Sunday, December 12, 2010

Blog Writings 11/15/2010

It has come to my attention that the service I was using did not maintain the site with consistent flow of my writings. I no longer receive copies of any post or comments. I am switching services to try and maintain some regular postings.

I am very much on a snail pace through this abuse of power. Defeating them is doubtless but they want to torture me slowly for my arrogances. The Lord is completely in charge of these events and I take the journey full of joy. I do wish my writing could convey a confidence so sure in truth that no lie would trouble you. This remains an unfulfilled desire I know. It does appear truth is creeping back into society. What Dorean spoke against is coming to the forefront. On coast to coast 11-14-10 a gentleman (reporter) Greg Hunter was exposing all we already know at Dorean. Perhaps you can listen to this broadcast or go to his webpage. If anyone should obtain a broadcast transcript of this program I would enjoy a copy.

52 comments:

judge allslop said...

"I am very much on a snail pace through this abuse of power."

It has become equally as difficult on the "outside". Crime syndicate activity has become layer after layer of sleaze, you find that the whole damn thing is fraud. We are talking about tens of trillions of dollars of it. Tens of thousands of individuals were involved. It was thorough. It was blatant. It was even transparent, right under the noses of regulators. It was normal business practice. It never had any fear of prosecution or punishment. Even today, it taunts the impotent administration, daring President Obama to do anything. And it expects to win. The fraudsters have Congress in their back pocket and plan to rush through legislation to validate ex post all of their illegal activity. It is almost a foregone conclusion that Congress will pass a law early next year to legalize everything MERS and the big banks did — lending fraud, recording fraud, tax fraud, securities fraud, and foreclosure fraud. There will be no rule of law to protect private property in the United States. Wall Street can claim any property it wants — no proof required. That is what President Bush meant when he proclaimed a new “Ownership Society” . The plan all along was to put the bottom layer of Americans into permanent indebtedness while the top fraction of one percent would transfer ownership of everything to itself. So far, President Obama has stuck with the program — overseeing the greatest wealth transfer in human history.

sopsback said...

LAROUCHE:

TOTAL AND UTTER GLOBAL MELTDOWN BY DEC. 24TH.


http://larouchepac.com/node/16785

judge allslop said...

Banks have little no incentive to modify a home loan with an inherent loss suffered, when a ripe profit can easily be plucked with FDIC collusion. They pay lipservice to official modification scam revolving doors conducted by the USGovt. Take for instance, IndyMac Bank, which was shut down in July 2008. Its buyer was One West Bank, owned by Goldman Sachs, investors from a George Soros group, and the John Paulson fund. The mortgage portfolio of ruined loans was purchased at 70% of book value. The FDIC then bought the loans from One West, reimbursing them with 80% payment of the loss, but from the original book value, not the discounted price. A typical deal bagged 25% to 30% profit to One West in a short sale after foreclosure. The homeowner was often left with a promissory note. The bank suffered no loss at all, in fact a hefty profit. The process is ongoing, in parallel to the pointless futility of the USGovt revolving doors with HOPE NOW banners. The USGovt sponsored programs are a ruse, while the real deals are struck with FDIC collusion to generate significant bank profits. The USGovt deficits spiral upward in the process.

judge allslop said...

Google Map has expanded the tools for people to drill down into granular detail. A capability made available since 2008 can be used to examine your region or metropolitan area, even neighborhoods. Home foreclosures and their sales can be viewed with a magnifying glass for inspection. A shortcoming is that the millions of REOs (bank owned homes) that have been seized and/or sold are not shown, just foreclosure sales. Here is a step-by-step procedure for Google Maps Foreclosure Listings:

1. Punch in any US address into Google Maps

2. Your options are Earth, Satellite, Map, Traffic and... More (select More)

3. The drop down menu comes. Check the box option for Real Estate

4. The left column will give you several options (select Show Options)

5. Check the box marked Foreclosure.

fireinthehole said...

To safeguard our privacy in a brave new world

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_KN6aKgfsE&feature=player_embedded

Joseph said...

Judge in this recent action is basically agreeing there was no loan, BUT ONLY AN EXCHANGE and the borrower traded the legal title of the house for a bank check.

Memorandum decision by U.S.D.C., District of Connecticut, District Mark R. Kravitz:
See: Raymond Winston McLaughlin, and Shakir Ra-Ade Bey; Plaintiffs, v. Citimortgage Inc. Defendant No. 3:09CV1762 (MRK), United States District Court, D. Connecticut June 10, 2010.

