I heard a quote from Wesley “Your Christ is my Devil”. I could relate to his sentiment The Christ of the gospel message is completely misunderstood by the corrupt human heart. When a true Christian has a relationship with God through Christ he is easily criticized for his obedience which is foreign to all they know as righteous. It is why so many clamored to have Christ crucified. He knew that His true professions of the Godhead would be reflected by those who garner their righteousness from the devil.
What is so despicable about the judicial system Scott and I faced and still fight is that it borrows the righteous credibility of God’s righteousness buy follows the tenets of the devil. Christians foolishly allow themselves to be duped by the profession of righteousness and presume in their ignorance that God’s will is being performed. I tell you the fact by the knowledge of Christ, The true Christ, that our judicial system is akin to witchcraft and none who practice its art can know the Lord. If they profess a relationship with Christ their Christ is the devil of the true gospel.
I have had friends and I will use that term loosely who have studied the word of God with me. Yet when the institutions of law merely make the cursory claims of God’s authority they ignore the witness they have of me and condemn me as unjust. This is the work of the devil and true Christian love cannot practice it. So when you make the profession of Christ I am not easily moved and I will judge you by whose report you believe before I call you brother.
As for the judicial system it has made an enemy with Christ in me. I have no fear of the quantity or the size of the giants God throws at my rock. They will be defeated as Goliath because the true Christ of the gospel is more than a conjurer and is not deceived by the devil’s false righteousness.
As to the battles I face I do not grow weary and have always seen the victory inherent in Christ. So if you cannot understand my determination against or contempt for all things labeled lawful fear not it is easily understood: Christ is my devil.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4,867 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 600 of 4867 Newer› Newest»http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulWK-Ni-xiw
Davis, Samuel
Registration No. 43741-048
Unit CA 114
Nevada Southern Detention Center
2190 E. Mesquite Ave.
Pahrump, Nevada 89060
From Just Dave
September 18. 2012
I got that word out on my call last night and I told his son Mike when I talked to him I would get the word out so people could write Sam if they wanted to. With all that Sam did to help so many people for so long I think it would be great if people would write him. I actually got to talk with Sam on the phone for a very short bit and he says he must be more dangerous than murderers and gang members because he is a sovereign and they have him "in the hole" in solitary confinement and he gets to go outside 1 hr each day and that is it and has to go through a full body cavity search every time he goes out as well. He seemed in good spirits in the short bit I got to speak with him before they cut the call off.
sam davis was one of those how to get out of from you mortage guys, simular to the dg group
Sam Davis:
Researcher of Commercial Law, Nationally known speaker on the "Redemption" process and the concept of "Accepted for Value." Sam has presented this infor- mation all across the United States and to thousands of people via video, audio, and related media's. Sam gives educational information concerning remedies in commerce that are outside of the popular trend and understanding.
Sam is NOT a lawyer, he is just a very well read researcher and has a very uncommon knowledge of money, commerce, and a little un- derstood concept practiced every day of our lives, public policy.
website: http://statusisfreedom.homestead.com/Products.html
seem like all dose moonage elimitation guys all wind up the can???
Fascinating stuff, too bad we are no longer under the rule of law. Any person with a stock account in a major US financial firm is at risk, and should deplete the account, remove the funds, and close it out. That includes both Morgan Stanley and Merrill Lynch, which operates under the Bank of America broken wing, full of wrecked parts and insolvent rot. These giants will surely attempt to re-hypothecate client assets in brokerage accounts. Get out!!!
"Paper is poverty. It is the ghost of money, and not money itself." ~ Thomas Jefferson
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/wall-street-rolling-back-another-key-piece-of-financial-reform-20120920
TREASURY TO FORECLOSE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
POSTED BY NESARA AUSTRALIA
SEPTEMBER 21, 2012
FILED UNDER COMPTROLLER OF MARYLAND, DEFENSE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING SERVICES, DEFENSE PENTAGON, E PLURIBUS UNUM, U S TREASURY DEPARTMENT, US DEPT OF TREASURY
The US Dept of Treasury is set to foreclose on “the Fed” by virtue of filing a UCC-1 financing statement and a lien on the Federal Reserve System.
The IRS and other parties is/are also listed as a Secured Party Creditor in accordance with the IRS becoming a benevolent organsization.
———————————————————————————————————————
It’s a UCC Financing statement (File #0000000181425776) AMENDMENT which was done on August 12th of this year. And you know who the debtor and secured parties are?
http://sdatcert3.resiusa.org/UCC-Charter/UCC_AckDetails.aspx?AckNumber=1000362002135657&FileNumber=0000000181425776&EntityName=THE+FEDERAL+RESERVE+SYSTEM&CurrentOnly=true
Debtor Information for File Number: 0000000181425776
Name Address
THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
20TH STREET, N.W. WASHINGTON, DC 20551
[Note: See photo above -AK]
E PLURIBUS UNUM THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
1500 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, NW WASHINGTON, DC 20220 U.S.
[Note: The above is US Treasury address, not sure why its here and below, except for possibly the intermingling of FED and TREASURY in the same offices. -AK
Further note: The Treasury Building is used primarily for executive offices, the Secretary of the Treasury and Deputy Secretary occupying suites on the third floor. Despite its size, the Building can accommodate only about 10 percent of all Treasury personnel located in Washington.
In the basement, there are 15 vaults ranging in size from 10 feet by 16 feet to 50 feet by 90 feet. Stored within these vaults at one time were currency, coins, bonds and securities. Also, most of the Nation's gold and silver bullion was also stored in the vaults. They were securely protected by combination and time locks and by an electrical protection system which alerted the captain of the guard, the United States Secret Service, and local police headquarters to any attempt to tamper with the locks or otherwise violate the security of the system. Partially because of these vaults, the building was protected by the Treasury Guard Force, supervised by the United States Secret Service. The Treasury Building is now protected by the United States Secret Service Uniform Protection Division. The basement also houses a pistol range used by the United States Secret Service and other enforcement personnel to maintain marksmanship. The rest of the basement area is used for maintenance equipment and personnel and store rooms.]
add the Comptroller of Maryland.
http://sdatcert3.resiusa.org/UCC-Charter/UCC_AckDetails.aspx?AckNumber=1000362002135657&FileNumber=0000000181425776&EntityName=THE+FEDERAL+RESERVE+SYSTEM&CurrentOnly=true
it all there.
New evidence suggests Jesus was married:
http://www.forbiddenknowledgetv.com/videos/history/the-gospel-of-jesus-wife.html
In a decision with implications beyond the Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Inc., the state's second-highest court also held today that a lender must ensure a complete ownership history of the mortgage is filed in county records before it can foreclose outside a courtroom.
Read full article:
http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/news/article.asp?docKey=600-201207182307KRTRIB__BUSNEWS_43778_27597-1¶ms=timestamp||07/18/2012%2011:07%20PM%20ET||headline||Oregon%20Court%20of%20Appeals%20rules%20against%20banks%2C%20MERS%20in%20foreclosure%20case%20[The%20Oregonian%2C%20Portland%2C%20Ore.]||docSource||Knight%20Ridder/Tribune||provider||ACQUIREMEDIA||bridgesymbol||US;COF&ticker=COF
This case has huge implications throughout the country as other litigants will use this case in their foreclosure to fight the illegal non-judicial foreclosure.
Course without a trial by jury, all non-judicial foreclosures are void by nature of the fact that as a borrower you can't surrender your constitutional right to a trial by jury through the force and manipulation of an administrative foreclosure. And the constitution, including your bill of rights, was still the supreme law of the land, last time I checked.
July 18, 2012 court ruling in the appellate Oregon Court:
Niday v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Inc., et al, held that MERS when acting as a nominee for a named lender, IS NOT A BENEFICIARY UNDER OREGON LAW. The practical effect of the holding is that any trust deed naming MERS, the beneficiary may NOT BE FORECLOSED IN THE NAME OF MERS by the more expedient NON-JUDICIAL METHOD.
Complete ruling in case:
http://courts.oregon.gov/Publications/A147430.pdf
Sunday, September 23, 2012
Regarding: Detainment of President James Timothy Turner
The Detention Hearing is set for September 24, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 5-A, Frank M. Johnson, Jr. Federal Building and United States Courthouse Complex, One Church Street, Montgomery, Alabama before /s/ Wallace Capel, Jr. WALLACE CAPEL, JR. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE. The arraignment will also be set for this time.
You can help right now. For those of you who personally know President James Timothy Turner, please write a letter of character reference and or affidavit that can be taken to the court on Monday morning. Fax to 206-426-5149 or email to jamesttinfo@gmail.com making sure to sign it and have it witnessed before midnight EST TODAY, Sunday 9/23/12. (If your letter is in email form only, please put the date, your name, city, and state.) They will be printed and taken to the Courtroom and placed before the Judge. Character references play an important part in the defendant being released on his Own Recognizance (OR).
The letters should include information of the nature that Tim should be released on his own recognizance and without the need of bail, as he has significant ties to the community, a family, and is not a flight risk, nor is he any danger to anyone. He is a calm, polite, courteous, and well-reasoned man, and that the charges against him are made in retaliation for his exposure of public corruption. For charges of 10 felonies, as in Tim's case, he will need hundreds of letters, so please make personal contact with as many others as possible in your assemblies so that these will be available for the hearing on Monday morning.
Those prompted to assist with regular donations to defray costs, send them to Donna Kozak, P.O. Box 461162, Papillion, NE 68046. Please include your name, email, and phone # for a reply and further communications.
Our Pledge of Allegiance, “and to the Republic, for which it stands,” demonstrates that our government is indeed, a republic, not a democracy. In fact, the Republic for the United States of America is the only lawful government for the United States of America. The lawful government was re-inhabited in 2010 and is in the process of shifting governance from the unlawful, unchartered United States municipal corporation to the de jure Republic for the United States of America (The Republic).
We have all seen over the last several decades the Constitution being ignored and how the current unchartered Municipal Corporation (DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA or also known as UNITED STATES) interferes with our private and personal lives. This unchartered Municipal Corporation does not function under the Constitution of the United States of America and by this means has usurped the rights of “We the People”. This unchartered Municipal Corporation, posing as our government, has ignored the Constitution and operated under commercial code for corporate profit and has no obligation or accountability to “We the People”.
You have recently heard in the media that The Republic has been re-inhabited. This constitutional government is the continuation of the government that our founding fathers began in 1776. It is this original government that your fellow Americans have re-inhabited. It may take you a bit of study to understand how over the last 100 plus years our constitutional government has been stolen from "We the People." The re-habitation of our original Constitutional Republic is the best news you and your family have heard about government in years. Citizens of the Republic for the United States of America will be back under the protections of the Constitution.
James Timothy Turner
President
James Buchanan Geiger
Acting President
Jeffrey Neil Smith
Acting Senate President pro tempore
Mark Wayne Lounsbury
Speaker of the House
Office
285 East Broad Street, Ozark, Alabama [36360]
On September 18, 2012 the unchartered Municipal Corporation unlawfully detained President James Timothy Turner. The unchartered Municipal Corporation (United States) took this desperate action through their corporate policies which are clearly outside constitutional governance. This dishonorable act has revealed to Americans that the United States of America must return to the Constitution and the rule of law. The act of detaining the lawfully elected President of the provisional government for the Republic for the United States of America without lawful cause is reprehensible conduct.
You most likely are discovering for the first time that the reason things have been going so wrong in this nation is because you have not been in The Republic and under the protections of a constitutional government. But now the way has been opened for you to make a real change in America. Come join with us, your brothers and sisters in The Republic.
May God Bless the Republic,
James Buchanan Geiger Acting President The Republic for the United States of America
Please feel welcomed to explore further and study the links below. Republic for the United States
http://www.republicfortheunitedstates.org/
Republic Congress Resource Center
http://republiccongress.org/public.php
Republic Judicial Branch
http://republiccourts.org/
Republic for the United States Facebook Page
http://www.facebook.com/groups/republicfortheunitedstates/
James Timothy Turner
President
James Buchanan Geiger
Acting President
Jeffrey Neil Smith
Acting Senate President pro tempore
Mark Wayne Lounsbury
Speaker of the House
Office
"the unchartered Municipal Corporation unlawfully detained
wtf is dat???
da unchatted lawliss organtion call da f***ing untied states
Sunday, September 23, 2012
Regarding: Detainment of President James Timothy Turner
The Detention Hearing is set for September 24, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 5-A, Frank M. Johnson, Jr. Federal Building and United States Courthouse Complex, One Church Street, Montgomery, Alabama before /s/ Wallace Capel, Jr. WALLACE CAPEL, JR. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE. The arraignment will also be set for this time.
