Monday, July 09, 2007

Could Dorean be a Divine Interruption (06-11-07)

In the Wall Street Journal on June 5th page C9 there were a couple interesting articles. One on the subprime bond woes but the more interesting was the plans to offer derivatives from Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. This is the racketing up of the endless derivatives of greed they can attach to the mortgage industry fraud. This is intended to give another exponent of diversion to lend credibility to a criminal enterprise. The assets stolen from the owners are bundled and sold and now they want to leverage against the stolen assets. If we are successful this dream will never appear. Look at the names involved in this idea and maybe you’ll begin to fathom the magnitude of what we’re up against and how successful we’ve been so far just in maintaining their attention. It makes you understand why a Mr. Alsup must violate even his own rules to manage the risk. Two little guys with the truth can put a lot of sand into this greasy little crowd.

26 comments:

peanut gallery said...

Notorial Dissent said,
It has been tried and been summarily rejected by every court it has been tried in.


So ND, can you give us specific examples and cases to back up your statement?

mogel said...

Here is a list of Federal Agencies:

http://www.usdoj.gov/oip/
chieffoiaofficers.html

I wonder if this agency can help out at all:

"Court Services"

or even this agency:

BOP's FOIA Service Center

The BOP's FOIA Service Center (FSC) is available to requesters seeking information concerning the status of a submitted FOIA request.

BOP FSC: (202) 616-7750

BOP's FOIA Public Liaison

Any requester with concerns about the service received through the FOIA Service Center should contact the BOP FOIA Public Liaison (FPL). The Public Liaison should only be contacted after the requester has received an initial response from the FSC.

BOP's FPL: Wilson Moorer

near the end said...

More media bliss is a comin.

WillToContTheFight said...

ND

Thinks he is one of them! However, soon he will get his/her due! That circle loves to use you up then throw you away!.

Soon the chicken will come home to roost.

He does not arealize that if we don't win he/she will lose also.

Keep up the fight K&S! Some of us just look at the comments of these discenting idiots, knowing we have the key.

I have learned the game. I will use it!

frivolous said...

WillToContTheFight (good to see you back) said...

Notoriously Delusional "does not arealize that if we don't win he/she will lose also."

So Will, that's a pretty bold statement you made, care to back it up with some facts for those who don't know what you are talking about?

peanut gallery said...

Hey Notorial Piss-ant,

Where is all that proof of rejection of the courts?

Yeah, just as I thought. Put up or shut up

Pauligirl said...

I'm not Notorial Dissent, but here are some decisions indicating the source "Modern Money Mechanics" has been addressed by Court's and found to be meritless.

(All have portions redacted for space considerations)
Quote:
Schiefen states that he has been influenced by, among others, ACRES U.S.A., Night Came to the Farms of the Great Plains by Raymond D. North, Dr. Gene Schroder, and Modern Money Mechanics published by the Federal Reserve Bank.

I further find that where a bona fide legal theory has been stated (i.e., misrepresentation, unconscionability, lack of jurisdiction), those theories have little legal or factual basis and are not sufficient to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. n9 Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). For example, Schiefen's argument that United States currency is unbacked paper has been rejected by numerous courts. Nixon v. Phillipoff, 615 F. Supp. 890, 893-94 (N.D. Ind. 1985) (discussing history of federal reserve notes as legal tender). Therefore, the government's Motion to Strike Answer is granted and Defendant's Answer is stricken.

Defendant Schiefen moves to dismiss this action on the grounds that the government has failed to respond to his Request for Admissions, his Request for Production of Documents, and his challenge to jurisdiction. Doc.38. Schiefen argues that such failure constitutes a default of this action. The Court, by this Order, denies Schiefen's Request for Production of Documents for the reasons stated in the previous section.
United States v. Schiefen, 926 F. Supp. 877, 881 (D.S.D. 1995)



Quote:

Defendants following the Federal Reserve Corporation's [*17] monetary expansion rules in the Fed's publication titled "Modern Money Mechanics", employing the "transaction concept" of money, converted the application made by Plaintiff into a Promissory Note and exchanged in for a bank liability to create and "open" the credit-card account.

