually default in the time frame that they have to answer the presentment according to UCC law to answer. The banks provide no evidence of a validation of debt, nor has any Court that has ruled against the "affidavit of truth", done so point for point, & no evidence to rebut each point. The only friviolous thing is any supposed rulings based upon NO facts, or cases ruled based upon a lie or no evidence to support a lieing precedence.

Besides the Dorean Process has only been around since about Jan. 2004, so what cases can you cite that has ruled since then that has specifically considered the complete Dorean presentment & has considered the doctrine of "agency by estoppel" and the bond paying off the debt as a legitimate tender of payment. Then again, they also have to be a Supreme Court ruling, otherwise I'm not interested since I'm interested only in the "final word."

How about all of the Supreme Court cases that say that national banks cannot "lend credit", for it goes against their prime objective to protect depositors monies? Why do the Courts lend blind eyes & death ears to ALL of those Court cases? Those cases certainly outnumber the number of cases you can cite. Essentially lenders are using the courts to enforce something that is unenforceable in the first place. You are acquainted with the doctrine of "ultra vires" are you not, Counselor?


There IS evidence that banks alter the promise to pay, into a negotiable instrument that they can sell or encumber to come up with monies to loan. That is the bogus thing that ISN'T discussed & seriously considered in the Courts. It's friviolous that lenders can advertise they have money to loan, when lending is a misnomer since monies are created, not loaned. The Federal Reserve Publications prove this. These publications never have been challenged in Court & proven to be false by facts. Opponents of bank challenges just say that clients challenging the banks are misinterpreting what is written in those Federal Reserve Publications, but don't explain what is being written or what those publications are really saying. How is that winning a debate? If I'm mistaken, please explain why indepth, don't just say I'm mislead or that I'm a liar, for I object.

The Court cases you refer that supposedly have answered the charges still don't trump the Supreme Court case I cited, so they aren't relevant. I don't care what lower courts have said.

You're the one that has lied if you can't trump the case "that we aren't subject to code." Anything that violates the constitution that is put into law is unenforceable anyway. The very way that banks operate violate the constitution. Even a third grader can understand that, they don't have to be a Judge or a lawyer.

Besides you are a lawyer, you have given away your integrity already, so your insults mean nothing to me. I just consider the source. Your first priority is to the interests of the Court, not to the search and acknowledgment of truth. You're the one with a hidden agenda, not me. I'm just interested in the truth & could care less about anything else, for those that care for other things are the ones I allow to be damned in their ignorance. And as Paul Harvey says, "now you know the rest of the story."

mogel said...

Neodemesne: I can't really comment on Brenton's commercial affidavit since I'm not familiar in what he is affirming. If he is affirming something that is false, then, maybe he is in trouble. If you affirm a lie, you can't expect to be victorious.

The question arises, what do you say is a lie about the Dorean affirmation of truth? If you can't answer that, you can't certainly use the Brenton case as a simliar case to discuss. Can anyone point out the lie(s) or disprove anything that the Dorean affirmation of truth says? If not, then, the Principles are free to file other documents as Brenton did & expect no repercussions.

If the State or Federal Courts in CA or UT thought Dorean was filing false affidavits, & they knew them to be such, would not other charges also be included in their already 64 Counts or other charges should have been cited in the UT case, but were not? I think the count of "perjury" as many times as presentments went out, would have or could have been included in criminal charges would it not? Or maybe you think that the FBI & Federal & State Court is just too stupid at this point in time to have figured out these extra charges also apply to the Dorean Group. Maybe you are smarter than these people that brought the charges. If so, maybe the dynamic duo's chances are better than naysayers have expected or predicted?

Then again, maybe Mr. Brenton will beat those charges, I don't know. Maybe you can legally copyright your name & penalize others that use your name for profit without your consent if things were properly done.

Maybe you would like to comment further on the similiarities you perceive of the two cases & why you think they are similiar. Maybe they aren't similiar. Bank fraud certainly isn't similar to copyright fraud.

An interesting post by you, none the less.

mogel said...

"A Manchester man has been accused of retaliating against a Merrimack County judge, a guardian ad litem and a child support officer. All three were working on Ghislain L. Breton's divorce case, according to Assistant Attorney General Bob Carey.
Breton, 39, was indicted by a Merrimack County grand jury on eight counts of (1) improper influence, (2) obstructing governmental administration and (3) witness tampering.

Nemo, I can't see that this case is simliar to the charges against the Dorean group. Even the charges aren't even similiar.

Sounds like simliar charges that should be levied against the banks though by Dorean since the lenders are guilty of those 3 charges.

mogel said...

Nemo: Remember when Dorean was evicted from their office building for failure to pay rent since the FBI confiscated their accounts illegally? Remember that some legally manuvering went on somehow that made it so that I would guess legal liens were put on Hanover Properties (The Landlord) & maybe those liens were foreclosed upon where Dorean became the legal owner through some quiet title action or something like that I would presume. Remember the Dorean Group after securing Title, then sent out written notices to all tenants to pay them rent after they became the owner of record? Does this sound like real estate fraud to you? Or does it sound like possibly an affidavit of truth was put in the Court record & that affidavit of truth went unrebutted that allowed Dorean to attach legal liens against their prior Landlord for unlawful conspiracy with the FBI & so these legitimate liens or damages were created where they could legitimately claim an interest in the property. Maybe the Dorean Group put Hanover Properties in some sort of involuntary bankruptcy postion when demand for payment went unmet & was able to sell off their building to pay off Dorean's lien? Maybe the bidder on the property was friendly toward's Dorean's interests. I'm only guessing how things could have been done obviously.

How do you go from renter to Landowner of a 12 million dollar office complex in a short period of time if you don't do it legally? If you don't do it legally, why hasn't the Federal Court added criminal charges solely based upon those actions that involve this nice piece of real estate? Why hasn't any naysayer come up with this thought as a possible complaint?