You can help right now. For those of you who personally know President James Timothy Turner, please write a letter of character reference and or affidavit that can be taken to the court on Monday morning. Fax to 206-426-5149 or email to jamesttinfo@gmail.com making sure to sign it and have it witnessed before midnight EST TODAY, Sunday 9/23/12. (If your letter is in email form only, please put the date, your name, city, and state.) They will be printed and taken to the Courtroom and placed before the Judge. Character references play an important part in the defendant being released on his Own Recognizance (OR).
The letters should include information of the nature that Tim should be released on his own recognizance and without the need of bail, as he has significant ties to the community, a family, and is not a flight risk, nor is he any danger to anyone. He is a calm, polite, courteous, and well-reasoned man, and that the charges against him are made in retaliation for his exposure of public corruption. For charges of 10 felonies, as in Tim's case, he will need hundreds of letters, so please make personal contact with as many others as possible in your assemblies so that these will be available for the hearing on Monday morning.
Those prompted to assist with regular donations to defray costs, send them to Donna Kozak, P.O. Box 461162, Papillion, NE 68046. Please include your name, email, and phone # for a reply and further communications.
Our Pledge of Allegiance, “and to the Republic, for which it stands,” demonstrates that our government is indeed, a republic, not a democracy. In fact, the Republic for the United States of America is the only lawful government for the United States of America. The lawful government was re-inhabited in 2010 and is in the process of shifting governance from the unlawful, unchartered United States municipal corporation to the de jure Republic for the United States of America (The Republic).
"in the Frank M. Johnson, Jr. Federal Building and United States Courthouse Complex, One Church Street
yo dat be dr. flinstons bro, Jr., also held in a chruch, as yo can see by da addriss.
Donna Kozak,
dunno why but dis name seem filial...i herd dis name beefo?
Inter alia, Turner is alleged to have promoted tax defier schemes throughout the United
States through a nationwide seminar circuit, to have filed and assisted others in filing with the IRS
fictitious “bonds” purporting to be worth large sums of money, to have instructed his followers to
retaliate against IRS employees by filing fraudulent maritime liens threatening their personal
property and assets, and to have threatened unspecified “recourse” against the Governor of Alabama
if the Governor did not “resign within three days” to make way for a “sovereign” leader to take over.
read da hole sotry here:
http://www.cheatingfrenzy.com/timturner4.pdf
"the Governor of Alabama
if the Governor did not “resign within three days”
dis is too funny!!
i wished it happen, but not that easy.
"If you are involved in a FORECLOSURE or you are thinking about filing for BANKRUPTCY protection to buy you more time, instead of trying to defeat the corrupt Bank and your Creditors in a State or Federal Court, where the cards are certainly stacked against you, plan to file for BANKRUPTCY and do it this way, too insure that you come out on top!"
File for bankruptcy yourself at a cost of $280. List your Birth Certificate as an asset. Research and list the appropriate number to identify it. This will force the judge to appoint an attorney (free to you) to pay all of your debts out of your Cesta Que Trust, as described above. Any of the $ Millions left after debt payments will be refunded to you!
??? interesting ???
as Mr. Spook would say to Capt. Krik
fill it yoslef
Chase Bank admits in a letter they sent off on August 7, 2012 that the debt is discharged by my EFT, then in another breath they are trying to collect on the debt & then say if I'm ever in default, they reserve the right to foreclose. Well the fact is, I have been in default for years on one mortgage, many months on another Chase mortgage, so why they want to talk hypothetically, is crazy, it's just another way to confuse you to make you think you still owe the money.
Yet on two EFT’s, Chase never sent me back the original instrument, so I can't know whether they put it through or got they credit on it. I think they didn't put it through, but it doesn't matter if the instrument was invalid, or if they didn't put it through, it's still considered acceptance after 5 business days of their receipt of the EFT when they don’t timely send it back to me within one banking business day, citing legal defects that need to be corrected and sending it back certified mail, return receipt requested. Acceptance of the instrument is discharge of the debt. Here's what Chase Bank said, "In regards to your EFT transfer, Chase has not deposited those funds."
Well that's a very confusing statement to deceive I believe. You can't deposit an EFT. An EFT is an electronic funds transfer, which means monies are sent though the Federal Reserve wiring system. An EFT is a "payment order". A payment order must be put through timely, otherwise, the creditor/lender loses certain rights to collect. That’s clearly the law. Now here is the most important statement of admission: "to the extend YOUR ORIGINAL OBLIGATION WAS DISCHARGED, or is subject to an automatic stay of bankruptcy........." Well the “or part” is immaterial, because I didn't file bankruptcy.
The last part says: “This notice is for compliance and/or informational purposes only and does not constitute an attempt to collect a debt or to impose personal liability for such obligation.” There you have it on the record. My obligation WAS DISCHARGED, they had a personal obligation to tell me that the debt was discharged in writing “for compliance reasons”, and that I no longer have any personal liability on the obligation. How can I have any personal liability when the EFT paid them in full. To what extent the debt is discharged is discharged to the amount of the amount of tender of payment on the EFT. We’re talking about a $136,000 debt gone. So even the wording, "to the extent it was discharged", they can't even be honest about the amount and be specific. I'm getting good at detecting most all of their lies & deception. Can you discharge part of a debt? Yes you can, but why would I make an EFT for less than the amount owed? If you want to discuss redundantcies, deception, irrelevancies, or BS, just try reasoning with these people at the bank on the subject of EFT'. It's a test of patience as they don’t even understand these “form letters” that are unsigned, and no one wants to take personal responsibility of liability for the deceit contained in them, but the Chase bank logo is good enough to know it’s official correspondence, even though it doesn’t constitute “legal correspondence”. It’s all still heresay, as nothing is sworn under oath, but it’s as close to “evidence” that you are going to find.
Here's the strange part of the letter that Chase Bank mailed on August 7, 2012: "this letter is for 'informational purposes only,' and does not constitute an attempt to collect on a debt." This was sent by the legal dept. of the bank & as usual, NO ONE SIGNS THE FORM LETTER.
In other words, they believe that by telling me where to send payment to, it's not an attempt to collect on a debt. LOL
Informational purposes only? They only refer to their own interests in this letter about how I'm in default, they might foreclose, I'm behind on my monthly payments, their position is final, and this constitutes "informational purposes only"!
Can it be "informational purposes only "if they don't inform me of something I didn't know or the knowledge or information is "final" and not subject to review or negotiation or debate?
Do people on the news say, "this is for informational purposes only" what we tell you is the only viewpoint out there and it's as final? Isn't their language a form of "brainwashing" in this letter and “double talk” done purposely for the sole purpose to tell the truth, to comply with the law of notice, but to deceive you in order to believe something else by suggestion?
"Informational purposes and/or “for compliance” only" is just some sort of lame attempt at a "disclaimer" by the bank that would never fly in court, because they are still violating the Fair Debt collections Practices Act by the lawyer spewing out deceit and double talk.
Compliances purposes means that they must inform me that by “operation of law” that my debt is discharged now, meaning “paid in full” and that the EFT discharged the debt and the account is zeroed out on the banks books, but not on their billings they send out. ONE MORE IMPORTANT POINT of Chase bank's letter that is worthy of mentioning. Chase says: This letter is not implied to impose personal liability for such obligation." Since when is there no personal liability when I’m not in bankruptcy? Obviously the EFT payment is what produced the “no personal liability admittance”.
Here's the strange part of the letter that Chase Bank mailed on August 7, 2012: "this letter is for 'informational purposes only,' and does not constitute an attempt to collect on a debt." This was sent by the legal dept. of the bank & as usual, NO ONE SIGNS THE FORM LETTER.
In other words, they believe that by telling me where to send payment to, it's not an attempt to collect on a debt. LOL
Informational purposes only? They only refer to their own interests in this letter about how I'm in default, they might foreclose, I'm behind on my monthly payments, their position is final, and this constitutes "informational purposes only"!
Can it be "informational purposes only "if they don't inform me of something I didn't know or the knowledge or information is "final" and not subject to review or negotiation or debate?
Do people on the news say, "this is for informational purposes only" what we tell you is the only viewpoint out there and it's as final? Isn't their language a form of "brainwashing" in this letter and “double talk” done purposely for the sole purpose to tell the truth, to comply with the law of notice, but to deceive you in order to believe something else by suggestion?
"Informational purposes and/or “for compliance” only" is just some sort of lame attempt at a "disclaimer" by the bank that would never fly in court, because they are still violating the Fair Debt collections Practices Act by the lawyer spewing out deceit and double talk.
Compliances purposes means that they must inform me that by “operation of law” that my debt is discharged now, meaning “paid in full” and that the EFT discharged the debt and the account is zeroed out on the banks books, but not on their billings they send out. ONE MORE IMPORTANT POINT of Chase bank's letter that is worthy of mentioning. Chase says: This letter is not implied to impose personal liability for such obligation." Since when is there no personal liability when I’m not in bankruptcy? Obviously the EFT payment is what produced the “no personal liability admittance”.
Translation: You can pay again by wire, and you’re late in your monthly payments, BUT YOU HAVE NO PERSONAL LIABILITY FOR THIS OBLIGATION ANYMORE. You are under no obligation to pay. LOL
THEY KNOW I DON'T OWE THEM MONEY, BUT THEY ARE TRYING TO COLLECT AGAIN so they violate the mail fraud statutes by sending out untrue billings. The bank protects themselves by admitting, such notice couldn't be an attempt to collect on a debt, because if that were true, it would be blatent, and admitted fraud to send out a billing notice that is deceptive, AFTER GETTING PAID BY THE EFT where the billing says I still owe money. And if they are continually going to report to the credit bureau late payments, they are violating still the Fair Credit Reporting Act. So giving a disclaimer, they think they minimize or negate any liability of their fraud. At least they have an excuse. Let's translate: “you don't have to pay because the debt is discharged, and have no personal liability anymore, but if you would like to pay again, and remain a stupid debt slave for the rest of your life, this is where you send your monthly payment so we stop reporting late pays to the credit bureau through extortion and wrongful threats.
Yet most people would read this letter & say, oh, the EFT process didn't work, the account is still not zeroed out, I should give up as they believe there is no proof of success for anyone.
One interesting remark is that if you do a google search on the phrase "operation of law", you will only find a UCC 4A law that talks about "discharge" due to sending a negotiable instrument. This section talks about how EFT's and checks & negotiable instruments are to be processed and the laws pertaining to them which constitute a lawful discharge of the debt.
In most bank letters, the bank will say, "to the extent your original obligation was discharged, BY OPERATION OF LAW"........this notice is for compliance and/or informational purposes only......"
Compliance of what? Well, compliance of the laws of receipt and notice for payment, as the banks understand them and are required to follow these laws to inform in writing.
In other words, due to "operation of law" means the EFT discharged the debt according to the laws of UCC 4A. The banks admit that the law discharges the debt and the PHRASE "OPERATION OF LAW" IS TIED TO THE BANK RECEIVING THE EFT & ACKNOWLEDGING RECEIPT OF THAT, COMMUNICATING ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT OF PAYMENT & THE TRUE LEGAL STATUS OF THE DEBT. That's as close to the truth, the banks ever get to tell the full truth. But they will also say, but by the way, you have a payment coming due now, and you are late, and if you want to make payment, you can wire to such & such. payment coordinates.." Well, I already paid it off & already gave wiring instructions, and even got an acknowledgment from the bank the debt is discharged, so why would I pay again unless I believe the deceit part of their intended message.
If you want a resolution without any doubts, you MUST SUE IN MOST CASES TO HAVE THE COURT EXPLAIN IT THROUGH AN ORDER OR DECREE WITHOUT THE BANK’S RHETORIC AND DECEIT. But if you read between the lines, it's actually quite clear, but few will understand the words and phrases and their meanings. It's diabolical the way these form letters are drafted.
I'm almost done with my federal lawsuit, its' about 35 pages long, quoting every law that is applicable to prove that the debt is discharged and the lenders got paid & that the process is legal and accepted and won’t send you to jail. I'm going to sue these lenders for millions of dollars soon. That's probably the only way I will get final resolve here rather than living in limbo land.
You most likely are discovering for the first time that the reason things have been going so wrong in this nation is because you have not been in The Republic and under the protections of a constitutional government. But now the way has been opened for you to make a real change in America.
__________________________________
Well the dejure President is now in jail for a crime that is not a crime. Wasn't he in the Republic and under protections of a constitutional government? Isn't he in fact immune in theory to prosecution? That's what they have been telling people that join the Republic. What is the change they are talking about? Imprisoning more people?