Both Michigan and federal law set forth procedures through which a debtor can contest the existence and amount of the debt he or she has incurred. Plaintiff has failed to utilize any of them. While Plaintiff's goal of getting his "debt to [income] ratio down" is undoubtedly laudable and prudent, neither Michigan nor federal law countenances the method Plaintiff elected to utilize; i.e., the purported unilateral extinguishment of debt by means of documents unrecognized by either body of law. Plaintiff nonetheless has sought to raise a series of primarily fraud-based claims, however, for the reasons set forth above, I conclude that there is no genuine issue of material fact as to any of them. I thus suggest that it is appropriate for summary judgment to issue in favor of Defendants on all the claims made against them in Plaintiff's complaint, and that Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment be denied.

Williams v. Cawley, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35598, 16-17 (D. Mich. 2005)


2003 Tex. App. LEXIS 5656, *
JAMES ALCORN AND TODD ALLEN, Appellants v. WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, F.A., Appellee
No. 06-02-00137-CV
COURT OF APPEALS OF TEXAS, SIXTH DISTRICT, TEXARKANA
The trial court's denial of Alcorn and Allen's motion for summary judgment was correct for the same reasons that Alcorn and Allen's response to the bank's motion for summary judgment was ineffectual-the allegations supporting their motion did not present material facts, but only conclusory statements and allegations of various erroneous legal theories of recovery.

The bank asks us to assess damages against Alcorn and Allen for filing a frivolous appeal. Although we have HN3the authority to do so under TEX. R. APP. P. 45, we elect not to do so in this case.

For all these reasons, as modified, we affirm the summary judgment.

William J. Cornelius
Justice
Do you have a court case where the defendant prevailed on the premise of the modern money mechanics theory?

mogel said...

"Schiefen's argument that United States currency is unbacked paper has been rejected by numerous courts." Nixon v. Phillipoff
______________________________

So is the court decreeing that the US currency in reality is "backed paper" in this ruling & because of that "Modern Money Mechanics" is not based in reality? Another "fantasy ruling"?

So if a court decrees that federal reserve publications are fallacious with no facts to back that conclusion up, the other party in the lawsuit isn't required to answer interrogatories or supply factual or requested information? Seems like a cop out to me to determine the subject truth on the matters.

So is the court saying that the Federal Reserve, the experts in these matters by the way, is sponsoring fraud by the very publications of their materials? So why hasn't the Federal Reserve published anything along the lines of what the Courts have decreed? Now that's an interesting question. So with all the educated & intellectual people with the Federal Reserve, they couldn't find one person to write a true or coherent discussion on how money is created or lent? Another unbelievable conclusion.

Are the courts saying they know more than the experts? In any other scenario they would reject testimony if it wasn't from the experts, so why on this issue?

These cases kind of remind me of the story of the King that walked around naked. Everyone in the kingdom had to pretend and believe that the king wasn't naked, since it was unlawful to do otherwise, and to say that he was naked, or to acknowledge his nakedness or to be offended by the truth, of his offensive nakedness, this became a crime that wasn't tolerated due to the custom that existed. Does a custom become the truth simply because it's a custom to be believed at all costs?

When the truth isn't tolerated for what it is, the truth, we are in a tyranny situation. To speak against a ruling, this becomes a frivolous action and to say anything otherwise than what has been decreed must be immediately dismissed as "fallacious", "frivolous",
"immaterial", "redundant",
"erroneous", "extraneous", "without merit", and all of the other legal terms to justify closing your eyes toward enlightened discussion.

I think the problem in these court cases is NOT that the truth hasn't been spoken, so it hasn't been upheld, but these cases that lost, did not succeed due to their poor presentation and poor game plan. For example, if one could show that the lender opened up an account in your name without your permission & deposited the promissory note & one had the actual bank accounting records to show that the bank admits a liability, to give to the court as evidence, it would be hard to dismiss these things so easily & quickly as theories.

mogel said...

"those theories have little legal or factual basis and are not sufficient to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. n9 Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6)."
__________________________________

That's nonsense! A claim could be "no real consideration", or "no money lent", or a claim of "fraud" against the lender, or a claim of noncompliance of the original intent of the agreement, etc. There are many claims for which monetary relief or contractual relief could be granted such as voidance of the agreement.

That's like saying there is no claim of relief for stealing, counterfeiting, or swindling.

mogel said...

"Dorean, a divine interruption"..

According to Alvin James Hansen, it would appear he believes that statement according to the document he signed on p. 13

The attestation doesn't have Kurt & Scott's signature however, so I can't say it's genuine, but it makes for interesting reading none the less:

http://pennibancpost.blogs.com/
pennibancpostblogscom/files/
marin_county_bob_sudar_july_8_
malicious_service_jl10001.pdf

I wonder if Kurt & Scott have seen this or if they even know this man personally? According to Mr. Hansen:

"The Dorean Group is to take over and manage Chicago Title, Fidelity National Title Companies, and all subsidiaries for Pennibanctrust/ABVA Group Trust International, a Global Finanical Institution."