Do you think that these actions went unnoticed or that these actions went noticed & that the FBI & courts can't do anything about it? Sounds like the latter to me.

Naysayers complain about the 5 million in a Latvian account, & are impatient about their refunds, which by the way is not an obligation, but a gift or offering of charity to show good faith, but that isn't the biggest asset out there to complain about. Dr. Fred commented once that Kurt has done this legal process successfully many times before.

If Kurt can get away with this in a legal way, why can't he beat the Federal rap too? What is harder to do, obtain a 12 million asset in a few months, or beat a bogus rap of bank fraud that has no substance? I don't know how Kurt did this, I can only guess, but I'd like to learn.

Nemo, you have a creative real estate website which is suppose to inspire people to think in a different way, do you think that you can obtain a 12 million dollar building through adverse possession? If so, you wouldn't have any financial woes, would you? You like many naysayers are quick to judge & condemn the man, but can you understand one of his biggest miracles? I await your explanation. Maybe you have been under estimating the Dorean Group's abilities from the start? Prepare yourself to be surprised.

son of a prophet said...

looks like that guy was railroaded by the jugde....



judicial system infested with vermin...


need to get exterminator to spray/bait some traps.

mogel said...

DG Wondering: Why Lenders are Violating the Law & Why the Dorean Presentment is Not Bogus according to Court decisions. Did Judge Alsup consider these things below before he prematurely ruled? Are you to tell me these cases below are in the Court records of Judge Alsup's cases? Maybe he should be sanctioned for not doing his job in learning what the Courts have said on these issues? I apologize for the long post, but all of this is actually relevant.