"Private parties may enter into transactions to trade whatever they agree on, as having equal value; they are not limited to gold and silver coins. Here, the Mortgage Company traded its check for [the] promise to pay on the promissory note executed at the time of the mortgage's creation. [Plaintiff] IN TURN TRADED THE CHECK FOR THE HOUSE. Neither transaction implicates or violates a constitutional restriction on the states." (Emphasis added).
___________________________________

These are the conclusions that the borrower can come to based upon the above:

Upon Information and belief, Plaintiff contends Judge Kravitz's statement: "promissory note executed at the time of the mortgage creation" is the court's acknowledgement that the promissory note WAS NOT A PART OF THE DEED OF TRUST.

Upon information and belief, plaintiff has not found any evidence that he ever received a loan from JP Morgan/Chase Bank N.A. in which to be in default of.

Upon information and belief, the Deed of trust and the Promissory Note were not integral, therefore, the Deed of trust may be unenforceable. See: Carpenter v. Longan, 83 U.S.16 Wall. 271 (1872).

Joseph said...

Foreclosuregate
Show

Date: 11-14-10
Host: Ian Punnett
Guests: Greg Hunter

Ian Punnett welcomed investigative reporter Greg Hunter, who detailed how foreclosure mills are creating massive amounts of counterfeit promissory notes, so banks could legally foreclose on homeowners. "When you start drilling down on this, you're going to find all kinds of malfeasance," he declared. However, Hunter lamented, unlike the Savings and Loan crisis of the 1980's which saw about 1,000 people sent to jail, the current financial debacle has yet to yield any indictments, despite being forty times bigger. "Not a single person has been charged criminally," he marveled, "with what I think is the biggest fraud in all of history."

Hunter explained that promissory notes are a critical aspect of the unfolding Forclosuregate. These notes, he said, are supposed to act as proof that the bank has the right to collect on a mortgage. However, Hunter revealed, as the larger banks purchased mortgages in bundles, many of these promissory notes were lost. Likening the notes to physical dollars, Hunter pointed out that they are "financial instruments," and, thus, cannot be recreated or copied for official use. As such, he cautioned homeowners who are currently paying a mortgage that "you don't know what they're going to say at the end of 15, 20, 30 years of you paying." Along those lines, he shared one troubling tale of a man who paid off his mortgage and was then told that the deed to his home was essentially lost in the mire of the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac meltdown.

Looking ahead to the future, Hunter warned about what he called "the Fed's biggest fear." He noted that many adjustable rate mortgages will be recast over the next year, resulting in a massive increase in payments for homeowners, peaking in November of 2011. However, the stream of income from the homeowners must continue in order to maintain the economy. Therefore, Hunter theorized that the Fed will take a number of dangerous steps in order to "keep interest rates artificially low until this clears out." This course of action would result in people staying in their homes and still paying their mortgages, but would also "destroy the dollar while you're doing it."

fireinthehole said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
fireinthehole said...

"Note were not integral, therefore, the Deed of trust may be unenforceable. See: Carpenter v. Longan, 83 U.S.16 Wall. 271 (1872)."


The court said, "the Deed of trust may be unenforceable."

So, was the deed of trust unenforceable?

near the end said...

SOB the market is doing well and No Nukes yet. Paranoid sob.

near the end said...

SOB the market is doing well and No Nukes yet. Paranoid sob.

near the end said...

SOB the market is doing well and No Nukes yet. Paranoid sob.

near the end said...

SOB the market is doing well and No Nukes yet. Paranoid sob.

near the end said...

SOB the market is doing well and No Nukes yet. Paranoid sob.

near the end said...

SOB the market is doing well and No Nukes yet. Paranoid sob.

Joseph said...

http://supreme.justia.com/us/83/271/case.html

If the deed of trust(mortgage) and note are issued at the same time without consideration by both parties, they are not integral or related & so the mortgage is invalid since there is no evidence of a debt in the first place.

A note is just "first glance" or primae facie evidence of a debt. It isn't proof that the debt is valid. First glance evidence is not always true. For example just looking at the impeccable condition of the outside of a car car, is not evidence that the car will run well or is even valuable or is even evidence that buying it is a good deal. It may not have a motor after careful and thorough examination.

The mortgage is just an appendage of the debt. With just a mortgage, and nothing else, there is no evidence of a debt.

fireinthehole said...

"The mortgage is just an appendage of the debt. With just a mortgage, and nothing else, there is no evidence of a debt."

So what does "there is no evidence of a debt" mean? Does it mean the mortgage or deed is unenforceable? If it was unenforceable, why didn't the court just say so?

Here's why the court never says so:

"You have to take into account what a contract is. It is a binding agreement that is all.