Kurt & Scott were imprisoned too for crimes that are not crimes. No difference here. When you try to make a difference, you get thrown in jail. Expect it.
y not jus tell em' jug beans an all to go fux demselfs???
Any of the $ Millions left after debt payments will be refunded to you!
___________________________
??????? Discharge in bankruptcy doesn't give you funds. You can just get rid of the responsibility of the debt in bankruptcy. You're trying to get money back or get enriched, which is not computing in my brain, by filing bankruptcy if I'm not mistaken, show me someone who's done this and who's walked away with millions after filing for bankruptcy. Sounds ridiculous in theory & I say is illegal.
DOD Financial Management Regulations, Volume 3 Chapt. 10, June 2009:
100102 B. Closed Cancelled Accounts. "Accounts with balances that have been canceled under section 1552, 1555 or 1557 of title 31, U.S.C. When balance canceled the amounts ARE NOT AVAILABLE FOR OBLIGATION OR EXPENDITURE FOR ANY PURPOSE."
Doing what you suggest would be like me issuing an EFT off of a closed account, so I can buy a million dollar mansion. Won't work and doing this is illegal !!!!!
The birth certificate being used by the government, doesn't entitle you to funds, or to purchase whatever you want, that's just a theory & it's gotten alot of so called patriots a free pass to go to jail for using instruments to pay for things so they can be enriched. Due to HJR 192, you are entitled to discharge all of your debt though outside of bankruptcy, and don't need to file for bankruptcy to do this. I saved you $280.
Now show me proof how to make millions by your scheme and still stay out of jail, and stay a free man.
You are suggesting that the birth certificate issue of "recoupment" due to the bankruptcy of the UNITED STATES arises out of the issue of you deciding to just file a personal bankruptcy & listing the asset which is not true since the "recoupment issue" is a totally separate issue. Recoupment is a counter claim. A counterclaim is not the same as receiving payment. That's why you would never get millions of dollar just by issuing your birth certificate as an asset. It violates law if not procedure of law. Can you file a counter claim in bankruptcy? If so, how does that work? Who would the counterclaim be against?
See: http://keystoliberty2.wordpress.com/tag/congressman-traficant/
In recoupment, the respective claims may arise either before or after the commencement of the bankruptcy case, but they must arise out of the same transaction.
Newbery, 95 F.3d at 1399. The creditor is allowed “to assert that certain mutual claims extinguish one another . . . in spite of the fact that they could not be ‘set-off’ under 11 U.S.C. § 553.” Lee v. Schweirker, 739 F.2d 870, 875 (3rd Cir. 1984).
The “same transaction” requirement essentially distinguishes recoupment from “set-off” or “off-set,” a similar equitable doctrine of debt adjustment, governed by § 553, which requires the existence of mutual, prepetition debts.
all deese theerys are just you sless bollshite, is all is is....
yosless bollshate....lolololol!
yo thik dat da govts. jus a bunch of crimnals, da yo???? nah....
den looky hear?
http://gradworks.umi.com/3515886.pdf
they sprayed insense ppls with chemals, wout they now legdge.
govt a bunch of mofo's
THE MANHATTAN-ROCHESTER COALITION, RESEARCH ON THE HEALTH EFFECTS OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS, AND TESTS ON VULNERABLE POPULATIONS WITHOUT CONSENT IN ST. LOUIS, 1945-1970.
http://gradworks.umi.com/3515886.pdf
RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS, AND TESTS ON VULNERABLE POPULATIONS ****WITHOUT CONSENT**** IN ST. LOUIS,
ya, govt is mofo's alrite.
without consense mean dat day just sparyed all the mofos in da areal and tehy dint even no it was bing dun to dem....
dose po mofos....
in case looknig to buy some cheep gole fo yo wif....
------------------
Tungsten Heavy Alloy Fake Gold Application
Gold layer corrosion resistance, good conductivity, easily welding, high temperature, and a certain degree of wear resistance (referring to hard gold), and thus it is widely used in precision instruments, printed circuit boards, integrated circuits, shell and tube plating of electrical contacts. The gold layer anti-tarnish good performance can be plated tungsten alloy layer to prevent discoloration. Alloy coating can be a variety of colors, used as a valuable decorative coating, such as plated jewelry, gifts, art.
Tungsten heavy alloy fake gold products could be regarded as the special present for some fields. If you are in an international enterprise, a broker in stock, manager in a big insurance company, you can use our tungsten heavy alloy fake gold gift engraved with your company's name as souvenirs or present to your VIP customers. Tungsten heavy alloy fake gold gift is a very decent present without costing too much, and tungsten heavy alloy fake gold products also could attract more customers for your business.
Tungsten heavy alloy fake gold gifts are the best choice if you are a gold dealer and attend some trade fair or put your gold products in the showcase. In case your real gold being stolen, you can choose tungsten heavy alloy fake gold products to reduce any possible loss.
Notice: Chinatungsten Online (Xiamen) Manu.&Sales Corp. is a very professional and serious company, specializing in manufacturing and selling tungsten heavy alloy fake gold products for more than two decades. Our tungsten heavy alloy fake gold product is only for souvenir and decoration purpose. Here we declare: Please do not use our tungsten heavy alloy fake gold products for any illegal purpose.
Therefore, if you are interest in tungsten heavy alloy fake gold application, please feel free to contact sales@chinatungsten.com, or telephone 86 592 512 9696.
More Info>>
"Tungsten heavy alloy fake gold gifts are the best choice to give to your wife or girlfriend. In the evnet the bitch/c*nt ever leaves yuo, you dont have to worry so much about it, simply let her keep it and be rid of the bitch for good!
"And another good reason is, that the stupid bitch will never know the difference either!
Here we declare: Please do not use our tungsten heavy alloy fake gold products for any illegal purpose.
LOLOLOLOLOOOLLOLOLLOLL!!!
EFT REVERSE WIRES CANNOT BOUNCE, ARE FINAL & IRREVERSEABLE & REAL
The Court has defined the purpose of a “closed account”: “An account to which no further
additions can be made on either side, but which remains still open for adjustment and set
off which distinguishes it from an account stated. Bass v. Bass 8 Pick. (Mass.) 1w87; Volkening
v. De Graaf, 81 N.Y. 268; Mandeville v. Wilson, 5 Cranch 15, 3 L. Ed. 23. Black’s Law 3rd
Edition. An “account stated” is an “open account” as opposed to a “closed account”. On the
closed part of the account, (the public side) “no further additions can be made”. In other words,
you can’t add credit to it, and you can’t take credit from it on the public side since it is closed.
Ignorant people will say, you can’t use the account because it’s closed, there’s no money there.
Yes that is true only on the public side, the debt side. But we are not talking about the public
side of this account which is the “debt side”. We’re now talking about the side now which is the
“private side” of the closed account, “which remains still open” which is the money or credit side
of the closed account attached, private monies attached to your private Treasury Funds
account. Remains still open for what? The private side remains still open for “discharge of
debt” because that’s what “adjustment and set off” is used for. It is true that we can do nothing
with the closed side, the public side, because there are no longer any monies there, but we can
do something effective and useful with the “private side” of the closed account WHICH SIDE IS
NEVER CLOSED by the bank. The public side is the debt side (closed side) the private side is
the credit side (open side) for adjustment and set off that has money there. Where does the
money come from? The money comes from your birth certificate that was used as collateral to
trade since you were born that has amassed a fortune since; where you have money at an
account at one of the 12 Federal Reserve Banks. That’s where the real money is coming from
to discharge an unlimited amount of any debt you accrue in a lifetime. This is the “private side”
of your closed account. In other words, one side of the “closed account” is still open obviously.
If you look on the back of your social security card, if issued after 1999, there is a letter followed
by a 9 digit number. The letter tells you which one of the 12 Reserve Federal Banks holds your
private funds which is the routing number. The 9 digit account number in red ink is your actual
personal account number at that Federal Reserve Bank which is your Treasury private trust
account. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=er6V14LpJio&feature=related It is not uncommon
that a person could have a couple billion dollars in private funds one can use to discharge
debt, in essence, an unlimited amount of funds to discharge debt. Proof of this personal
Treasury Account all citizens have to adjust and set off debt is shown here in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uu07IdJOsj0&feature=relmfu
Speaking of the closed side of the account, if this is my account and it is closed, who has the
right to do adjustment and set off on this account? Who’s account is it? We’ll it’s my account
obviously, so only I have the ability to do adjustment and set off on this closed account. If it’s
my account, if someone other than myself used it, is that not identity theft? Of course it is.
Your right to discharge debt IS YOUR BIRTHRIGHT, PUN INTENDED, and your heritage and
right as an American Citizen to discharge debt and your inheritance (your monies). You aren't
getting something for nothing. IT'S YOUR BIRTHRIGHT to do this. You were already used by
the federal government since you were born, and now you are using your funds (private side) to
discharge debt & pay the creditor. I believe the private side is linked to your Treasury Funds
Trust account monies that is debited, to pay the creditor when you set off debt which is tied to
any account that you open through your social security number, even if that account gets
closed. The private side of the closed account in essence, enables those real funds to be
activated in the transfer or process of set off and discharge.
Also Section 4-401 of the UCC, gives the bank a clear right to pay a check/financial
instrument even though the customer's balance was not sufficient to cover it. See paragraph 19
of this link: http://www.ckfraud.org/UCC_provisions.html My payment order cannot bounce
like a check. Here it explains clearly that my EFT payment order is final and non-reversible:
http://www.quora.com/Wire-Transfers/Can-wire-transfers-be-reversed
“A reverse wire transfer (a/k/a "funds drawdown request" or "Fedwire 1031 drawdown request")
is a special type of wire transfer that is initiated by the recipient to "drawdown" money from the
sender of the funds. Reverse wires are very fast (same day, often near real-time) and final
(non-reversible).” Wiki Answers also explains the nature and purpose of a reverse bank wire:
http://wiki_answers.com/Q/What_is_a_bank_reverse_wire_transfer#ixzz19hpOquDE
“A reverse wire is a B-to-B transaction in which the bank account holder authorizes another
party, such as a vendor, to withdraw funds from their account via a wire transfer. It is called a
reverse wire because it is initiated by the recipient of the funds, rather than the sender. This is
in real time, like a wire, so it will not bounce, whereas an ACH debit or check can bounce.
They are also known as drawdown requests, drawdown wires, or verse wire requests. The
benefit to the funds recipient is that the transfer is secure, the benefit to the payor is that once
they have authorized their bank in writing to respond to future drawdown requests, no work is
required on the payor’s part to execute a transfer. Reverse wires are of particular use where
the payment is 1) high-risk, 2) on a recurring basis, and 3) for a variable amount. (If the
payment is not high-risk, ACH is a viable alternative. If the payment is not recurring, a
traditional wire is simpler to execute. If the payment is not variable, a repeating tradition wire is
most efficient.) Typical reverse wire scenarios include 1) high-volume, variable-dollar
purchases of perishable inventory and 2) payroll services. Not all banks, especially local banks
and credit unions, are currently able to process drawdown requests. Even fewer banks are able
to provide an initiator (funds recipient) with simple functionality in a treasury management
software or website. In the case of an EFT which are written instructions as a reverse bank wire,
the instrument cannot bounce. This is true because the remedy for the debtor is that he has
the right to discharge an unlimited amount of debt according to HJR 192 so the EFT instrument
can never bounce. The debtor is just using the same “ledger side” that the banks use on a daily
basis by zeroing out all accounts daily as required by banking laws. See Exhibit F. Here is proof
that the discharge set off program is real and works; a story of a man who discharged $41,000
on an IRS debt: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3raBt0lF_0g&feature=relmfu Even more
amazing is the evidence of 685 million dollars in credit in his Treasury private trust account.
Notice the old dollar amount symbol “S” without the two lines drawn through it at the top of the
Treasury check, which isn’t a social security number, but in fact the old dollar sign that was used
to denote “private funds” before debt became money, but when there was real money in the
financial system backed by gold. Obviously, he has almost ¾ of a billion dollars in credit he
could theoretically set off and discharge if he needed to, which for all practical purposes is an
unlimited amount.
First video to watch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=er6V14LpJio&feature=related
Second video to watch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uu07IdJOsj0&feature=relmfu
Third video to watch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3raBt0lF_0g&feature=relmfu
If after watching all three videos, if you think a closed account can't discharge your mortgage debt, and make them go bye bye, then you are just brain dead.
Why not demand a look at the actual money transfers and accounting entries through discovery?
Someone that I know has just rec'd a summons to court from the attorney trying to collect on his original mortgage 'debt.'