The United States Code, Title 12, Section 24, Paragraph 7 confers upon a bank the power to lend its money, not it’s credit. In First National Bank of Tallapoosa vs. Monroe, 135 Ga 614; 69 S.E. 1123 (1911), the court, after citing the statue heretofore said, “The provisions referred to do not give power to a national bank to guarantee the payment of the obligations of others solely for their benefit, nor is there any authority to issue them through such power incidental of the business of banking. A bank can lend it’s money, not it’s credit.” Meanwhile, they do it anyway from a profit motive, even though it flies in the face of their primary duty to protect people’s money.
In Howard & Foster Co. vs. Citizens National Bank of Union, 133 S.C. 202; 130 SE 758, (1927), it was stated, “It has been settled beyond controversy that a national bank, under Federal law, being limited in it’s power and capacity, cannot lend it’s credit by guaranteeing the debt of another. All such contracts being entered into by it’s officers are ultra vires and not binding upon the corporation.”
An activity constitutes an incidental power if it is closely related to an express power and is useful in carrying out the business of banking. See First Nat. Bank of Eastern Arkansas v. Taylor, 907 F.2d 775. But even with this latitude no hint of lending credit is provided in 12 U.S.C. 24 that would give rise to an incidental power to lend credit. The exercise of powers not expressly granted to national banks is prohibited:
First National Bank v. National Exchange Bank 29 U.S. 122, 128
California Bank v. Kennedy 167 U.S. 362, 367
Concord Bank v. Hawkins 174 U.S. 364
Further, it is laid down as a general rule that a national bank cannot lend its credit by becoming surety, indorser, or guarantor for another. “In the federal courts, it is well settled that a national bank has not power to lend its credit to another by becoming surety, indorser, or guarantor for him.” See the following cases:
.
C.E. Healey & Son v. Stewardson Nat. Bank, 1 N.E.2d 858, 285 Ill. App. 290.
People’s Nat. Bank of Winston-Salem vs. Southern States Finance Co., 122 S.E. 415, 192 N.C. 69, 48 A.L.R. 519.
Colley v. Chowchilla Nat. Bank, 255 P. 188, 200 C. 760, 52 A.L.R. 569.
Rice & Hutchins Atlanta Co. v. Commercial Nat. Bank of Macon, 88 S.E. 999, 18 Ga.App. 151.
First Nat. Bank of Hagerman v. Stringfield, 235 P. 897, 40 Ill.App. 376
City Nat. Bank of Wellington v. Morgan, Civ. App., 258 S.W. 572.
Farmers’ & Merchants’ Bank of Reedsville v. Kingwood Nat. Bank, 101 S.E. 734, 85 W.Va. 371.
Best v. State Bank of Bruce, 221 N.W. 379, 197 Wis. 20.
A national bank’s charter requires that they protect customers money first, and then make money second. National banks are only allowed to make money in order to protect people’s money-so one serves the other, but the priority is to protect.
In Central Transp. Co. v. Pullman, 139 U.S. 60, 11 S. Ct. 478, 35 L. Ed. 55, the court said:
“A contract ultra vires being unlawful and void, not because it is in itself immoral, but because the corporation, by the law of its creation, is incapable of making it, the courts, while refusing to maintain any action upon the unlawful contract, have always striven to do justice between the parties, so far as could be done consistently with adherence to law, by permitting a property or money, parted with on the faith of the unlawful contract, to be recovered back, or compensation to be made for it. In such case, however, the action is not maintained upon the unlawful contract, nor according to its terms; but on an implied contract of the defendant to return, or failing to do that, to make compensation for, property or money which it has no right to retain. To maintain such an action is not to affirm, but to disaffirm, the unlawful contract.”
a. “When a contract is once declared ultra vires, the fact that it is executed does not validate it, nor can it be ratified, so as to make it the basis of suitor action, nor does the doctrine of estoppel apply.” Fand PR v. Richmond
b. “A national bank cannot lend its credit to another by becoming surety, endorser, or guarantor for him, such an act; is ultra vires…” Merchants Bank v. Baird 160 F 642.
The following case cites also support this Memorandum on credit loans and void contracts:
• “In the federal courts, it is well established that a national bank has no power to lend its credit to another by becoming surety, endorser, or guarantor for him.” Farmers and Miners Bank v. Bluefield Nat’l Bank, 11 F 2d 83, 271 U.S.669.
• “A national bank has no power to lend its credit to any person or corporation…Bowen v. Needles Nat. Bank, 94 F 925 36 CCA 553, certiorari denied in 20 S.Ct 1024, 176 US 682, 44 LED 637.
• “Mr. Justice Marshall said: The doctrine of ultra vires is a most powerful weapon to keep private corporations within their legitimate spheres and to punish them for violations of their corporate charters, and it probably is not invoked too often. Zinc Carbonate Co. v. First National Bank, 103 Wis 125, 79 NW 229. American Express Co. v. Citizens State Bank, 194 NW 430.
• “A bank may not lend its credit to another even though such a transaction turns out to have been a benefit to the bank, and in support of this a list of cases might be cited, which-would like a catalog of ships.” [Emphasis added] Norton Grocery Co. v. Peoples Nat. Bank, 144 SE 505. 151 Va 195.
• “It has been settled beyond controversy that a national bank, under federal Law being limited in its powers and capacity, cannot lend its credit by guaranteeing the debts of another. All such contracts entered into by its officers are ultra vires…” Howard and Foster Co. v. Citizens Nat’l Bank of Union, 133 SC 202, 130 SE 759 (1926).
• “…checks, drafts, money orders, and bank notes are not lawful money of the United States…” State v. Neilon, 73 Pac 324, 43 Ore 168.
• “Neither, as included in its power not incidental to them, it is a part of a bank’s business to lend it’s credit. If a bank could lend its credit as well as its money, it might, if it received compensation and was careful to put its name only to solid paper, make a great deal more than any lawful interest on its money would amount to. If not careful, the power would be the mother of panics,…Indeed, lending credit is the exact opposite of lending money which is the real business of a bank, for while the latter creates a liability in favor of the bank, the former gives rise to a liability of the bank to another. I Morse. Banks and Banking 5th Ed. Sec. 65; Magee, Banks and Banking, 3rd Ed. Sec 248.” American Express Co. v. Citizens State Bank, 194 NW 429.
• “It is not within those statutory powers for a national bank, even though solvent, to lend its credit to another in any of the various ways in which that might be done.” Federal Intermediate Credit Bank v. L “Herrison, 33 F 2d 841, 842 (1929).