Even in a state, if the contract holder makes no complaint there is no venue for the state to act as the agent of the person in the contract being "cheated," so IT IS ALWAYS UP TO THE CONTRACTED INDIVIDUALS TO ENFORCE THEIR OWN CONTRACT. What the state claims to offer in reference to this is an impartial mediation service (court), but with the monopoly status of the state, impartiality is a fiction." (EMPHASIS ADDED)

Joseph said...

The lead Attorney General for the 50-state foreclosure investigation, Iowa’s Tom Miller, said “We will put people in jail,” in response to questions during a meeting Tuesday with more than 100 people from 15 states representing community, faith, and labor organizations, foreclosure victims and struggling homeowners from across the country.

Miller also agreed that principal reductions, loan modifications, and compensation for defrauded homeowners are necessary to clean up the mortgage mess created by the big banks.

near the end said...

So u find a house u want; put some money down; now u live in the home for a monthly fee; What's the big issue here? You got a home quit tring to weasle out of your debt.

Yetter said...

Thats been the topic of discussion here for the past 5 Years. Given all the paper work from all parties, do you have a valid "loan" and to whom? Seriously, Is there still any doubt that our collective ignorance of the law has contributed to the greatest rip off in history to our collective determent.

fireinthehole said...

"Seriously, is there still any doubt that our collective ignorance of the law has contributed to the greatest rip off in history to our collective determent."


IGNORANCE OF THE LAW? WHAT LAW?

fireinthehole said...

"So u find a house u want; put some money down; now u live in the home for a monthly fee; What's the big issue here? You got a home quit tring to weasle out of your debt."



Collective ignorance of MONEY, not law, has contributed to the greatest rip off in history to our collective determent.

fireinthehole said...

FRNS buy nothing, and all contracts, whatever they be for (vehicle, boat, house) are manifest impossibilities.
They don't take into account if you CANNOT pay, only if you DO NOT pay.

fireinthehole said...

That's why chapter 13 works for some people.

If you want to keep the house, but cannot pay, and have exhausted all administrative remedies with the bank or mortgage co, then bankruptcy court may be able to help.

sopsback said...

the movie that they dont want you to see!


sorta like the wizard of oz, only much funnier (and true!)

see where it all began!


THE HOUSE OF ROTHCHILD (1934)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIoQ6v07hXM&playnext=1&list=PLAD7546FCCFB53926&index=4

sopsback said...

FULL LINK FOR THE ABOVE:




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIoQ6v07hX
M&playnext=1&list=
PLAD7546FCCFB5392
6&index=4

Joseph said...

Senate reviews mortgage practices:

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/ForeclosureC

Joseph said...

You got a home quit tring to weasle out of your debt.
__________________________________
A promissory note is not conclusive evidence of a debt.
You've got to be kidding?
The whole issue of a bank loan is who is the real creditor? I know the borrower is the true creditor, but obviously you still don't get it when you make statements like you do.

Fact is, federal reserve publications say that the bank owes you "your deposit" WHICH WAS CREATED THROUGH THE LOAN PROCESS. In a bank loan, the banks assets & liabilties both increase by the same amount. The banks liability says THEY OWE YOU, THE BORROWER. Course when you pay off your loan, 3 months later, the bank sends paperwork to the IRS, saying that the borrower abandoned this deposit at their bank, so EVENTUALLY THEY EVEN LEGALLY STEAL THIS, because the borrowers are so ignorant of what really went on in this smoke & mirror called, the loan process. There's your proof that you have been cheated if you can get a hold of this paperwork sent to the IRS. The IRS knows what is going on. If you prove you sent a demand before they filed an abandonment, you could prove fraud because you can't abandon something the bank refuses to return after sending a legal written request years before they file an abandonment.

We got a home because the bank stole our promissory note without paying for it. The promissory note converted to a negotiable instrument created the value that paid for the home. Bank gave a check, we got a home. That's an even exchange. That should have been in the end of it, but the bank insisted on getting us to pledge the home through a mortgage so the bank could get paid again plus interest. I have no problem with that if the bank will return our deposit WHICH THEY DON'T DO. As a matter of fact, they deny the existence of this secret bank account.

What you should say, the bank got a mortgage lien, so why can't they stop weasling out of not paying us for the consideration they received & RETURN OUR DEPOSIT WHICH IS A LIABILITY OF THE BANK WHICH IS OUR MONEY. After all, the account is in our name.

So the borrower is not weasling out of anything by bringing up this issue. They are just asking for what is legally due them by filing a "recoupment suit" or claim against the bank. The banks own accounting entries agrees with this argument.

fireinthehole said...