This summons states that the complaint is soon forthcoming, which will ask for relief/remedy.
The summons contains 4 cases where the mortgage was improperly assigned.
Why is the borrower/owner of the house being asked for either/or remedy or to take part in this case?
The house was improperly foreclosed upon but was never purchased by anyone and in fact still lists the original owners as the current owners.
The summons also states that in the forthcoming complaint, that the defendant should put in for remedy or will be barred from any future demands for remedy.
It also states that the true holder of the mortgage requests judgment to clear clouded title so that the current holder of the mortgage can be listed as the mortgagee.
Why is the borrower/owner of the house being asked for either/or remedy or to take part in this case?
___________________
Maybe it's because the NAME and address matches the NAME and address on the mortgage documents, and for no other reason.
The NAME and Tax I.D. (SSN) is used to drag you into the lion's den-- to argue. Pick your argument- there must a thousand different ways to argue mortgage fraud.
Most arguments are vacated, the paper work is fake and used to cover the trail. Follow the money!
Notice the difference in the two statements below from what Chase Bank 2nd mortgage on home tells me opposed to what Wells Fargo (1st mortgage) on home says; WELLS FARGO WON'T ADMIT TO A DISCHARGE OF THE DEBT, BUT CHASE BANK DOES. Both accepted the EFT. Both are threatening to foreclose, so both are violating the law still. Wells Fargo returned the EFT back to me, all marked up, meaning in this instance, they got paid, and the banks markings show the debt is discharged. The UCC proves that here: DISCHARGE BY CANCELLATION OR RENUNCIATION. UCC 3-3604 reads:
(a) A person entitled to enforce an instrument, with or without consideration may discharge the obligation of a party to pay the instrument (i) by an intentional voluntary act, such as surrender of the instrument to the party. Destruction, mutilation or cancellation of the instrument, cancellation of striking out of the party’s signature, or the ADDITION OF WORDS to the instrument indicating discharge."
Notice, Wells FArgo returned the instrument, so that is also proof of discharge.
Chase bank didn't return the EFT to me so they accepted the EFT and never gave me a lawful reason for dishonor, nor was that done timely, so that alone is proof of discharge too.
Acceptance is also discharge by law.
Both banks use a different form of deception and method in dealing with the borrower. Chase refuses to return the instrument or acknowledge it's value as that's their plan of deception.
"Notice given for compliance reasons"? This is the admittance by bank they must inform according to the law, if debt is paid in full! Wonder why Wells Fargo doesn't comply giving proper legal notice of this fact?
I show both statements to show that Chase Bank is not talking about a future bankruptcy by me as an excuse to include this disclaimer statement. They say that the debt WAS DISCHARGED, important point to remember! If the EFT was effective for one bank to admit the debt is discharged, it must have also worked to discharge the debt at the other bank. According to the bank, when a debt is paid off and discharged, they aren't acting as a debt collector, but when they say the debt wasn't paid off, they are acting as a debt collector according. Yet in reality if you send a bill, you are acting as a debt collector irregardless of the rhetoric.
WELLS FARGO:
"Please be advised that Wells Fargo Home Mortgage may be attempting to collect a debt and any information obtained may be used for that purpose. If you are currently in bankruptcy or your debt has been discharged in bankruptcy, Wells Fargo Home Mortgage is only exercising its rights against the property and is not attempting to hold you personally liable on the Note."
Another important point to make. I never got a statement like this from Chase Bank until after they received the EFT. More evidence that the process is effective, the debt is paid off and the bank knows this too and only talks in the past tense about discharge when in fact the debt was discharged.
___________________________________
CHASE BANK:
"TO THE EXTENT YOUR ORIGINAL OBLIGATION WAS DISCHARGED, or is subject to an automatic stay of bankruptcy under Title 11 of the U.S.C., this notice is FOR COMPLIANCE and/or informational purposes only and does not constitute an attempt to collect a debt or to impose personal liability for such obligation. However, a secured party retains rights under its security instrument, including the right to foreclose it's lien."
Course neither according to the law can foreclose lawfully after accepting the EFT. If the note is paid, the mortgage must be discharged. Without an interest in both, the mortgage and the note, you can't foreclose as many courts have ruled.
This summons states that the complaint is soon forthcoming, which will ask for relief/remedy.
___________________________
A summons is moot, without a complaint. Both must exist at the same time. Not sure why it would be sent this way.
drinkingwithbob's videos are being blocked by Youtube... What's next?
The summons contains 4 cases where the mortgage was improperly assigned.
___________________________________
Where on a summons is there room to cite four court cases?
Are court cases allowed to cited on the summons? No way.
So sad everyone is pretending there is (was) an obligation, where is it and to whom?
It would appear that BONY is suing for clear title and asks for removal of the other 4 improper assignments of the mortgage.
The way I read it is that I see BONY (Bk of NY) doing the homeowner a favor by asking him to include a remedy for the 4 improper assignments of the mortgage.
I told him if and when the complaint comes to ask for remedy of $1M for each improper assignment of the mortgage and see what happens.
What has he to lose?
The worst they can do is deny it or come back with a counteroffer.
And yes, the summons definitely says that in 20 days the complaint will be forthcoming.
So sad everyone is pretending there is (was) an obligation, where is it and to whom?
_______________________
What do you expect? The lawyer pretends else no bread and butter.
There are no ethical debt collectors out there- none whatsoever- especially the lawyers who take on foreclosures- they know the courts will support them. If they didn't the lawyers and courts would be out of business.
Ignorance is what holds the system together. Courts and lawyers rely on it. Without it, they starve.
But watch out. There are levels of ignorance just as there are levels of consciousness, and courts work with all levels of ignorance. Don't be ignorant at all.
Man sues Washington Mutual/Chase Bank for 22 billion in behalf of the people:
http://bankster-gov-fraud.com/chase_wamu-lawsuits/COMPLAINT-pleading%20form-10-04-2010.pdf
September 18, 2012
James Timothy Turner, the self-styled “president” of the Republic for the united States of America (RuSA), was indicted today on charges of conspiracy to defraud the federal government and several other tax charges, including attempting to pay taxes with a fictitious financial instrument and attempting to obstruct an Internal Revenue Service investigation.
Based in the southeast Alabama town of Ozark, Turner heads what is likely the largest and most organized group of antigovernment “sovereign citizens” in the country.
According to the federal indictment announced Tuesday, Turner is alleged to have attempted to pay his own taxes with a fictitious $300 million bond and to have assisted others who wanted to get out of paying taxes with similar bonds ranging from $10 million to $300 million, the FBI said in a joint statement with the Internal Revenue Service and the Justice Department.
Turner burst onto the sovereign citizens scene in 2007 with a series of seminars claiming he could help his clients get out of paying mortgages, credit card debt and income tax bills. But with RuSA, which he formed in 2010, Turner went a step further, setting out to form a shadow government that he claimed would lie in waiting for the day the federal government crumbled.
“We, the people of the United States of America, are the most powerful force on earth,” Turner once said in a video posted online after RuSA was formed. “We’re more powerful than any government on earth. … We are a nation of kings.”
http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2012/09/18/sovereign-citizen-%E2%80%98president%E2%80%99-indicted-for-tax-crimes/
Sovereign citizens claim that they are not subject to most taxes, are not citizens of the United States (but instead are "non-resident aliens"), cannot be tried for crimes in which there is no complaining victim (zoning and professional licensing violations, for instance), and are only subject to "common law courts," a sort of people's tribunal with no lawyers. Most refuse to obtain Social Security cards, register their vehicles, carry driver's licenses or use zip codes...
James Timothy Turner
"According to the federal indictment announced Tuesday, Turner is alleged to have attempted to pay his own taxes with a fictitious $300 million bond and to have assisted others who wanted to get out of paying taxes with similar bonds ranging from $10 million to $300 million
seem lik i herd dis sumways beefo?
but da guy dint yoze bond paper but regualr printing paper. so he was bustid fo makeing flase copys of bonds
he shud haft spent a few ecktra bux and bawt some bind paper to crate bonds
Sovereign citizens claim that they are not subject to most taxes, are not citizens of the United States (but instead are "non-resident aliens
yes, non residual aleens are all from Mars
we are all aleens in many ways
If you type "illuminati" backwards, followed by '.com' (itanimulli.com) in your address bar, you end up at the U.S. government's national security page.
Does anyone else find that more than a little bit strange? Or perhaps "chlling" is the word.
/s/ I. Lou Minotti
President, The Control Group ;-)\
(I tried it; is real.) WTF?
According to the federal indictment announced Tuesday, Turner is alleged to have attempted to pay his own taxes with a fictitious $300 million bond and to have assisted others who wanted to get out of paying taxes with similar bonds ranging from $10 million to $300 million, the FBI said in a joint statement with the Internal Revenue Service and the Justice Department.
_____________________________
That's his first mistake- an admission he owes taxes. The SSN is not a Tax I.D. so how could he owe tax? By admitting he owes taxes he admits he's a corporation subject to tax.
Never admit you owe a tax, or attempt to pay a tax you don't owe.
Filing a 0 return is not a good idea because the form requires a tax id. the form says Social Security Number but it cannot be an SSN and Tax I.D. at the same time. That's the deception. The SSN becomes a Tax I.D. on tax forms. Only taxpayers have Tax I.D.s
Social Security was never passed as a tax. The Supreme Court did not say the government could call it tax though- and so they did.
Milton Friedman
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCdgv7n9xCY
W-2 forms lie. There's no such thing as a 'social security tax', because it was never passed as a tax.
There's no such thing as an honest corporation.
MERS wins in Supreme Court in Nevada:
http://www.lvrj.com/news/supreme-court-gives-banks-foreclosure-win-172056761.html
Bank of America to forgive 2nd mortgages on many borrowers across America:
http://www.pe.com/business/business-headlines/20121001-real-estate-bofa-extinguishes-2nd-lien-debt.ece
I remember when Judge Roy Bean said something like this wasn't even possible. Well it's happening, & he was wrong.
Speaking of Roy Bean check out Wesley's sight. Seems like he may have seen the light, or he's still ambulance chasing.
http://www.loansharks.blogspot.com/
They could not be bought so they will be destroyed.
SEC Sues the One Rating Firm Not on Wall Street’s Take
By William D. Cohan Sep 30, 2012 6:33 PM ET
The Securities and Exchange Commission, it seems, has finally lost its mind. In April, motivated by what I consider pure maliciousness, the SEC initiated a “cease and desist” administrative proceeding it deemed “necessary for the protection of investors and in the public interest” against Egan-Jones Ratings Co., a privately owned, 20-person firm based in Haverford, Pennsylvania, and against its principal owner, Sean Egan. Egan-Jones, founded in 1995, is one of nine ratings companies that the SEC has accredited as “nationally recognized,” allowing the firm to rate the debt of sovereign nations, companies and asset-backed securities, among others. Notably, it is the only one of the nine that gets paid by investors instead of by the issuers of securities. The bigger and better-known ratings companies — Standard & Poor’s (owned by McGraw-Hill Cos. (MHP)), Moody’s Corp. (MCO) and Fitch Ratings Ltd. — are paid by the Wall Street banks that underwrite the debt securities of corporate issuers. That is, the companies are beholden to the sellers of the products they are supposed to pass judgment on, not the buyers. That’s akin to allowing the Hollywood studios to pay the nation’s film critics for their opinions. We all saw the result in 2007 and 2008. A major cause of the financial crisis was that S&P, Moody’s and Fitch, while being paid hundreds of millions of dollars by Wall Street, gave AAA ratings to complicated, risky securities that turned out to be anything but AAA. If a big bank didn’t like a proposed rating, it just shopped the deal until it found a firm that would provide something it liked better.
MERS decision:
Underscoring the split over how to deal with MERS, U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Linda Riegle issued a ruling in Las Vegas in 2009 that it could not represent lenders unless it could produce a note. However, this applied only to homeowners in bankruptcy.
_________________________________
shit faced deal
I believe that decision violates several state and federal statutes especially the UCC.
Abraham Hicks : create money without action. My kind of money :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKdNgy_VWSA&feature=g-vrec
Why the Federal Court charging the 68 counts of fraud has a problem:
See: www.lawfulpath.com/ref/
silvbult.shtml
CONCLUSION - SUMMARY
If The Individual is not subject to any Constitutional Jurisdictions, He is also not subject to any Enactment made by any Constitutionally Created Legislature;
if He is not subject to any Constitutional Jurisdictions, He is also not subject to any Jurisdiction presumed by any Constitutionally Created Executive Branch of Government; and
if He is not subject to any Constitutional Jurisdictions, He is also not subject to any Jurisdiction presumed by any Constitutionally Created Judiciary.