• “There is no doubt but what the law is that national bank cannot lend its credit or become an accommodation endorser.” National Bank of Commerce v. Atkinson, 55 E 471.
• “…the bank is allowed to hold money upon personal security; but it must be money that it loans, not its credit.” Seligman v. Charlottesville Nat. Bank, 3 Hughes 647, Fed Case No. 12, 642, 1039.
• “A loan may be defined as the delivery by one party to, and the receipt by another party of, a sum of money upon an agreement, express or implied, to repay the sum with or without interest.” Parsons v. Fox 179 Ga 605, 176 SE 644. Also see Kirkland v. Bailey, 155 SE 2d 701 and United States v. Neifert White Co., 247 Fed Supp 878, 879.
• “The word ‘money’ in its usual and ordinary acceptation means gold, silver, or paper money used as a circulating medium of exchange…” Lane v. Railey 280 Ky 319, 133 SW 2d 75.
• “A promise to pay cannot, by argument, however ingenious, be made the equivalent of actual payment..” Christensen v. Beebe, 91 P 133, 32 Utah 406.
• “A bank is not the holder in due course upon merely crediting the depositors account.” Bankers Trust v. Nagler, 229 NYS 2d 142, 143.
• “A check is merely an order on a bank to pay money.” Young v. Hembree, 73 P2d 393.
• “Any false representation of material facts made with knowledge of falsity and with intent that it shall be acted on by another in entering into contract, and which is so acted upon, constitutes ‘fraud,’ and entitles party deceived to avoid contract or recover damages.” Barnsdall Refining Corn, v. Birnam Wood Oil Co., 92 F 26 817.
• “Any conduct capable of being turned into a statement of fact is representation. There is no distinction between misrepresentations effected by words and misrepresentations effected by other acts.” Leonard v. Springer 197 Ill 532.64 NE 301.
• “If any part of the consideration for a promise be illegal, or if there are several considerations for an unseverable promise, one of which is illegal, the promise, whether written or oral, is wholly void, as it is impossible to say what part or which one of the considerations induced the promise.” Menominee River Co. v. Augustus Spies L and C Co., 147 Wis 559.572; 132 NW 1122.
• “The contract is void if it is only in part connected with the illegal transaction and the promise single or entire.” Guardian Agency v. Guardian Mut. Savings Bank, 227 Wis 550, 279 NW 83.
• “It is not necessary for recession of a contract that the party making the misrepresentation should have known that it was false, but recovery is allowed even though misrepresentation is innocently made, because it would be unjust to allow one who made false representations, even innocently, to retain the fruits of a bargain induced by such representations.” Whipp v. Iverson, 43 Wis 2d 166.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Turner, 869 F. 2d 270 (6th Cir. 1989)
“Turner was told that the blank for the debtor’s name would be completed by adding the name of a company affiliated with Turner. Unknown to Turner, the guarantee was completed by filling in the name of a debtor with whom Turner was not affiliated and by altering the guarantee to change the name of the bank/creditor. The court held that Turner could assert a fraud claim against the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation as owner of the note in its corporate capacity.”
Southern Mortgage Company v. O’Dom, 699 F. Supp. 1227 (S.D. Miss. 1988)
“The court held that the fraud claim was defective since it alleged a promise to perform an act in the future or a representation as to future events…The court rejected this claim holding that there was no evidence that the lender had any sort of power or domination over the borrower who was free to seek financing elsewhere.”
American National Bank & Trust Company v. Hanson Construction Co., Inc., 1991 WL 42668 (Ky. 1991)
“The court held that, considering the relationship of the parties, Hanson was reasonable in relying upon the alleged representations by the bank. The court held that the future financing provisions were not so indefinite that it would be unreasonable for Hanson to rely upon them. Hanson’s failure to read the loan documents was excusable since he was encouraged by the bank officer not to read them and the bank officer advised him not to have his lawyer present at the closing. The court affirmed a jury award of compensatory and punitive damages against the bank.”
Nibbi Brothers. Inc. v. Brannen Street Investors, 205 Cal. App. 3d 1415 (1988)
“The court acknowledged that the statute would not bar a claim for unjust enrichment if it could be shown that a benefit had been conferred on the lender by mistake, fraud, coercion or request. Thus, had Home induced Nibbi to provide work on the project under circumstances in which Home’s inducement fell under circumstances traditional categories of mistake, fraud, coercion or request, a claim for unjust enrichment might escape the reach of the statutory bar.”
Bank of Sun Prairie v. Esser, 151 Wis.2d 11, 442 N.W.2d 540 (1989)
“The court affirmed the jury verdict in favor of Esser for fraud based upon evidence that at the closing the bank advised Esser that she was signing only for the new truck loan. The court held that Esser’s reliance on the bank’s misrepresentations was reasonable since she trusted the bank’s security practices and believed that the guarantee only applied to the new loan. The court also held that the trial court should have submitted Esser’s punitive damage claim to the jury because of evidence that the bank’s misrepresentation was active and the bank took advantage of Esser’s trust and reliance.”
Touche Ross Limited v. Filipek, 778 P.2d 721 (Haw. 1989)
“the court held that the alleged misrepresentations made by the bank were material and actionable since it was claimed that the bank affiliate did not have the development expertise it was represented to have and had no intention of advancing the funds when the promise was made.”
Blankenheim v. E.F. Hutton & Company, Inc., 217 Cal. App. 3d 1463 (1990)
“The court held that a claim of negligent misrepresentation is included within the definition of “fraud” as used in the statute and as that term is defined in Civil Code § 1572. The court also held that questions of fact were presented as to whether the investors had justifiably relied upon Hutton’s alleged representations concerning the investment.”
First National Bank of Montgomery vs. Jerome Daly. “Regarding the power to delegate the control of our money supply to a private corporation can be found in 16 Am Jur 2d, Section 347, which states: "The rule has become fixed that the legislature may not delegate legislative functions to private persons or groups, or to private corporations or a group of private corporations."
"
"Banking Associations from the very nature of their business are prohibited from lending credit." (St. Louis Savings Bank vs. Parmalee 95 U. S. 557)