The same fraudulent loan process goes on with car loans. They repossess your car if you don't pay, just like they repossess your home if you don't pay your mortgage loan.

fireinthehole said...

A few words to inspire you today from Success Quotes:

"Oh, my friend, it's not what they take away from you that counts. It's what you do with what you have left."

- Hubert Humphrey

sopsback said...

looking back on the youboob movie of the wrathchilds, they must have produced that movie.

watching that movie, you could almost feel bad for them and root for them.

so you know that the movie must not be accurate.

they must have been greedy SOBs.

but made it look loke they were generous slobs insted.

they didnt lend money for war, only for piece.

yes, piece allright. a piece of everything.

but it also showed that even way back in 1934 how they could short the stock and bond markets and creat false rumors to drive down the market and

buy when others are selling and sell when ohters are buying.

really a good watch even if you dont like it.

fireinthehole said...

"Bank gave a check, we got a home. That's an even exchange."


Bank gave nothing. A check is not money. The bank gave nothing, therefore it is impossible to repay what you were never given.

Spooner: A contract to perform a manifest impossibility, is an immoral and absurd contract; and a contract, that is either immoral or absurd, is void from the beginning. It has no legal obligation whatever. And if a party pay value, as a consideration for such a contract, he must lose it, unless the receiver voluntarily restore it. The law will neither restore it to him, nor compel the fulfillment of even the possible portion of the contract.

"You are not (morally) required to do something you cannot possibly do (ultra posse nemo obligatur)."

fireinthehole said...

This is what you get when you don't OWN the house, when you're a mere RENTER

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=149145

habakkuk said...

Exposure is coming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgM6do4JpFs

...oh yes, those who have conspired against Dorean are included.

This is confirmation on what HE has been speaking about Dorean's case. I feel like G-d is saying: "I can't stress this enough..this is serious business. Repent!..for I desire to be merciful"

sopsback said...

LOL!!

a "woman profitess"


is this the same profitless whom predicted to kurt that she had a "word" that the dg would be done on '07??

same result: -0-

nada....thing


better of stick with burly baal


at last yo no what yo gettin

"gong to be BIG!"

sopsback said...

and as a matter of fact, she said that is was suppose to be done in DEC 07 no less. exacky 3 years ago this moth.

just like a christmas(less) gift

fireinthehole said...

Most people won't make the connection between fraud and our money. The fraud will never go away until HONEST money makes a come back.

sopsback said...

i agree that a lot of the bad guys will be esposed.

howver, the ultimate badguy has already reinvented hisslef as one of the "good guys"

the only one with the power to bring the 'bad guys' to heel will be the bad guy who has jumped ship to save his ass, so that he is now viewed as one of the good guys.

all our money problems are going ot be solved and all the programs will eventually pay, even burly baals HYPEs....

howver, this wont solve all the worlds problems. you will see.

the bad guys still control the weapons, ability to start wars, the weather, etc.

in sum, the earth is still satans kingdum. $$$ is not going to change that fact.

in fact, iin the babble, babylon/iraq is going to becum the worlds "economic powerhouse" and thru the iraq dinar is going to bail out all theo worlds fiat currency.

like 1 dinar will soak up 3 USD

everyone will love that.

$3 USD of "printed money" absorbed by the dinar reval.

the u.s. govt. didnt built a $! billion embassy there for nuttin'

only problem is, god say that he is gong to destroy babble on iraq in one hour. he is gong to do a 'rush job' on this one...expedited shipping....not even 1 1/2 hrs...but 1 hr.

at that point, eveyone can "eat" thier iraq dinars....

better than even FEDEX overnight delvery.

sopsback said...

yes, iraq dinar is going to be used to "soak up" trillions in phony printed fiat dollars.

this will also 'soak up' all the phony created derivatives by gold man sucks, jp money, (just print), etc.


yes, all the countries crying about buying all those phony worthless u.s. derivatives will finally get paid off when the dinar revals.


now, the preceding was a grad level economimics lesson for those smart enuf to see it and you dont nedd an IQ of 162

fireinthehole said...

at that point, eveyone can "eat" thier iraq dinars....


I found one of those on the ground a few weeks ago. It seems to have a little silver in it, because it feels heavier than the American dime.

sopsback said...

btw, having said that, would i buy an eye rack dinners?


i would eat all the dinners that i could get my eyes on, whether or not theyre on the rack.


tranlated:


i would buy(eat) all the dinars (dinners) that i find (get my eyes on)



then go out cash them in for USD, AND BUY ALL THE GOLD YOU CAN SAFELY PROTECT. ONE BULLIT FOR EACH OUNCE or ONE BB FOR EACH OUNCE IF YOU HAVE A REMINGTON 370

fireinthehole said...