Gosh where was that benefit & perk when clients were doing their refinances. :o)

Apparently Mr. Hansen is claiming he is the receiver/owner of these major companies by way of his UCC judgment creditor interest.

What is the true relationship between Dorean & the Penibanc Trust if any? One thing the Dorean Group & the Pennibanc Trust have in common is that they both have filed alot of CA UCC liens valued at large amounts.

Mr. Hansen claims that he has a 3 TRILLION dollar UCC judgment against major banks like Bank of America, Chase Manhattan, Berkshire Hathaway, Bill Gates & government officials like Arnold Schwatznegger, many lawyers & felons, & other corporations like Porsche. He claims he is the acting Secretary of State of California. According to documents on his website, he has made attempts to sell the assets of some of these companies to partially satisfy his claim.

I suppose if you really were controlling a 3 trillion dollar company, you would have enough pull and power to get the necessary attention your issues called for.

Anyway, it appears Mr. Hansen does have paperwork & Court filings & a legitimate case number & win to back up partially the basis of his stories and claims. Supposedly July 13, 2007 is an important hearing in his attempts to get justice in his pursuits.

According to Mr. Hansen, there was another man that took over his identity & his assets that was murdered. The real Mr. Hansen claims to have had many attempts made on his life & is still kidnapped by his enemies if I understand what I read on his website.

Could the Hansen saga be part of the "season & signs of the times" happening where a number of dominoes must fall into place before Dorean victims see their compensation?

Here was an interesting scripture I came across today that reinforces that God is in control, & a scripture that Kurt & Scott can relate to well:

Psalms 64: 2-9

WillToContTheFight said...

frivolous

I do not put out! Don't deal with these idiots who can not reason or are afraid to speak truth or even look at it.

Too late admiral! I do not have time like Mogel to fence with liars and just plain blind idiots'

Those who know me no who makes these post! They know where to call 74377!

Time for work!

mogel said...

Notice of Judgment Lien Release or Subordination filed on 6-08-2007:

http://pennibancpost.blogs.com/
pennibancpostblogscom/files/
dorean_group_jl3_voiding_
indictment.pdf

This filing supposedly voids the false criminal indictment brought by Kevin Ryan, the prosecutor against the Dorean Group. The reasoning is if the Dorean Group are in fact judgment creditors against the banks then, the U.S. Court bringing bank fraud charges are false since the Dorean Group can't be debtors to the banks & the banks can't be victims if in fact the Dorean Group are creditors.

It appears that the hearing on July 16, 2007 in CA may affect the Dorean Group. This hearing is a criminal contempt audit of people in power positions that have brought false charges & done fraudulent & unlawful acts.

mogel said...

This filing supposedly voids the criminal indictments against the Dorean Group that was filed on June 8, 2007

http://pennibancpost.blogs.com/
pennibancpostblogscom/files/
dorean_group_jl3_voiding_
indictment.pdf

If the banks are debtors, then they can't be damaged or be victims & bank fraud cannot apply.
If the Dorean Group are in fact judgment lien creditors to the banks, then, the indictment by Kevin Ryan is false upon its face & thus legally void.

The criminal contempt audit or hearing on July 16, 2007 in CA may play a role in all of these things.

notorial dissent said...

Got to give you credit for one thing Moogs, you finally found someone loonier than you are. Hansen is further out in the ether than you are. The only hearing though you have to worry about will be the competency one they will be holding for him eventually, and the result is a foregone conclusion.

mogel said...

Hansen takes a legitimate win in court to justify his UCC filings & people like you can't stand for it, so it's just easier to call him crazy than to explain his court win. If he was crazy where's the explantion why his court case didn't lose or get dismissed? Can't answer that one can you?

mogel said...

Here's a realtor in FL that is helping in the liquidation of the properties that Mr. Hansen has seized due to his UCC judgments:

http://www.zoominfo.com/people/
Sheridan_Pat_982018335.aspx

Is Mr. Sheridan crazy also? He even lists his phone number. Maybe someone can find a good deal for himself here by calling Mr. Sheridan & getting a list of property for sale.

mogel said...