"Banking corporations cannot lend credit." (First National Bank of Amarillo vs. Slaton Independent School District, Tex Civ App 1933, 58 SW 2d 870)

"Nowhere is the express authority granted to the corporation to lend its credit." (Gardilner Trust vs. Augusta Trust, 134 Me 191; 291 US 245)
"A national bank has no authority to lend its credit." (Johnston vs. Charlottesville National Bank, C.C. Va. 1879, Fed Cas. 7425)
"A contract made by a corporation beyond the scope of corporate powers is unlawful and void." (McCormick vs. Market National Bank, 165 U.S. 538)
(Note: Black’s Law Dictionary: ultra vires - Latin for "beyond powers." It refers to conduct by a corporation or its officers that exceeds the powers granted by law.)
Despite the above court cases, Ralph Gelder, Superintendent, Department of Banks and Banking, State of Maine, said on Feb. 20, 1974, "A commercial bank is able to make a loan by simply creating a new demand deposit (so called checkbook money) through bookkeeping entry." This is in total contradiction to what the courts have said. Yet, that is exactly how the banks create the money to loan to its customers or to buy government bonds.

"Act is ultra vires when corporation is without authority to perform it under any circumstance or for any purpose. By doctrine of ultra vires a contract made by a corporation beyond the scope of its corporate powers is unlawful." (Community Fed S&L vs. Fields, 128 F 2nd 705)
"A holder who does not give value cannot qualify as a holder in due course." (Uniform Commercial Code 3-303.1)
In securities law, the most important requirement is full disclosure. Investors have to be given the full scoop. You cannot hold anything back. Everything-lawsuits, criminal records, market share, debt-has to be disclosed. This same type of disclosure is required in the Truth in Lending Act as well. With that said, why is it that no one has ever heard of this legal argument? Well, probably because they have not been told. But don’t you think that it is important and relevant to tell potential loan customers, as well as bank shareholders, that according to the US Code and numerous judicial decisions, it is questionable whether a national bank is actually authorized to lend credit, become a guarantor, or become surety? They should at least say something to their customers and shareholders along the lines of this:
“Disclaimer: We the bank, are lending credit, guaranteeing debts and becoming surety, through our lending business, for profit. The Comptroller of Currency approves. Congress has been silent in recent years. However, both federal and state courts in the past have repeatedly told us that the National Bank Act does not provide for this activity. Therefore, at any point in the future, the bank could be subject to either federal or state cease and desist orders. In that event the bank will require immediate and full payments and will cancel your credit or loan. Further, the bank may be exposed to civil lawsuits from all its former loan Clients and shareholders.”
Here are other things to consider:
• ?If a party breaches its authority, by entering into an agreement that it knows it is not allowed by law to execute, is it moral to allow that party to enforce the agreement?
• ?Is it moral to force a person to pay on a loan, when that person did not know that the bank did not have the legal authority to issue credit or to become surety?
• ?Is it moral for a bank to place a negative mark on your credit report, when they did not have the authority to enter into the agreement in the first place, and that any deficit in payment has been insured by a third party insurance company and can be written off as a claim?
In addition to these three points, consider also that moral arguments (arguments based in equity), verses legal arguments (arguments based in law), are only upheld if the party seeking to enforce the agreement comes to the court with “clean hands.” This concept is known as the clean hands doctrine. What this doctrine means is that if a bank desires to enforce an agreement based on equity (morality), then they must have acted equitable (moral). In the case of credit, if the banks know that the law prevents them from loaning credit (there is over a hundred years of case law on this point) and they do it anyway, then they simply do not have clean hands, and cannot argue their case in equity. Therefore they must argue in law. MEANWHILE, THE LAW PREVENTS THEM FROM LOANING CREDIT. There are penalties and forfeitures attached to what the bank did. In this case there are. In fact there are penalties attached to national banks going beyond their express powers in that they are exposing depositor’s money to loss in contradiction to the bank’s primary duty. Therefore, the issue that can be raise is the argument of ultra virus and not only is the contract void, but even if the borrower did receive a benefit, the borrower was not unjustly enriched. If the contract is void then both parties walk away as if there never was a contract. The judge is then asked to declare a zero balance and deem it as paid as agreed. Since the borrower provided the value for the source of funds, the borrower is also entitled to a judgment in the amount of the highest credit limit issued or loan amount. Also, since the banks acts demonstrates that the bank took unfair advantage of the borrower, this results in the bank needing to be penalized. Typically, the borrower is entitled to ask for a financial award against the bank in the amount of the debt forgiven. Since fraud is committed, the borrower is entitled to all sums paid on the contract including interest, plus treble (triple) damages, attorney fees expended and court and other costs in addition. The borrower can also demands a zero balance on this debt, and a voidance of the loan agreement, and a financial judgment in favor of the borrower due to the bad behaviour of the lender.
ADDITIONAL BORROWERS RELIEF
In Federal District Court, the borrower may have additional claims for relief under “Civil RICO” Federal Racketeering laws. (18 U.S.C. 1964) As the lender may have established a “pattern of racketeering activity” by using the U.S. Mail more than twice to collect an unlawful debt and the lender may be in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1341, 1343, 1961 and 1962. The borrower may have other claims for relief. If he can prove there was or is a conspiracy to deprive him of property without due process of law. Under 42 U.S.C. 1983 (Constitutional Injury), 1985 (Conspiracy) and 1986 (“knowledge” and “Neglect to Prevent” a U.S. Constitutional Wrong). Under 18 U.S.C.A. 241 (Conspiracy) violators, “shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than ten (10) years or both.
In a Debtor’s RICO action against its creditor, alleging that the creditor had collected an unlawful debt, an interest rate (where all loan charges were added together) that exceeded, in the language of the RICO Statute, “twice the enforceable rate.” The Court found no reason to impose a requirement that the Plaintiff show the Defendant had been convicted of collecting an unlawful debt, running a “loan sharking” operation. The debt included the fact that exaction of a usurious interest rate rendered the debt unlawful and that is all that is necessary to support the Civil RICO action. Durante Bros. And Sons, Inc. v. Flushing Nat’l Bank, 755 F2d 239, Cert. Denied, 473 US 906 (1985).25. The Supreme Court found that the Plaintiff in a civil RICO action, need establish only a criminal “violation” and not a criminal conviction.
Further, the court held that the Defendant need only have caused harm to the Plaintiff by the commission of a predicate offense in such a way as to constitute a “pattern of Racketeering activity.” That is, the Plaintiff need not demonstrate that the Defendant is an organized crime figure, a mobster in the popular sense, or that the Plaintiff has suffered some type of special Racketeering injury; all that the Plaintiff must show is what the Statute specifically requires. The RICO Statute and the civil remedies for its violation are to be liberally construed to effect the congressional purpose as broadly formulated in the Statute. Sedima, SPRL v. Imrex Co., 473 US 479 (1985).
Seems that the Truth In Lending Act (TILA) also gives folks some ammo to use against an impending foreclosure sale or the illegal behaviour of the banks.

dgfloundering said...

mogel said...
DG Wondering:

Mogel, i have changed my name to dgFLOUNdering, so please address me as such.

You know that when you ask me a question about the dg process, legalism, etc., all I can do is character assasinate

gotlight said...

Mogel, That explains why my case was dismissed and all actions in the second complaint were dropped from a year ago.

Ha! What a year this has been.

Godspeed Kurt and Scott.

KYHOOYA said...

tcob247 said...
SOP

You are either stupid or cant read!

against_the_odds said...
SoP, how about the link next time? Why can't you see that people here don't want to scroll through all of the text. PLEASE, just post the link next time. I'm asking PLEASE!


Post the link idiot

If we are interested we will read it

Also,
Get your own blog
I'm sure you will have many followers

3:00 PM

Hey TIN CUP FIRST OFF

SHUT YOR PIE HOLE

Second

WHO & WHEN DID YOU GET APPOINTED TO BE EVERYONES REP. ON THIS BLOG.

3rd

CALLING THE KETTLE FROM THE POT WHEN YOUR
TELLING SOMEONE THERE AN IDIOT
(By the way nice way to speek to someone mr. I don't cuss at or bad mouth to get my point said)

DID'NT YOU UNDER STAND THE DIRECTIONS i GAVE YOU.

yOUR FULL OF SHIT NOW GET BACT TO YOUR THUMB FROM ASS TO MOUTH WORKOUT.

YOU DON'T SPEEK FOR ME OR ANYOTHERS HERE, WELL THAT I KNOW OF ANYWAY.
SO SHUT YOUR PIE HOLE AND GET BACK TO THE OFF RAMP YOU KNOW YOUR GOING TO NEED THE MONEY TO PAY THAT MORTGAGE OF YOURS

IF ANYONE CAN BE CALL AN IDIOT IT WOULD BE YOU
STUPID

p.s.....










.......

down a little more ..






..



..

I don't want anyone to hear this so just page down a little more ..







..