In the complete absence of any Lawful and verified Oath or Affirmation made by a Nonparticipant Individual, to support any Constitution; or in the complete absence of proving a Higher Title to that Property Known and Described as the Nonparticipant Individual Himself, In Personam Jurisdiction does not exist; and
in the complete absence of proving a Lawful and voluntary contract made by Such Nonparticipant, pledging Himself and/or His Property- Rights to certain specified performance, Subject Matter Jurisdiction does not exist; and
in the complete absence of any Lawful and verified complaint made against Such Nonparticipant, wherein a Real Injured Party Claims a Damage, NO CRIMINAL JURISDICTION EXIST; thus
in the complete absence of proving the existence of either In Personam and or Subject Matter Jurisdiction, governmental Jurisdiction over the Nonparticipant Individual does not exist. QUOD ERAT DEMONSTRANDUM
Fellow muppets did we enjoy the presidential "debate". Which do you think costs more to subsidize, Sesame Street and big bird or TBTF Wall Street?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wxekPHqn2c&feature=g-all-u
Jay Sekulow appeared on Fox News to discuss the Department of Justice purchasing an Illinois prison. Is it an end-run around Congressional approval for moving GITMO detainees or is this political payback?
All we have is our good words and our good deeds..
http://thezeitgeistmovement.com/press_releases/tzm-exclusive-a-tragedy-of-circumstance
Question: Do you feel Tony Blair is avoiding intervention due to his
need to preserve his political persona? If you had anything to say to him directly, in person, what would it be?
O.W.: “It’s no secret that Saif and Mr. Blair were good friends,
have worked together and Mr. Blair has even helped Saif with his PHD.
I do believe Mr. Blair is not doing or saying anything not because he thinks Saif deserves anything he’s been going through, or that he should have an unfair trial before an incompetent court. But that his silence and his inactivity about the injustice that Saif is dealing with comes from fear of losing his own position and more than that, he
is probably threatened that if he says or does anything about the
matter, he will be punished by people and entities that don’t want
anything done to change this horrible policy of silencing the truth about western corporate crime in the international arena.
Mr. Blair and other high-profile influential politicians and
corporate businessmen that were good friends with Saif, have now
renounced him as it’s no longer in their interest, they now have
free access to all they needed from him. If I was to meet Mr. Blair, I would ask him if everything that he has, position-wise, materialistic-wise, is worth giving up the values of being human, and that means being loyal to your friends, not letting them be victims of propaganda intended to wash off other people’s sins. As a Christian
man he should help his friend and speak the truth.
All we have in our lives is our word, and a man who doesn’t live
telling the truth, speaking out what he knows, has nothing, for our
property in this life is nothing. Not even our bodies. When we leave
this world we take nothing with us, and the only thing that will be
left of us is our good words, good deeds and the influence they will
keep on making long after we are gone.”
[snip]
O.W: “Of course. The people who are now in control of the world’s
wealth, and therefore control the rest of the population (through the
use of the monetary system and the state system) are being cruel &
thoughtless in their actions, seeing the entire world as their own playground back yard. They do not show any regard to the way our
economy is destroying our planet, as if we have more than one, or as
if there would be no one left to live here after them. However, I do
not accuse them of being “evil” but I see them as victims of their
own disproportionate power.
I agree with The Zeitgeist Movement’s understanding that a new
system that will allow us a more open-source, “flat” way of
managing our affairs on this planet, is the only way to build a more humane and environmentally responsible society, and I think that now,for the first time in history, we have the technology that can enable us to do just that.”
"Words are just words, and without heart they have no meaning."
Chinese Texts
Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, kinda rhymes with PONZI.
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/business/real-estate/foreclosure-mills-in-the-clear-state-closes-cases-/nSWQ5/
This is very special for me. Sic em Mitch.
On August 3, 2012, a Federal District Judge in San Francisco refused to dismiss a $1 billion lawsuit against California, and several of its Attorney Generals and Deputies: Kamala Harris, James Toma, Blithe Leece, Benjamin Diehl and disgraced “investigator” Thomas Layton. The case bears index number CV 12-00987 CRB. The case remains pending by homeowners against these corrupt officials, including California’s own Attorney General Harris.
The homeowners filed the lawsuit after Kamala Harris allegedly stole their attorney client privileged files and destroyed them, right in the middle of their litigation against Bank of America and at Bank of America’s request. Homeowners from all over the Country have joined the lawsuit.
The District Judge further blocked any discovery against the homeowners until licensed attorney, Mitchell Stein, completes his litigation against Attorney General Harris and her cohorts.
The lawsuit was filed by Spire Law Group, LLP -- the law firm known for fighting corruption – and alleges that Kamala Harris acted with approval from the Obama Administration (and, in the past, from Harris’ brother-in-law, Tony West, of Obama’s Department of Justice) to “hurt homeowners while helping banks, however it can be done.”
Wells Fargo sued for fraud for hundreds of millions of dollars:
http://news.yahoo.com/u-files-mortgage-fraud-lawsuit-against-wells-fargo-202947891--finance.html
And look who's bringing the suit that will be settled for pennies on the dollar without admission of any wrong doing while aiding and abetting in a scheme and artifice to defraud the US citizen out of tens of trillions of fake dollars, a fake and corrupt Justice Dept run by a fake and corrupt Govt headed by a fake President in a fake and corrupt election year. Be sure to vote. LOL I feel much better now.
Fake indeed, special thanks to a handful of men:
Jim Macgregor responded:
In the years before and during WW1, the Secret Elite took control of virtually the entire banking, industrial and armaments might of the British Empire and the United States. We are talking here of fewer men than would be in one of your DF sessions. Namely, J. P. Morgan, J.D. Rockefeller, Jacob Schiff and Paul Warburg in the US, and Lord Nathaniel Rothschild in England. We have substantial evidence to prove that the great Wall St forces, Morgan, Schiff and Warburg were actually fronts for the Rothschild dynasty. Rather than fight the giant, Rockefeller gladly accepted Rothschild overtures to join them. This handful of men controlled the railroads, shipping, public utilities, coal and copper etc mining throughout the US and Britain. They controlled the press, the politicians and more importantly perhaps, they controlled the Federal Reserve System and the Bank of England. Professor Quigley clearly explains and details their ‘triple front penetration’ of politics, the press and education. Virtually every major geopolitical event over the last century stems from this tiny, all-powerful clique. Without a clear understanding of this, and the fact that the descendants and agents of these corrupt and malignant individuals remain in control of global ‘property’, attempts to release ourselves from their grip and move forward in creating the decent world we all desire, is impossible. As you well understand, Richard, their fascistic ‘New World Order’ is not far off.
_________________________
What, me worry? The solution for the student loan problem is steal the money from pension funds,widows and orphans then baffle everyone with bull shit and call it secuitization, pay a rating agency to rate them as AAA sell it 30-40 times into multiple derivatives and fake offshore trusts to hide your tracks and when it all goes wrong receive bailouts from the tax payer and default insurance. You can say you never saw it coming and if the fine is 100 million dollars and gross sale were 100 billion dollars this is great business.
Bankers growing more worried about student loans
By Allison Linn, TODAY
Here’s the good news: Bankers seem pretty confident that most Americans will continue to pay off most of their consumer debt on time. Here’s the bad news: They’re not nearly as optimistic about Americans’ ability to deal with ballooning student loan debt. A new quarterly survey of U.S. banks’ risk managers finds that more than six in 10 expect student loan debt delinquencies to increase in the next six months. Only about 13 percent expect delinquencies to decrease.
Three Portland Activists Jailed Indefinitely For Using Fifth Amendment Right
Posted By: Watchman
Date: Saturday, 13-Oct-2012 09:28:41
Since late July, three activists have had their lives torn apart by the police and the legal system, simply because they refused to answer any questions in a grand jury case, regarding crimes that they have absolutely no connection to. As of right now, all three are behind bars, with no clue when they will be able to get out.
The most recent to be sent away was Leah-Lynn Plante, this week she repeated the same process that she just watched her roommates go through. After being summoned to speak twice and refusing to speak both times, the prosecutors in the case enacted a legal loophole which waived her 5th amendment right to remain silent. This decision was made for her by the court against her will.
The sneaky legal trick that the prosecutors pulled....
The rest: http://www.activistpost.com/2012/10/3-portland-activists-indefinitely.html
"The sneaky legal trick that the prosecutors pulled....
the sneeky trik dat da prosectors pulled, was dat they pull jub beans's joint.
LOLOLOLOL!!!
have da 'end times' cum??
HAVARD HOSTS 'INCESS FEST'
At least one student at Harvard University is expressing outrage over the name of “Incest-Fest,” a hook-up dance to be held at the university’s famous Kirkland House dormitory this winter.
The event, described in the Kirkland House Wikipedia entry, is an annual “debaucherous dance open only to [male and female] members of the house.”
The Kirkland House (pictured above) will host an “Incest-Fest” party later this Winter.
Harvard’s official student newspaper, The Crimson, also mentions the event in it campus life guide.
“You’ll spend all of Secret Santa week watching underclad men gyrating in the dining hall and figuring out who you’ll hook up with at Incest Fest,” it reads. “[H]ouse life is incredibly close-knit, bordering on downright incestuous.
“But there’s more to Kirkland than raunchy dining hall skits and regrettable hook-ups,” the paper continues.
Junior Samantha Berstler, who is a resident in the Kirkland House however, argued in an op-ed in the The Crimson, that the party’s name is “offensive and insensitive” because incest is no joking matter.
“The name ‘Incest-Fest’ is not sexy or cute or clever,” wrote Berstle.
Other students commenting responded to Bestle’s criticism, however, suggesting she should lighten up.
“Don’t go and let other people have a sick time getting laid,” wrote an apparent student, Marcus Bunny.
A spokesperson for Harvard University did not provide comment to Campus Reform, despite multiple inquiries via phone and e-mail.
Famous former residents of the Kirkland dorm include Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) and, and Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg.
Is Big Bird the 1%.
Plans to save Big Bird, the fuzzy yellow character on U.S. public television’s “Sesame Street,” from possible extinction are taking shape in the form of a puppet-based protest next month dubbed the “Million Muppet March.” The demonstration is planned for Nov. 3 at the National Mall in Washington, D.C., three days before the general election. PBS markets over 5,000 Sesame Street products with gross sales over $1 billion a year; and they are all made in China.
TSA GRABS/SEARCHES WOMEN'S CUNT FOR WEAPONS/STRAPONS
“I am subjected to this almost every time I fly”
Conservative radio host and Breitbart Editor Dana Loesch had her vagina groped during an advanced screening by the TSA at Phoenix Airport, with Loesch complaining that she is targeted for such treatment almost every time she flies.
The incident, which occurred yesterday, took place in terminal four of the airport after Loesch was told that a swab of her hands had detected potential explosive material.
She was then led against her will into a private room as her husband filmed the encounter. The TSA screeners closed the door on her husband and began the grope down.
“They performed the regular pat-down and then the agent informed me that she would be using the front of her hands to “sweep” my groin. She pressed and swept across my crotch three times horizontally and three times vertically. In any other circumstance this would be sexual assault,” writes Loesch.
“The agents themselves were friendly and smiled, yet I was still denied a public screening and no witness of my own present for the screening itself (a second agent was in the room at the time). I had no reason to be angry with the agents themselves, yet I was angry, and still am, at the regulations which require them to routinely violate men, women, and children in the name of a false sense of security.”
In the video, Loesch complains to the screeners that she is “subjected to this almost every time I fly.” In her You Tube blurb, Loesch links to a previous incident in Providence, Rhode Island, where her husband was molested and had his genitals groped after TSA workers claimed he was covered in “nitrates.”
“After concluding that I wasn’t a terrorist hiding weapons in my vagina, the TSA agents allowed me to go,” concludes Loesch.
Groping travelers’ genitals has now become a routine part of TSA screening procedures.
More here: http://www.infowars.com/conservative-radio-host-tsa-groped-my-vagina/
ho do i get a jawb as a TSA cunt screener?
omg i wanna job like dat!!
i understand that some womans haft smelly cunts, i dont care!!! :-)
i do hope that they shave they cunts tho. i relly dun like smelly, harry cunts.
“They performed the regular pat-down and then the agent informed me that she would be using her hands to “sweep” my cunt. She pressed and swept across my cunt three times horizontally and three times vertically. In any other circumstance this would be sexual assault,” It was very obvious that she enjoyed running her hands on my cunt, Loesch said. I really dont lik anyone but my husband touching or rubbng my cunt, its really disgusting, she said.