Sounds great. Will do.

Joseph said...

Attorney General in AZ files fraud charges against Bank of America:

http://zingervotes.blogspot.com/2010/12/arizona-attorney-general-charges-bank.html

Joseph said...

Here's a law firm that is doing a class action lawsuit against Bank of America, & Wells Fargo:

http://www.bhn-law.com/consumer_rights

sopsback said...

hey, dont sue boa and wf.

you might get them close down.


thewe are the only 2 banks who will x/c dinar for usd when it happens!!

fireinthehole said...

"The very idea of private property is a fairly recent one. It all used to be based on the commons. At one time, whether it was Native American tribes or even the commonwealths of England, property was distributed amongst the people. We now have a situation where one percent of the population owns about 90 percent of the property of the world, and everyone is deprived of it. And this is why you have revolutions and terrorism and all of that. There is a basic unfairness in the way that the goods of the universe are distributed today because of greed; it has absolutely corrupted the minds of people.

Private property literally means property that the commonwealth is deprived of or property that is no longer common."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IRTGQxBF04

judge allslop said...

http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/reform_transaction.htm

The Founding Fathers are rolling over in their graves.We were finally granted the honor and privilege of finding out the specifics, a limited one-time Federal Reserve view, of a secret taxpayer funded “backdoor bailout” by a small group of unelected bankers. This data release reveals “emergency lending programs” that doled out $12.3 TRILLION in taxpayer money - $3.3 trillion in liquidity, $9 trillion in “other financial arrangements.”
Any fairytale notions that we are living in a nation built on the rule of law and of the global economy being based on free market principles has now been exposed as just that, a fairytale. This moment is equivalent to everyone in Vatican City being told, by the Pope, that God is dead.

fireinthehole said...

"The Founding Fathers are rolling over in their graves."

I doubt it. The constitution is a fraud. The new government was forced on the people. That right there makes the new government illegal.

Patrick Henry news:

After the Revolution, Henry again served as governor of Virginia from 1784 to 1786, but declined to attend the Constitutional Convention of 1787 saying that he "smelt a rat in Philadelphia, tending toward the monarchy." An ardent supporter of state rights, Henry was an outspoken critic of the United States Constitution and led the Virginia opposition to its ratification arguing that it gave the federal government too much power and that the untested office of the presidency could devolve into a monarchy. As a leading Antifederalist, he was instrumental in forcing the adoption of the Bill of Rights to amend the new Constitution and became a leading opponent of James Madison.

judge allslop said...

Doubt this.
Terry Goddard Charges Bank of America with Mortgage Fraud.

Phoenix, Ariz – Dec. 17, 2010) Attorney General Terry Goddard announced that his Office today filed a lawsuit against Bank of America Corporation and its affiliated companies (“Bank of America”) alleging violations of the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act and violations of the consent judgment entered in March 2009 between Arizona and the Countrywide companies owned by Bank of America.
The lawsuit, filed in Maricopa County Superior Court, was triggered by hundreds of consumer complaints and follows a year-long investigation into Bank of America’s residential mortgage servicing practices, particularly its loan modification and foreclosure practices. Goddard stated that Bank of America, the nation’s largest residential mortgage loan servicer, should be leading the way out of the country’s foreclosure crisis. Instead, he said, “Bank of America has been the slowest of all the servicers to ramp up loss mitigation efforts in response to the housing crisis. It has shown callous disregard for the devastating effects its servicing practices have had on individual borrowers and on the economy as a whole.”
The complaint asks the court to hold the defendants in contempt for violating the consent judgment and to order them to pay restitution to eligible consumers and civil penalties, attorneys’ fees, and costs of investigation to the State. It further asks the court to order the defendants to pay up to $25,000 for each violation of the consent judgment and up to $10,000 for each violation of the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act.
Think this will ever get passed Interrogatories and discovery?

fireinthehole said...

You guys think too much about money.
Time for A Love Economy.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OAx-0SfMMI

Joseph said...

Kurt talked about this on a former blog. This link suggests that it's unjust of prosecutors in the past to suggest a long prison sentence on mail fraud for honest services given:

http://www.gibsondunn.com/publications/pages/USSupremeCourtToDecideLimits-HonestServiceMailFraudProsecutions.aspx

Joseph said...

Ashley case of 1988, fraud on the part of the bank was proven because the defendant revealed,“the banks told me they had ‘money’ to lend and they didn’t.”

Can someone find the full case for me to read?