So any way Tin Cup I just wanted to tell you that I really think your a great








PIECE OF SHIT AND WOULD LOVE IT IF YOU COULD JUST GO FUCK YOUR SELF YOU KNOW YOU LIKE THAT THUMB IN YOUR ASS SO GO BE HAPPY AND



AND BY THE WAY THIS IS NOT YOUR BLOG TO TELL ANYONE WHERE THEY CAN OR CAN'T POST SO IF YOU HAVE TO STAY AND WE ALL KNOW YOU CAN'T BRING YOUR SALF TO GO AWAY DO

SO SHUT UP AND SIT THERE PLAING WITH THAT SHITTY THUMB AS I SAID IT IS THE TASTE THAT YOU GIVE ME AND I'M SURE OTHER WHEN YOU POST ON HERE

NASTY TASTE ISN'T?

SO SHUT UP WOULD YOU FOR A CHANGE TRY NOT POSTING FOR ..OH.. LETS SAY 3-4 MONTHS BE T YOU CAN'T ?

KYHOOYA said...

tcob247 said...
SOP

I'm either stupid or cant read!

against_the_odds said...

that he would like it if I would stop post his word because I don't have a copy right to them and could not no what he real feeling and meaning are so I sould just Shut My PIE HOLE, because




Post on here or with a link it's no problem


Tin Cup leave SoP along and mond your own stupid self.
I have been here for a long time and in that time you have never posted one dam thing that is helpful or has one good link thought or direction in it so you are one to be telling anyone how and where they can post and to do so like you speek for anyone other than your self is the biggest lie and shit pile to ever come out of your pie hole of a mouth so shut the fuck up till you have something that some one could find so useful info in it content.

YOU ARE BY FAR THE BIGGEST PLANT ASS HOLE I HAVE EVER HEARD ANYWHERE
YOU VALUE YOUR SELF WHY TO IMPORTANT AND THE DAY YOU ARE SPEEKING FOR ME OR THE MASSES I WILL PUT A GUN TO MY HEAD BECAUSE THERE WILL NO MORE HOPE LEFT IN THE WORLD AND THE COUNRTY ILL BE RUN BY WHAT SEEMS THE IMPOSSABLE TO DO BUT NEVERTHE LESS A BIGGER ASSS HOLE THEN IT ALREADY IS BE RUN DOWN BY


SO FUCK OFF AND SPEEK FORR YOUR SELF I KNOW THAT HARD TO DO WHEN YOU CAN'T COME UP WITH ANYTHING OF ANY REAL SUBSTANCE BUT TAKE SOME TIME OFF AND THINK ABOUT IT THE WHY DON'T YOU GET YOUR OWN BOLG AND THEN YOU COULD GET ON THER AND POST EVERY DAY HOLE MUCH YOU WHAY OF THINKING IS THE ONLY WAY AND HOW YOUR A BIG POMPASSSSSSS PRICK THAT EVERYONE ON YOUR BLOG HAS TO FOLLOW YOUR WAY OR BE BANISHED FROM IT

I BET KINDA EMPTY

BUT HEY YOU GO GET IT SET UP AND I'LL TELL YOU WHAT I WILL COME AND POST ON IT FOR YOU SO YOU WON'T FEELS SO LONGLY YOU PRICK!


You ever had one interested thing worth two cents to pot Tin Cup

I DON'T THINK SO NO MAKE THAT I KNOW YOU HAVE'NT POSTED ONE THING EVER FOR THE INFO OR HELP OF OTHERS OH

WAIT i NEEDED TO CORRECT THAT YOU DID POST THAT ONE TIME HOW YOUR WERE SURE THAT YOU WOULD HELP (EVIL-X ) "WITH SOME $$ SUPPORT AND THEN SAID THAT YOU WERE SURE THAT OTHERS WOULD TOO" .. Been speeking for eveyone for some time now YOU CAN STOP!
Also,

SO Get your own blog
I'm sure you will have many followers NOTT! echooo echoooo is anyone out there echoo...

neodemes said...

Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice. Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you.

Ephesians 4:31,32 NIV

papa_dont_preach said...

Thank you Neo! I must say, your words have softened lately (nice change). However, does this mean that you have forgiven Dorean's Principles, Brokers, and Supporters et al, for assuming they had malicious intent (sort of like practicing what you preach)?

tcob247 said...

kahooya

I bet your 9 year old daughter is sure proud of her daddy

Jesus loves you sir

I forgive you

Go in peace

neodemes said...

papa,

I don't think Dorean et al is requiring my forgiveness, as they have done nothing to me (apart from those particularly ugly and malicious posts from time to time, presumably on Dorean's behalf - anonymous, of course. If they desire my forgiveness, consider it done, to the extent that forgiveness can be given to unknown entities).

To those I have offended, I would ask the same.

Y'all will be glad to know I don't have a whole lot left to say on the matter.

The story will play itself out and we'll all just have to wait for the ending.

Blessings all around.

neodemes said...

Mogel says:
"I apologize for the long post, but all of this is actually relevant."

I was getting ready to be impressed at the amount of research and time you put in to that last post, mogel.

However, it seemed all to familiar and, as it turns out, a link would have sufficed and credit would have been given to the original source if it indeed even originated there.

I can help you out with a source, just to keep the record straight.

Freedomfinancial court cases

If I'm not mistaken, Eraser spent quite a bit of time and effort debunking many of those case sites on another forum.

If you google Idiot Legal Arguments, you will find a slew of cases of the genre you are fond of emulating, relating to bank fraud, IRS, parking tickets, fringe on flags, admiralty, etc, etc, all tried at one time or another and blown out of the water.

It is my belief that Dorean will meet a similar fate.

Again, time will tell and all is speculation until its all over.

neodemes said...

correction: case cites

mogel said...