Handbook to fight foreclosure:
http://consumerdefense.s3.amazonaws.com/ForeclosureDefenseHandbook.pdf
Your link to the handbook doesn't work.
.in criminal cases we have repeatedly
stated that the failure of an indictment to allege an element of the offense deprives the court of jurisdiction to
proceed with the prosecution of the defendant. See State v. Levasseur, 538 A 2d 764, 766 (Me. 1988) One of the
hallmarks of subject matter jurisdiction is that it can be raised at any time, including on appeal. If the District
Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction, we would have to vacate its order.
Hawley v. Murphy, 1999 ME 127, 8, 736 A.2d 268, 271; M.R. Civ. P. 12 (h)(3)
JURISDICTION-"Subject matter jurisdiction may not be waived and courts may raise the issue sua sponte" FRCP,
Rule 12(h) "Lack of subject matter jurisdiction is a defense that is never waived." FRCP, Rule 12(h) 3
"Therefore, it is necessary that the record present the fact establishing the jurisdiction of the tribunal." Lowe v.
Alexander 15C 296; People v. Board of Delegates of S.F. Fire Department., 14C 479 "The law requires PROOF OF
JURISDICTION to appear on the Record of the administrative agency and all administrative proceedings." Hagans
v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 533 (1974) "If any tribunal (court) finds absence of proof of jurisdiction over person and
subject matter, the case must be dismissed." Louisville RR v. Motley, 211 U.S. 149, 29 S Ct. 42 (1908) "Where
there is no jurisdiction there is no judge; the proceeding is as nothing. Such has been law from the days of the
Marshalsea." 10 Coke 68; also Bradley v. Fisher, 13 Wall 335, 351. "Manning v. Ketcham, 58 F 2d 948. "A
distinction must be here observed between excess of jurisdiction and the clear absence of all jurisdiction over
the subject-matter any authority exercised is a usurped authority and for the exercise of such authority, when
the want of jurisdiction is known to the judge, no excuse is permissible." Bradley v. Fisher, 13 Wall 335, 351, 352
Jurisdiction is the essential basis of the court's authority, and this issue may be raised at any time. See State v.
Dhuy, 2003 ME 75 Paragraph 8, 825 A.2d 336, 341; M.R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) ("Whenever it appears by suggestion of
the parties or otherwise that the court lacks jurisdiction of the subject matter, the court shall dismiss the
action.") "Subject matter jurisdiction cannot be waived by parties, conferred by consent, or ignored by court".
Babcock & Wilson v. Parsons Corp., 430 F.2d 531 (1970). "Subject matter jurisdiction can never be waived and
can be raised at any time, even after trial". Zenith Radio Corp. v. Matsushita Elec. Indus. CO., Ltd., 494 F. Sup.
1161 (D.C. Pa., 1980). "Lack of subject matter jurisdiction is not waivable and can even be raised on appeal after
judgment on the merits". Monaco v. Carey Canadian Mines, Ltd., 514 F. Suppl 357 (D.C., Pa., 1981) "Jurisdiction,
once challenged, cannot be assumed and must be decided." Maine v. Thiboutot 100 S. Ct. 250.
The link worked just fine for me, however, I shortened it for you:
http://tinyurl.com/9sll25v
Try that.
The court never had jurisdiction over Kurt & Scott as the element of
"bribery" or "kickbacks" to the Dorean Group never existed.
Nor were those elements established on the court record either.
Without that, subject and personal jurisdiction can be challenged at any time.
It's been a long while now since Kurt has said he wasn't going to go to a higher court or a higher Judge to reverse his guilty convictions.
If Judge Alsup is going to over-rule his own rulings, when is that suppose to happen?
wha do all dis haft to do with da TSA rubbing dans cunt???
YO meen 'danas' cunt, dont yo?
Speaking of cunts, remember Enron. JP Morgue was the main architect to Enron in the early 90's along with Phil and Wendy Graham that deregulated the industry and tripled gas and energy prices in Calif, paying off the Governor who signed off on the deal helped. These fuckers have a lot of chutzpah, apology not accepted. Eat shit and die.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/18/us-jpmorgan-ferc-power-manipulation-idUSBRE89H1G120121018
Here's the language in a Deed of Trust I am now looking at:
"Borrower understands and agrees that MERS holds only legal title to the interests granted by Borrower in this Security Interest, but, if necessary to comply with law or custom, MERS (as nominee for Lender and Lender's successors and assigns) has the right: to excercise any or all of those interests, including, but not limited to, the right to foreclose and sell the property; and to take any action required of Lender, including, but not limited to, releasing and canceling this Security Instrument."
A friend of mine signed a Deed of Trust agreeing to that language. Hmmm.. no wonder MERS forecloses and sells. MERS doesn't actually do the foreclosing and selling- they assign Reconstrust to do it-- but that language is not in the Deed.
List of homes up for sale by state:
https://www.recontrustco.com/index.aspx
ReconTrust is the name you can trust, and a partner you can rely on. Call us today to find out how to put our expertise to work for you.
ReconTrust Company, N.A. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bank of America, N.A.
Bank of America, N.A. Member FDIC. Equal Housing Lenders Some products may not be available in all states.
Follow the MONEY.
Will do.
Ten most influential whistle blowers. Some of these folks got very little public notice (can't imagine why)but the personal sacrifice they made are all the more fascinating. I can think of at least ten more.
http://www.activistpost.com/2012/10/top-10-most-influential-whistleblowers.html
Paper is poverty. It is the ghost of money, and not money itself. Thomas Jefferson
The 1995 Bankruptcy Law was sweeping and radical. It virtually removed the door for Chapter 7 types, whereby a debtor could erase all debts when matched up against all assets (few really). It pushed all debtors into the door for Chapter 13 types, where debts are restructured for future payment in agreed upon plans. The law had stipulations for taxes to be paid, never to be avoided, often never fully paid off. The revised law was a resounding success for banks, who would create an army of debt slaves, never to pay off the burden during their lifetimes. Hidden within the sweeping new law was a carefully crafted provision applied to financial firms, which most people overlooked. The law stipulates that in the order of subordinated types of debt, the big derivative contracts were placed first in line. The revision carries enormous consequences. It means all other assets residing (but not owned) by the financial firm could be wiped out in a single stroke. Think of bank reserves, certificates of deposit by clients, brokerage accounts by clients, and much more. In the past, financial firm failures wiped out stock equity holders first, then gave a better deal (like 30 or 50 cents per dollar) to preferred stock holders and corporate debt bond holders. The entire picture has changed, seen in the MFGlobal case, and possibly to be seen in the Morgan Stanley case next.The application of derivative contracts is broad, enough to include the MFGlobal leveraged contracts on sovereign debt. The derivatives will take down the entire house, including all standing inside.
Fabian Calvo buys and sells a $100 million worth of distressed mortgage debt and property a year. He says, “We haven’t even scratched the surface of being at the bottom of the housing market.” Calvo runs a company called TheNoteHouse.us and predicts, massive default and massive foreclosures after the election.” Calvo is an outspoken critic of crony capitalism on his “Fabian4Liberty” YouTube channel that has nearly 2 million views! Calvo says, “You have to flush out mal investment to get the economy working again and to rework the Constitutional Republic, you have to flush out the criminals who have hi-jacked it.” Calvo contends, “There is systemic fraud and corruption” and sees firsthand how “. . . banks are profiting from short sales and foreclosures.” Calvo thinks there is an even bigger financial meltdown on the not-so-distant horizon, and it “. . . will center around the repudiation of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency” and that food and fuel prices could “triple.” In 2013, Calvo predicts, “The next President will inherit the economic calamity that is coming.”
As we stand the banks have inserted themselves into the mortgage process as though they were lenders, traded the loans, sold the loans and bought insurance all payable to themselves. The money came from managed funds for retirement and pensions, and the announcement of slashed benefits will come after the election.Despite clap trap from the MSM housing is no where near recovery, only carpet bagging is on the rise.
http://lansner.ocregister.com/author/jcollins/
THE USFED QE3 WITH $40 BILLION ON MORTGAGE BONDS IS DESIGNED TO COVER THE WORST BOND FRAUD AND MOST EGREGIOUS BOND CRIMES, IN ORDER TO ENABLE A CLEARING OF THE LOGJAM.
Catherine Austin Fitts is the foremost expert on Fannie Mae, the mortgage fraud, and the full proper accounting of the agency, including the pilferage by past presidents Papa Bush and Bill Clinton of $1.5 trillion, stolen from its accounts with full protection. She has survived three murder attempts and a stripping of professional license. When she speaks on mortgage matters at a national level, people should pay attention. She is expert. The following are some of her thoughts. The housing market cannot recover, in part because of multi-$trillion fraud, Foreigners own a lot of fraudulent mortgage bonds. So do domestic pension funds. The QE3 plan focuses on mortgage bonds in order to clear the market of fraud-ridden mortgages, their toxic appendages, and related channels. She states her opinion that fraud was the original plan, hatched a decade ago by Wall Street, although she did not identify them.
http://solari.com/blog/pay-attention-if-you-are-in-the-real-estate-market/
yo agrees with calvin. da hosing make it in nooways nee da bottom.
it gonna claps big time.
soon yo will see 400K hoses gong for $400 if dat??
Attorney Files Case Against US Federal Reserve Bank on Confiscated Armenian Gold
Posted by Charleston Voice
Case solved: Foreign gold stolen by US Federal Reserve - too bad, so sad...we knows nuthin'...try and take it back!
Many can recall growing up and your grandmother urging you to clean your dinner plate with the refrain: "Remember the starving Armenians!" Now, you know why. They were starved by our very own government.
Attorney Files Case Against US Federal Reserve Bank on Confiscated Armenian Gold
Jewelry and gold confiscated from Armenian houses during the turmoil in the Ottoman Empire in 1915 was taken to Istanbul and melted into gold coins before being deposited in a German bank, says attorney Vartkes Yeghiayan, who has recently filed a case against the Federal Reserve Bank. After World War I, the gold was sold and transported to the Federal Reserve Bank, he says.
An Armenian-American attorney has filed a lawsuit against the US Federal Reserve to demand the disclosure of information pertaining to Armenian assets that were allegedly confiscated by the Ottomans during the 1915 events, reports the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review, referring to the Armenian Genocide.
“The lawsuit against the Federal Reserve is in order to determine the legitimate ownership of this gold,” Yeghiayan, the attorney who filed the suit, told the Hürriyet in a recent interview.
Prior to 1915, the jewelry and gold confiscated from the Armenian houses were taken to Istanbul and melted into gold coins, Yeghiayan said.
“German banks took these coins and deposited them in the Reichsbank. When Germany and Turkey lost [World War I], the Allies confiscated this loot as ‘war reparations’ against Turkey,” he said.
“The money was deposited in the bank of England and Banque de France. As the directors of the banks realized that this particular deposit did not bare interests, they decided to purchase US treasury bonds which, in turn, did bear interest. The gold was then sold and transported to the Federal Reserve Bank in New York City,” he said.
Source: Attorney Files Case Against US Federal Reserve Bank on Confiscated Armenian Gold | Epress News
Related:
Armenian Group Sues Federal Reserve Over 'Turkish Gold' Data
The Armenian Dream Is Over ! | Armenian Genocide ...
Lawsuit against U.S. Federal Reserve over assets seized during ...
Corzine tells bought federal judge he is innocent of fraud because he had $225,000 in stock even though billions vaporized (safely relocated out of US jurisdiction).
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-10-23/corzine-tells-judge-he-purchased-50000-shares-mf-global-stock-bankruptcy-he-must-acq
Bernanke blueprint to bury trillions in Bank mortgage bond fraud through QE3 (printing to infinity)
1) Bernanke was sent out by the banker syndicate to ramp up the bond monetization without limit (QE to Infinity) with a focus on mortgage bond purchases. The goal is to dispossess Americans of their homes, a process well along with the spate of home foreclosures. Then the USGovt tool in Fannie Mae will rent the homes back to the public. Private property is to be killed off, in keeping with the marxist principles. The source of funds to purchase the homes, either directly from bank portfolios or via mortgage bonds, is obviously thin air. Wealth is to come from illusory sources, the banker arrogance, and their printing press under full control.
2) The USFed will use the mortgage bonds to enter the derivatives market, geared at least to the fractional 10-fold, maybe more. Chairman Bernanke so forewarned in his speech explaining the details of QE3. Few however contemplate what the plan is though when hearing his Politburo words
3) Banks will use the proceeds from mortgage bond sales to buy USTreasurys. The QE3 really is USTBond monetization, but with a handoff from banks to assure the home titles are in the proper hands. This is a paper game in movement.