Here is a very derogatory post about Mr. Hansen, however, even this naysayer admits: "From public records it does appear that there was a legitimate court case at one time, WHICH WAS WON. It seems that Hanson's identity was indeed stolen and it appears that there was some sort of settlement."

See link:
http://www.indymedia.org/
en/2007/06/887911.shtml

Best to start with the truth that even the naysayers admit & go from there.

mogel said...

If there was an admitted "attempted settlement" by a naysayer in the Hansen case, due to his UCC liens, then an eventual settlement in the Dorean Group becomes more believable too.

I don't understand how a reasonable person can totally dismiss all of these things.

mogel said...

Notarial Dissent said: "The only hearing though you have to worry about will be the competency one they will be holding for him eventually, and the result is a foregone conclusion."
___________________________

Tell me, how does a crazy person end up winning a major court case? How do you explain his enemies not even responding to his accusations? Who's more crazy? A person who tells a true story of his life experiences, or a group of attorneys & people that commit clear fraud, kidnap, and even the murder of a person's dog and family? How crazy & cruel is that?

mogel said...

Check out page 15 where the Sheriff
sent an email wanting to meet with Mr. Hansen to settle his judgment:

http://pennibancpost.blogs.com/
pennibancpostblogscom/files/
june_21_2007_order_to_sheriff_
marshall_52_pages.pdf

Is the Sheriff crazy also? How many crazy people are there out there in reference to this Hansen saga?

notorial dissent said...

Moogs, other than being a long winded collection of poorly written fiction, it isn’t worth wading through to figure out that it is all malarkey. For one thing, he isn’t now, nor has he ever been the Secretary of State for California, who couldn’t in any event order a court clerk to do anything, which is the first hint he is batty than a bedbug. The second clue is that nowhere in that mess is there an actual court order for anything, and without it, he got bupkis. Show me a verifiable court case and a court order awarding him, how many trillion dollars is it now, anything, and I will give it some credence, otherwise, it is just so much more of your total gullibility. A judgement of that size would have gotten some news coverage, and guess what, there ain’t nothing out there.

mogel said...

Notarial Protest said: "For one thing, he isn’t now, nor has he ever been the Secretary of State for California, who couldn’t in any event order a court clerk to do anything,"
______________________________
Mr. Hansen said he ran for that office. He mentioned that since the current Secretary of State is unable to hold the office due to his felon convictions, he is the acting Secretary of State by default. He's not saying he was elected.

As far as ordering the Clerk of Court, I think you are referring to his "writ of mandamus" that he filed which he has a right to file.

He won by default in his court case as I understand the paperwork. He used the default as justification to file the UCC claims.

I agree there seems to be no real cooperation by the Courts (court orders) & the enforcement agencies as you say in relation to his judgment by default. Makes you wonder why there was no real defense filed to his claims.

If you are right about his mental state, where is a court record stating such. He got his judgment in 1997. Certainly if you are right, there would be something filed in the Courts to justify his mental instablity by now which their isn't as far as I can tell.

notorial dissent said...

Moogey said Mr. Hansen said he ran for that office. He mentioned that since the current Secretary of State is unable to hold the office due to his felon convictions, he is the acting Secretary of State by default. He's not saying he was elected.

Which is a crock. He didn’t win, so he can’t succeed. If, and I say advisedly if, the current CA Sec of State was for some reason unable to fulfill the office, the CA constitution provides for the post to be filled by appointment of the governor for the unexpired term. Runner up doesn’t get the job. And, since as far as I know there has been no upheaval in the CA Sec of State's office in recent years, it would appear the incumbant is still there. So crock 1, right off the bat.

Crock 2, even if he was Sec of State, a Mandamus can only be enforced by a superior court, fo which there is no evidence of one being involved.

Crock 3, he only won if there is a court order saying he did, so far I have seen nothing issued by a court with a court seal. I’ve seen a lot of dreck that was run off of a word processor that is totally meaningless.

Crock 4, what court orders? There is nothing in that mess of gibberish that would pass for a legal court order.

Crock 5, if he got a judgement in 1997, where is it, certainly not in that mess.

As I said, a judgement of that size would have made the news somewhere, and there is nothing out there, so so it is just so much hot air.

mogel said...

Notarial Dissent: I would like to see you post your thoughts and your specific questions on Mr. Hansen's website, just to see what his response or lack of response might be. You're free to do that. I'd be interested in reading the responses.