One thing is for certain, either Judge Alsup lied in his Court rulings or John Ruiz Dempsey, a Canadian lawyer is a liar. If a court ruling is based upon a lie, it is void, pure & simple, and any similiar ruling based upon the same false premise is also void. You can't have it both ways. It's either one or the other. This "vapor money" idea or that money is NOT created out of thin air that Judge Alsup came up with, is called by him a frivilous & ILLEGAL ARGUMENT because he says it is based upon nothing of relevance or of how real life lending works. Should we believe him? Did he provide any proof, or testimonies that he was telling the truth? Is Judge Alsup's point of view substantiated by experts in the field of banking, business, economics, & accounting?

When you go to the bank for a loan, have your application accepted and duly find the loan amount credited to your account, do you ever wonder where the money has actually come from? Do you know whose hard cash it is that has been transferred from one account (the "lender's") to your account (the "borrower's")?

If a class action suit recently filed in Canada succeeds, the answer to these questions could be quite simple: the money came from nowhere, because it never existed in the first place. It was created out of "thin air", the result of a bank cashier typing some figures next to your account number on the bank's computer system. No actual equity involved, no tangible assets monetized, no hard cash used.

So, a rather disturbing issue may start to keep the world's banking chiefs awake at night, for a change. If, as the class action suit claims, these transactions constitute counterfeiting and money-laundering (in that monies paid into borrowers' accounts cannot be traced to a real source, nor explained, nor accounted for), when the time comes for (potentially millions of) Canadian borrowers to pay back the loan or at least to pay interest - they, in theory at least, won't have to - since the original loan agreements will have been deemed illegal, void, or voidable.

John Ruiz Dempsey BSCr, LL.B, a criminologist and forensic litigation specialist filed a class action suit on behalf of the People of Canada alleging that financial institutions are engaged in illegal creation of money.

mogel said...

I would venture to say Judge Alsup would flunk this quiz on banking & lending if he took it without cheating:

http://wfhummel.cnchost.com/money_quiz.html

His ruling seems to be diametrically opposed with the right answers on some of the questions. Go figure.

mogel said...

Nemo said: Regarding future failure--- "It is my belief that Dorean will meet a similar fate.

I suppose you believe that because you either believe that Dorean's principles and Principals are basically flawed, or you believe that the Court system is too corrupt to have truth win in the end. Which is it? Or is it both? Maybe you believe that God is not a God of miracles today & can't pull it off given the corruption that exists or that God doesn't care enough to reform things at this point in time, or that God doesn't care about people's financial problems today caused by the banks. Maybe you aren't smart enough to see that the financial system is a ponzi scheme that is destined to fail? Whatever your reasons, I think I can safely say, it shows your lack of faith which I think is a reflection of who you really are and your real character attributes. These so called "idiot arguments" especially the lending issue & these lawsuits & class action lawsuits seems to have escalated in the last couple years in many countries of the world & in many States of the U.S. Is this a reflection that the world is getting stupider as a general rule? I thought in the fullness of times of the last dispensation, or the last days that "knowledge was suppose to increase" as never before in the history of man, not decrease as the scriptures have prophecised. Why can't you see that the greater & more frequent challenges to the financial system of the world is a fulfillment of scipture because that conclusion is there & and if that is true, why is it such a stretch to believe that Kurt is acting in accordance with God's will to fight the injustice of the System? If that is true, then your side you have set yourself on, is also against what is right, just & true. What if I am correct & you've been wrong all along? If true, what does that say about your ability to discern truth & follow God's will as a professed Christian?

tcob247 said...

Mogel said

"Maybe you believe that God is not a God of miracles today & can't pull it off given the corruption that exists or that God doesn't care enough to reform things at this point in time, or that God doesn't care about people's financial problems today caused by the banks."

Does God care about the people in Durfur who are being raped, murdered and displaced?
Don't you think their situation is a bit more crucial than whether you file some papers so you can stop making payments on a mortgage that you applied for and bought your house with?

God is not about correcting the banking system is he?

neodemes said...

mogel,

Whatever happens in Canada is irrelevant to US law.

I'll worry about my faith. You worry about yours.

Speculate all you want. Your 'what if's' are meaningless.

Have a ball.

Neodemes, out.

KYHOOYA said...

tcob247 said...
kahooya

I bet your 9 year old daughter is sure proud of her daddy

Jesus loves you sir

I forgive you

Go in peace


Well look at that another thought out post in reply by Tin Cup
It must of made you a little sleepy after all that thinking you did to come up with that post of crap.

I mean I can't beleive you are that stupid that you can't come up with something better than that. I would think that sense you spend most all your time on this blog (and the freeway off ramp) you could put together some words that first are anything close to the subject.
second that had anything to show your not a complete dumb ass that has a come back of that equil to a fourth grader (age & school use to make it easier for you to ref.)you might as well of said " nener nener what ever you say bounces off me and sticks to you. In fact I think that might have been better than most of the come backs you have displaied on here.

Oh and sense you seem to want to keep up with the family ref. in your derog. replies (as in my daughter)
than I will take that as your opening to that line of response.

So then you can expect to find my future post that same responce . That I might add you some time ago cried about the fact hat I had used your family in my post to you I think it went something like this (" cheap shoot or low blow to bring my kid's and wife into this but what can I expect from someone) .....blah blah blah ... you know that bunch of horse shit you plaied out so you could get some simpathy for yourself. and you did but I guess that has changed now or is it that you can take shots in that way but everyone but you is not aloud to .

Again nice display of you IQ in the responce here and per your every posting .. no doubt you road the little yellow bus to school good thing you keep that helmet on or just think of how you might have turned out. scary to think you might have grew up and been dumber than you are now.

I forgot that would'nt be so scary after all i mean what do you need to beg for change ..Oh i'mean coins you would never ask or beg for there to be change you like it just the way it is

Your ass so stupid to no when your getting the shaft so kep begging and pay that mortgage so there won't be any change right Tin Stupid Cup.