4) The USDollar from the three steps will be placed in an accelerated death spiral. A precise timetable for the collapse was not revealed, if it exists. The ex-CEO did not say. In order to prepare the US pubic for the solution on property rights, a creeping hyper-inflation will be engineered prior to collapse. The public has a long history of accepting almost any lunatic or deceptive or destructive solution when offered during a crisis, almost without question.
5) Upon the crippling fatal final chapter of the USDollar, a new world currency is unveiled, to be backed by Gold. However, in order to succeed from a banking perspective, from a solvency foundation, the Gold price must be at least $3000 per ounce and the Silver price must be at least $75 per ounce.
)6 The Syndicate expects the US population to remain subdued, in shock, and submissive. They are seen as indifferent, apathetic, while on their backs, in reaction to their own debt enslavement.
The big banks cooperated to keep homes in inventory as REO assets following foreclosure, which will later be shoved into the USGovt channels that lead to the Fannie Mae black hole.
Who said it? Gordon Gekko or Mitt Romney.
You got ninety percent of the American public out there with little or no net worth. I create nothing. I own. We make the rules, pal.
I am not a destroyer of companies. I am a liberator of them! The point is, ladies and gentleman, that greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right, greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.
Corporations are people, my friend.
What's worth doing is worth doing for money.
Don't try and stop the foreclosure process. Let it run its course and hit the bottom.
Let Detroit go bankrupt.
It's wreckable, alright? I took another look at it and changed my mind!
From now on, it's me, me, me.
[Speaking about company layoffs] Sometimes the medicine is a little bitter.
There are people all over the world who would love a job flipping hamburgers in America.
I like firing people.
Make a profit. That's the name of the game, right?
It's a zero sum game, somebody wins, somebody loses. Money itself isn't lost or made, it's simply transferred from one perception to another.
How many does this make? If your not going to prosecute to furthest extent of the law and award damages why waste the time.Oh that's right I forgot,you work for them.
http://www.latimes.com/business/realestate/la-fi-bofa-lawsuit-20121025,0,2232907.story
Wasn't pension pools funding mortgage bonds? By following the money you can control the narrative that there was no transaction, which means there was no loan, no payment due, no default and no right to issue of Notice of Sale, auction or credit bid from a non-creditor who neither funded nor purchased the loan. The banks stole everything.
San Bernardino halts pension fund payments
Bankrupt city owes $5.3 million to CalPERS; judge may have to decide payment priorities.
THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER
The city of San Bernardino filed for bankruptcy protection three months ago, and shortly afterward was reported to be under investigation by the federal Securities and Exchange Commission, allegedly for hiding deficits by diverting money intended for sewers, roads and construction to pay ongoing bills instead. Now, the Wall Street Journal reports the Inland Empire city of about 210,000 residents "has stopped making its regular payments to the California Public Employees Retirement System" and owes $5.3 million toward its employees’ pensions. A San Bernardino official told the Journal the city needs to be put on a payment plan because it doesn’t have enough cash to pay its bills.
This is just the latest in a string of California municipal fiscal difficulties. Perhaps more troubling, San Bernardino may offer a glimpse of the future for other cities struggling to avoid bankruptcy as varied interests and creditors make demands for limited funds. A lawyer for the state employees retirement system, known as CalPERS, says federal bankruptcy law doesn’t pre-empt state control over benefits overseen by the fund, the Journal reported.
This has been a long time coming and should catch the attention of criminal banksters and half of Washington DC who have stolen your country out from underneath you in broad daylight.If your going to go after someone in Court, hire the people who once defended them and knows where the bodies are buried.No body does this without a plan lets all pray this survives motion to dismiss. Sic em Mitch.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/major-banks-governmental-officials-and-their-comrade-capitalists-targets-of-spire-law-group-llps-racketeering-and-money-laundering-lawsuit-seeking-return-of-43-trillion-to-the-united-states-treasury-2012-10-25
Major Banks, Governmental Officials and Their Comrade Capitalists Targets of Spire Law Group, LLP's Racketeering and Money Laundering Lawsuit Seeking Return of $43 Trillion to the United States Treasury
Published: Thursday, 25 Oct 2012 | 2:09 PM ET
Text Size
NEW YORK, Oct. 25, 2012 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Spire Law Group, LLP's national home owners' lawsuit, pending in the venue where the "Banksters" control their $43 trillion racketeering scheme (New York) - known as the largest money laundering and racketeering lawsuit in United States History and identifying $43 trillion ($43,000,000,000,000.00) of laundered money by the "Banksters" and their U.S. racketeering partners and joint venturers - now pinpoints the identities of the key racketeering partners of the "Banksters" located in the highest offices of government and acting for their own self-interests.
In connection with the federal lawsuit now impending in the United States District Court in Brooklyn, New York (Case No. 12-cv-04269-JBW-RML) - involving, among other things, a request that the District Court enjoin all mortgage foreclosures by the Banksters nationwide, unless and until the entire $43 trillion is repaid to a court-appointed receiver - Plaintiffs now establish the location of the $43 trillion ($43,000,000,000,000.00) of laundered money in a racketeering enterprise participated in by the following individuals (without limitation): Attorney General Holder acting in his individual capacity, Assistant Attorney General Tony West, the brother in law of Defendant California Attorney General Kamala Harris (both acting in their individual capacities), Jon Corzine (former New Jersey Governor), Robert Rubin (former Treasury Secretary and Bankster), Timothy Geitner, Treasury Secretary (acting in his individual capacity), Vikram Pandit (recently resigned and disgraced Chairman of the Board of Citigroup), Valerie Jarrett (a Senior White House Advisor), Anita Dunn (a former "communications director" for the Obama Administration), Robert Bauer (husband of Anita Dunn and Chief Legal Counsel for the Obama Re-election Campaign), as well as the "Banksters" themselves, and their affiliates and conduits. The lawsuit alleges serial violations of the United States Patriot Act, the Policy of Embargo Against Iran and Countries Hostile to the Foreign Policy of the United States, and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (commonly known as the RICO statute) and other State and Federal laws.
CUNT IN YOU'D
In the District Court lawsuit, Spire Law Group, LLP -- on behalf of home owner across the Country and New York taxpayers, as well as under other taxpayer recompense laws -- has expanded its mass tort action into federal court in Brooklyn, New York, seeking to halt all foreclosures nationwide pending the return of the $43 trillion ($43,000,000,000.00) by the "Banksters" and their co-conspirators, seeking an audit of the Fed and audits of all the "bailout programs" by an independent receiver such as Neil Barofsky, former Inspector General of the TARP program who has stated that none of the TARP money and other "bailout money" advanced from the Treasury has ever been repaid despite protestations to the contrary by the Defendants as well as similar protestations by President Obama and the Obama Administration both publicly on national television and more privately to the United States Congress. Because the Obama Administration has failed to pursue any of the "Banksters" criminally, and indeed is actively borrowing monies for Mr. Obama's campaign from these same "Banksters" to finance its political aspirations, the national group of plaintiff home owners has been forced to now expand its lawsuit to include racketeering, money laundering and intentional violations of the Iranian Nations Sanctions and Embargo Act by the national banks included among the "Bankster" Defendants.
The complaint - which has now been fully served on thousands of the "Banksters and their Co-Conspirators" - makes it irrefutable that the epicenter of this laundering and racketeering enterprise has been and continues to be Wall Street and continues to involve the very "Banksters" located there who have repeatedly asked in the past to be "bailed out" and to be "bailed out" in the future.
The Havens for the money laundering schemes - and certain of the names and places of these entities - are located in such venues as Switzerland, the Isle of Man, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Cypress and entities controlled by governments adverse to the interests of the United States Sanctions and Embargo Act against Iran, and are also identified in both the United Nations and the U.S. Senate's recent reports on international money laundering. Many of these entities have already been personally served with summons and process of the complaint during the last six months. It is now beyond dispute that, while the Obama Administration was publicly encouraging loan modifications for home owners by "Banksters", it was privately ratifying the formation of these shell companies in violation of the United States Patriot Act, and State and Federal law. The case further alleges that through these obscure foreign companies, Bank of America, J.P. Morgan, Wells Fargo Bank, Citibank, Citigroup, One West Bank, and numerous other federally chartered banks stole trillions of dollars of home owners' and taxpayers' money during the last decade and then laundered it through offshore companies.
This District Court Complaint - maintained by Spire Law Group, LLP -- is the only lawsuit in the world listing as Defendants the Banksters, let alone serving all of such Banksters with legal process and therefore forcing them to finally answer the charges in court. Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission, nor the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, nor the Office of the Attorney General, nor any State Attorney General has sued the Banksters and thereby legally chased them worldwide to recover-back the $43 trillion ($43,000,000,000,000.00) and other lawful damages, injunctive relief and other legal remedies.
CUNT IN YO'ED
James N. Fiedler, Managing Partner of Spire Law Group, LLP, stated: "It is hard for me to believe as a 47-year lawyer that our nation's guardians have been unwilling to stop this theft. Spire Law Group, LLP stands for the elimination of corruption and implementation of lawful strategies, and that is what we're doing here. Spire Law Group, LLP's charter is to not allow such corruption to go unanswered." Comments were requested from the Attorney Generals' offices in NY, CA, NV, NH , OH, MA and the White House, but no comment was provided.
About Spire Law Group Spire Law Group, LLP is a national law firm whose motto is "the public should be protected -- at all costs -- from corruption in whatever form it presents itself." The Firm is comprised of lawyers nationally with more than 250-years of experience in a span of matters ranging from representing large corporations and wealthy individuals, to also representing the masses. The Firm is at the front lines litigating against government officials, banks, defunct loan pools, and now the very offshore entities where the corruption was enabled and perpetrated.
Contact: James N. Fiedler877-438-8766
SOURCE Spire Law Group, LLP
Copyright (C) 2012 PR Newswire. All rights reserved -0- KEYWORD: New York INDUSTRY KEYWORD: RLT
RRL SUBJECT CODE: LAW
$43 trillon. jus pocked change for burly balls hypes
bee ware hurricine sandy is cumming.
THIS COULD BE THE BEGINNG!!
the hucane will mstriously hit washton, dc. maybe it will kill all the policans there.
also, this could be the begins of 2012 events.
yo cold very well see none event cumming after anther till it all over.
bugle yo seet belts teat!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1yuCsJ3GhM&feature=context-gfa
ReCONtrust Company sent "Debt Validation Notice"; said notice states that, "ReCONtrust Company, N.A. may be a debt collector attempting to collect a debt and any information it obtains will be used for that purpose".
Did you get that? They state they don't know for sure they are a debt collector. In other words, they don't know for sure if they are a debt collector or not... maybe they are and maybe they're not. They then cite 15USC 1692(G) as their authority to collect.
If I can (easily) prove they are not a debt collector therefore not authorized to sell what is secured by the debt, then how can they make claim to sell what is secured by the debt (Notice of Default and Election to Sell Under Deed of Trust)?
ReCONtrust Company sent "Debt Validation Notice" to debtor. Said notice states that "ReCONtrust Company, N.A. may be a debt collector attempting to collect a debt and any information it obtains will be used for that purpose"
Did you get that? In other words, they aren't sure they are a debt collector.. maybe they are and maybe they're not. They then cite 15USC 1692(G) as their authority to collect.
If I can prove they are not a debt collector under the FDCPA, then how can they sell the property that is secured by the [alleged] debt (Notice of Default and Election to Sell Under Deed of Trust)?
My first communication to ReCONtrust Co., N.A., in part:
__________________
In order to satisfy your obligation to conduct a reasonable investigation into this matter, you are hereby requested to produce:
1. A copy of the contract or document where I willingly and knowingly affixed my authorized signature, making me liable for any alleged debt to your client.
2. A copy of your license to be a collection agency in the state of California
3. A copy of your license to operate as a collection agency in the state of California
4. A copy of the implementing regulation instructing you on your duties,obligations, authority, and limitations of authority.
5. A copy of the law giving you the authority to use the U.S. Mails to make ethereal and unsubstantiated claims of amounts due you and your client.
6. The bond with account #, trustee of said account, and my right to sue said account for any violations to the California Business & Commercial Code while you are attempting to operate a business in the state of California.
In addition, you are hereby requested to produce the following documents:
7. A front and back, true and correct copy of the alleged signed agreement.
8. The name, address and title of the officer that retained you.
9. Proof of debt.
10. Proof of Identification of Creditor.
11. Proof of Identification of Debtor.
Failure to present every item 1-11 in the above documentation and verification in 30 days will invalidate your above-referenced presentments under the statutes and subsequent commercial codes of the Federal and State law.