As far as the legitimacy of Mr. Hansen's judgment or claim, I believe he is relying on this case and reasoning to justify his judgment:

"Uncontested allegations of fact in affadavit MUST BE ACCEPTED AS TRUE."
Morris v. National Cash Register Co. 44 S.W.2d 433

Since there is nothing factual denying his claims & accusations, that he has filed in the court record, he is injured & thus is entitled to financial & punititve damages. It appears he isn't getting the cooperation to enforce that judgment I agree.

I think a judgment of that size would be covered up to the masses if it were legitimate & I suspect due to economic implications & huge power interests, even the Courts would want to interfere in the enforcement of this judgment too. Not all the biggest stories are shouted from the rooftops or put in print.

I agree his claim to the Secretary of State position as an agent or by default, might be a weak argument, & maybe he went too far there. I suppose he might argue if the powers that be, and the governor knows that corruption has gone on & turns a blinds eye to it, & is not punishing the guilty, but protecting his friends & if the Secretary of State indeed is corrupt & is a felon by definition & currently is not legally entitled to retain his office, & also that Mr. Hansen has put many agencies or corporations into an involuntary bankruptcy, even the State of California, who he claims is now bankrupt due to his financial interests & widespread fraud of the government, maybe there's some legal justification to do what Mr. Hansen has done, as a preferred legal creditor, and concerned citizen, when new elections are purposely not held as the constitution requires, & nothing is done about the injustices to Mr. Hansen, and the actions of Mr. Hansen are ratified by no one in power penalizing him or stopping his behaviour in making his claim as the Secretary of State by default.

His actions might even be similiar to a claim of adverse possession to the office, or agency by estoppel, that goes uncontested & becomes legal after so much time due to wide spread acceptance due to silence & inaction to say otherwise.

notorial dissent said...

Moogies blather As far as the legitimacy of Mr. Hansen's judgment or claim, I believe he is relying on this case and reasoning to justify his judgment:

"Uncontested allegations of fact in affadavit MUST BE ACCEPTED AS TRUE."
Morris v. National Cash Register Co. 44 S.W.2d 433


Moogs, I don’t care what you think he is relying on, until I see a real court judgement this is all just bad fiction. The quote is true, IF, you get into court and it isn’t contested, otherwise, it is just so much birdcage liner, and that is all I have seen so far.

There is nothing FACTUAL supporting his claims you mean, any fool can generate garbage with a word processor, that’s how dim and dimmer ended up in the slammer. Until there is something more than gibberish documents on the web, it is just so much more fantasy being broadcast on the web for the reality challenged by the reality challenged. Show me the court case, and show me a real judgement. No tickee, no laundee.

Moogey nonsense I think a judgment of that size would be covered up to the masses if it were legitimate & I suspect due to economic implications & huge power interests, even the Courts would want to interfere in the enforcement of this judgment too. Not all the biggest stories are shouted from the rooftops or put in print.

Pure nonsense on your part, if it were covered up then there would be no judgement, and if it ever went to court, it would have been on the record somewhere, yet somehow you can’t seem to find it, and he never provides it, how convenient. Anything of that nature would be front page news, if only for the humor value.

The Sec of State claim in ridiculous, and just one more lie to go with the rest. If the Sec of State were corrupt, there would be someone from the other party, or someone with an ax to grind who would make sure it made the news, oddly enough it never did. He is a delusional fraud, and he can claim he is the long lost King of Siam, but that wwon’t make it any more real than his other claims.

There is no such thing as adverse possession of an office, and your knowledge of estoppel has already been proven deficient, and since the other guy is still in office, so much for the rest of your silliness.

Go find something else to hallucinate over and don’t bore me anymore until you come up with a real verifiable court case.

mogel said...

Notarial Dissent said: "and if it ever went to court, it would have been on the record somewhere, yet somehow you can’t seem to find it, and he never provides it,"
____________________________

No, there is a real case, it's:

Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco,
Case # CGC-95-968484
State of California vs. Bank of America

Here is a calender of motions & events on the case Mr. Hansen is involved with which he claims a judgment from, as a damaged party (intervenor).

http://www.sftc.org/Scripts/
Magic94/mgrqispi94.dll?APPNAME=IJS&PRGNAME=caseinfo
screens&ARGUMENTS=-ACGC95968
484,-AR,-A,-AN,-AGenerated\%3
A%20Jun-15-2007%2010\%3A46%20
am%20PST,-A00287564,-AD,-AApr
-03-1995,-AJun-15-2007,-AALL%
20FILING%20TYPES,-AH,-ASort%20
by%20P