Talk about your CLUELESS AND WONDERING FOOLS YOU TAKE THE CAKE ON THAT

Why don't you take some time before you go post that same old worn out stuff you have been posting for over a year now and try aand come up with something that show's that you might have more than two bat's and some earwax between your ears (itchy ears that is) don't want to disapoint that other cry baby that post dribble on here O think thats Fruit of no tree that said that itchy thing all I no is that it has been said in post as much as you same old cry so get something new.


I hope that when you said "Go in Piece your telling me that your going away because if you are (and tell me it's true) than I will over look the fact that you are acting like your "GOD" tring to forgiving people no one asked you for it so who are you to be throwing out forgiveness as if you ment a thing to me and I have more that or less than I should say any thing close to respect for you as to give you power over me and be in the need of forgive ness from you for anything.

How about this why don't you go andd forg..fuck your self.

I'am sure that you son would'nt mind if you did be that he's over fighting for his country well your sitting all day on your computer doing nothing but posting bullshit and picking your ass .

now how's about you want to keep the comments about my daughter out of this o.k. or I can become more to your liking of post material if you choose to continue with them . Your ball You might want to pick a new game I don't think your up for fucking with me after you get me pisst off cuss what you have sen so far an'rt nothing I will assure of you that

By the way dill hole she is 7 year's old not 9 .

so as said before and I'm sure again
SHUT YOUR PIE HOLE AND GET BACK TO WHAT YOU NO AND DO BEST BEGGING BY THE FREEWAY SO YOU CAN PAY THAT BANK THERE MONEY THEY TOLD YOU THEY LOANED YOU BACK HURRY UP NOW GET GOING BEFORE IT GET TO LATE AND YOU MISS ALL THE EARLT TRAFFIC GO GO ON NOW.

WHAT A DIP SHIT YOU ARE TIN cUPPY.

NOT A REREAD OR LOOK BACK OF A EDIT HERE JUST FOR YOU TEACHERS HAVE FUN NOW

i GOT TO GO TO WORK NOW BUT i SURE TIN CUP WILL BE HERE THE REST OF THE DAY TILL IT'S TIME TO GET BACK TO THE OFF RAMP FOR THE DRIVE HOME ..


L8R

Seen it in Utah said...

Mogel,

I find it stunning to see you claim that God's will and Kurt's will are one and the same. I guess I know who you follow as your prophet.

good4info said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Stillwaiting said...

I'll be out to see you soon.

tcob247 said...

Kahooya....

"I can't beleive you are that stupid that you can't come up with something better than that"

What do you want me to say?
I'm not going to get into a name calling contest with you.

"Again nice display of you IQ in the responce here and per your every posting .. no doubt you road the little yellow bus to school"

Who's IQ are we talking about?
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
I'm suprised you can even spell "IQ"

"You ever had one interested thing worth two cents to pot Tin Cup"

Translator please!

Here are some of the words you posted that I'm sure you want to teach your seven (7) year old daughter.

PIE HOLE
crap.
dumb ass
horse shit
ass so stupid
go andd forg..fuck your self.
bullshit
picking your ass .
up for fucking with me
get me pisst off cuss
dill hole
SHUT YOUR PIE HOLE
DIP SHIT
FULL OF SHIT
THUMB FROM ASS TO MOUTH
shit pile
shut the fuck up
POMPASSSSSSS PRICK

Why don't you try some different words, these are all getting boring.
Do you really own a company?
You sound very knowlegable about the off ramp begging
Hitting close to home huh?
Construction business kinda slow this time of year?

I know this will get you all fired up again but believe me, I get a huge laugh our of your posts.
(I'm still looking for your substance)
Oh wait a minute.....
Is this your subtance?

PIE HOLE
crap.
dumb ass
horse shit
ass so stupid
go andd forg..fuck your self.
bullshit
picking your ass .
up for fucking with me
get me pisst off cuss
dill hole
SHUT YOUR PIE HOLE
DIP SHIT
FULL OF SHIT
THUMB FROM ASS TO MOUTH
shit pile
shut the fuck up
POMPASSSSSSS PRICK


LOLOLOL

mogel said...

Seen It in Utah said: "Mogel,
I find it stunning to see you claim that God's will and Kurt's will are one and the same. I guess I know who you follow as your prophet."

I FIND IT STUNNING THAT YOU CAN GUESS & KNOW AT THE SAME TIME. WHAT A FEAT! That's almost as stunning as owning a small title company AND being a small time lawyer too at the same time. Where do you find the time to do your ambulance chasing AND TITLE WORK AND coming to this blog to comment?

I guess I know (LOL) who you follow as your profit($$$$) too. (LOL).

neodemes said...

If anyone thinks himself to be religious,
and yet does not bridle his tongue
but deceives his own heart,
this man's religion is worthless.

James 1:26 NASB

__________________

Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen.

And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice.

Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you.

Ephesians 4:29-32 NIV

__________________

There is one who speaks rashly
like the thrusts of a sword,
But the tongue of the wise brings healing.

Truthful lips will be established forever,
But a lying tongue is only for a moment.
Proverbs 12:18,19 NASB

Paul Adams said...

Hi Blogger!I like your blog! Keep up the
good work, you are providing a great resource on the Internet here!
If you have a moment, please take a look at my site:
loans center
It pretty much covers loans center related issues.
Best regards!

Joe Berenguer said...

Hi Friend! You have a great blog over here!
Please accept my compliments and wishes for your happiness and success!
If you have a moment, please take a look at my site:
loans center
It covers loans center related subjects.
Have a great day!

James Baker said...

Hi Blogger!I like your blog! Keep up the
good work, you are providing a great resource on the Internet here!
If you have a moment, please take a look at my site:
loans center
It pretty much covers loans center related issues.
Best regards!