Legally all a "debt" collector needs is your statement and a copy of the deed of trust to execute and set an auction date in a non judicial state and will only comply with questions pertaining to those specific areas. The system has put the burden of proof on us instead of the other way around. if you confess taking out a mortgage loan with abc bank without doing your home work and performing a complete independent audit of your loan you've given every judge out there permission to rule against you despite the fraudulent paper work. The quasi paper work was needed to cover the imposter lenders fictional loan that was only brokered through them as a third party. The truth and proof of what you seek will only come through your independent audit and court discovery.You must force the courts hand when you deny you ever took out a loan with abc bank and force switching the burden of proof back to the party foreclosing. No simple task for rookies.
Legally all a "debt" collector needs is your statement and a copy of the deed of trust to execute and set an auction date in a non judicial state and will only comply with questions pertaining to those specific areas.
_________________
Then why did they send the Debt Validation Notice then? I do not believe the FDCPA applies to mortgages anyway so it is perplexing why they sent a Debt Validation Notice (hereinafter "DVN") in the first place, citing 15 USC 1692(G) as their authority.
In the DVN they state:
Said obligation including ONE NOTE FOR THE ORIGINAL SUM of $225,564.00. That a breach of, and default in, the Obligations for which such Deed of Trust is security has occurred in that payment as not be made of: FAILURE TO AY THE INSTALLMENT OF PRINCIPAL,INTEREST AND IMPOUNDS WHICH BECAME DUE ON ______ AND ALL SUBSEQUENT INSTALLMENTS OF PRINCIPAL, INTERESTS AND IMPOUNDS, TOGETHER WITH ALL ATE CHARGES, PLUS ADVANCE MADE AND COSTS INCURRED BY THE BENEFICIARY, INCLUDING FORECLOSURE FEES AND COSTS AND OR ATTORNEYS FEES. ....
The DVN also states the following:
(c) unless you, within (30) days after the receipt of this letter, dispute the validity of the debt or any portion of the debt, RECONTRUST COMPANY, N.A., will assume the amount to be valide.
(d) if you notify RECONSTRUST COMPANY,N.A., in writing, to the address provided below, that you dispute the debt, or any portion of the debt, RECONSTRUST COMPANY, N..A., will obtain verification of the debt or a copy of the judgment against you and mail a copy of such verification or judgment to you.
__________________
They assert they are acting as agent for MERS and debt collector for Bank of America.
Why? Because we can and here's the paper that says we can and who's going to challenge our authority? Only you can.
You need a little help with this professionally. Assume I'm full of shit. But if you get any letter from the Govt or Bank that gives a DATE for a reply, take it seriously.
But if you get any letter from the Govt or Bank that gives a DATE for a reply, take it seriously.______________
I'm taking it seriously, even though RECONTRUST COMPANY, N.A., is not Govt or a bank. They give a DATE: within 30 days of receipt of said notice.
I still say that if they cannot validate the debt then what does that tell you about the NOTE?
I inherited a CD from the Dorean Group that has responses to letters from Debt Collectors, lawyers and even includes a Motion for Summary Judgment re Foreclosure. It's too bad that nothing on the CD can be copied or printed. I had to use the snip tool to put a letter together... a real pain in the ass.
If they have the right to sell, then they don't need to validate the debt.
Outside of disputing the loan you need to take this to another level.If you are unable from an educational and financial stand point to take this on and given what we can see into the future, having a house around your neck while you fight for survival just doesn't make sense.I'm not judging you only suggesting.
Outside of disputing the loan you need to take this to another level.If you are unable from an educational and financial stand point to take this on and given what we can see into the future, having a house around your neck while you fight for survival just doesn't make sense.I'm not judging you only suggesting.
______________________________
I am able...on all levels to take it on...and that's all I will say about that. :) thanks for your input.
OMO: You're best chance to save your house is to issue an EFT. That takes care & pays off the note.
Then you "accept the deed", which takes care of getting rid of the mortgage, throwing the lender off title whether he likes it or not, and getting title back to the property. You need to know how to do this. Most county recorders will stop you in your tracks if you don't know what you are doing, and will refuse to record all of this paperwork.
Then you've stopped the foreclosure yourself from allowing them to legally proceed on the foreclosure. Now all you have to do is defend after filing all of your paperwork creating an offensive position:
(1) file Notice of status
(2) Notice of EFT affidavit
(3) Notice of secured interest in the property
(4) Notice of lis pendens that a federal lawsuit is coming against all imposters who will be named in the Title 42 suit for theft of your property which is a felony.
If you defend by the same methods that most people use, like validation of the debt, you will get walked over, I assure you, even if you are right in your arguments and even if you are prepared and knowledgeable. It won't matter. All non-judicial foreclosures are illegal and unlawful because they deprive you to your constitutional right of a trial by jury. But who cares if you don't enforce it by filing individual against all the tresspassers in a federal Title 42 lawsuit, and make them pay for their crimes?
The banks will still attempt to commit theft by deception and continue the foreclosure process is many if not some cases, but at least by doing all of these things, you have legal reasons to stop them, especially if the clowns think they could lose everything by continuing against you. In an administrative jurisdiction or non-judicial State like California, you need to bring the issues into the courts and you need to threaten all imposters in the non-judicial process that they will be personally sued too if they continue the foreclosure after the note is legally paid off by an EFT.
Right now the time clock is ticking against you. YOu choose an ineffective path, and you will only regret it in the end.
Joseph, why do you assume I know what an EFT is?
The property is already secured by the Note so there's no need for debt collectors. Either the property is secured by the Note or it isn't. By sending debt collection notices they are attempting to collect twice. They can't have it both ways.
The property is not secured by the note, it's secured by the mortgage.
You probably can't determine for sure who is the owner or holder of the original note as it could be destroyed, lost (probably not), or can't be found. Most likely the bank would show you a copy anyway, as when the loan is securitized the original note has to be destroyed, as the stock certificate and the note can't exist at the same time, as that is considered "double dipping".
By sending debt collection notices they are attempting to collect a third time if not more.
First time is when they got the note for free & treat it as their own asset. Second time is when they fractionalized the loan and got paid 9 more times. Third time they got paid is when they got a tax benefit & when they wrote off the debt & got paid by the insurance company or FDIC. Now they want to get paid again by selling your house. The debt collector/lender could get paid again if you paid the debt collector voluntarily to save your home. Bank will even get paid again & will be able to fractionalize the loan as new money when the loan is 3 years delinquent and the lender will even file for an abandonment of your "deposit" & request to keep it & file this request to the IRS, all done behind your back which you never knew about either. So how many times have they got paid on the loan, plus interest, plus late fees, plus foreclosure costs, etc.? Then they got paid AGAIN by all the bail out monies that the government gave the banks. I'd have to sit down and think and add it all up as it's so many times, I can't figure it out right off HOW MANY TIMES THIS DEBT HAS ALREADY BEEN PAID, AND THE BANK IS STILL PRETENDING YOU STILL OWE MONEY. IT'S TOTALLY ABSURD.
And to answer your question, i'VE MADE NO ASSUMPTIONS, I talked about EFT's before & explained what they were. This is not the first discussion I've had on this subject with you or on this board. EFT stands for "electronic funds transfer" and it is essentially instructions for a payment order for the bank to get paid in full for the indebtedness they claim you owe them. This EFT is created off a closed account & it's legal and no one is going to jail. As absurd as this sounds it's none the less true. They'll get real digits to their account, so this will allow the lender to get PAID AGAIN. However, interestingly enough since the banks don't admit getting paid in full as many times as they in reality do, is it any wonder that most of the time they deny getting paid when they receive an EFT too? The nature of the beast does not change. But you can prove it according to the UCC & USC that they were paid & got a financial benefit. Proof that the banks are getting paid with these instruments besides testimonies, and admittance by high banking officials, but also the fact that the funds go to zero out the accounts in some cases even without a fight & the bank sends accounting back to that effect in 15% of the cases with a zero account, yet most often, they will also charge back the account after they zero it out, but not always. This is illegal because a reverse bank wire, cannot bounce BY DEFINITION. So what is probably happening is that high banking officials are stealing the monies after you get credit, and putting the monies in their own personal accounts. Go figure. LOL Course they can't admit this remedy works, for if they did, then it would crush their lending scam for good, so they make sure most people aren't successful through lies, and deceit, & telling you that there is no such thing as a "private side" to each account, and that closed bank accounts have no real purpose, etc. (all Bullshit by the way), because you have to be smarter than the banks to enforce the truth through the existing laws that they in fact got paid & be able to prove that. There's overwhelming evidence of that. After studying this stuff in depth, for 6 months now, I'm truly amazed how much information is out there on this subject, yet most people out there don't even have a clue that there's a remedy out there that is in fact working as people have chased remedy for years without any real success until recently.
Do you know what "set off" and adjustment is referring to? When you talk about set off and adjustments, you are talking about debt discharge AND THEN YOU HAVE TO TALK ABOUT HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION 192 AND OTHER LAWS WHERE THIS REMEDY IS THERE BUT STILL KIND OF HIDDEN IF YOU DON'T HAVE ALL THE PIECES TO THE PUZZLE. What is the vehicle for debt discharge? Well the courts have said the vehicle for debt discharge is done through a closed account. All accounts HAVE TWO SIDES. The private side is never closed, even on a closed account.
Strangely enough, I first heard this concept in the year 2003, when I was affiliated with "Mortgage Alternatives", long before Dorean was EVEN on the scene, and I heard one of the first debt elimination gurus say, and I logged this in my memory banks even though I didn't understand it at the time. He said: "We have been successful in discharging debts off closed accounts in a few cases." He didn't explain it any further which was quite frustrating. I said, what the hell is he talking about?????????? This man is now dead by the way, a guru who lost his home to foreclosure, how ironic, an expert that didn't have it all figured out but did share some successes with some he helped. But I knew that statement was important I just didn't understand why until several months ago.
The Court has defined the purpose of a “closed account”: “An account to which no further additions can be made on EITHER SIDE,
but which remains still open for adjustment and set off which distinguishes it from an account stated. Bass v. Bass 8 Pick. (Mass.) 1w87; Volkening v. De Graaf, 81 N.Y. 268; Mandeville v. Wilson, 5 Cranch 15, 3 L. Ed. 23. Black’s Law 3rd Edition.
An "account stated" is an open account. So the court is defining the differences between an open account and a closed account, and their functions.
You'll find this same definition in Black's law 3rd edition if this sounds absurd, which is the Bible for law.
Black's law talks about two sides of every account. If there is a public side, the side most people are acquainted with & use to write checks, deposit monies, etc. If there is a PUBLIC SIDE, THERE MUST BE A PRIVATE SIDE. Kind of like the argument if there is a devil, there must be a God. Can't believe in one without believing in the other.
IT'S THE PRIVATE SIDE OF A CLOSED ACCOUNT THAT HAS UNLMITED FUNDS TO DISCHARGE DEBT. THAT'S THE BIG SECRET THE BANKS DON'T WANT YOU TO KNOW. THE QUESTION IS HOW DO YOU ACCESS THOSE FUNDS TO DISCHARGE DEBT? THE ANSWER IS YOU CREATE AN EFT off a check from a closed account, put the special endorsements on it, so it is no longer a check. DO YOU KNOW HOW TO DO THIS? IF NOT, YOU NEED TO LEARN MORE. BUT I'VE GIVEN YOU THE FOUNDATION. I've issued over a dozen of these instruments, and I haven't gone to jail, no one is hasseling me about writing these instruments and it's perfectly legal. Those bankers that work in the back office of the banks that deal in EFT's know they are legal and effective, however, the ignorance on this subject is just as overwhelming as the evidence that this stuff is true.
By the way, I'm debt free now. I don't make mortgage payments anymore. I've EFT'd all my mortgages and I've filed affidavits against all my mortgage holders. They are all in default. I still have a few more steps to make sure they don't have the temptation to frustrate my life in any way, but they are all at bay.
Chase Bank admits in writing my mortgage is discharged in at least 4 letters they've sent me. They say this in the "past tense" meaning it happened already, and that they admit they aren't holding me personally liable on the note either.
They never admitted to this in correspondence until after I issued an EFT to them, so the timing of their confessions is rather interesting too. But you also have to remember that banks talk out of both sides of their mouths as all great liars do.
Well since the obligation is paid off, I know it, and they know it, I don't see how they could hold me personally responsible for the debt, so I accept their statement as being true.
Whatever works for you Joseph. Personally I wouldn't admit to owing them anything, but I fully understand why one would admit to owing them, because if you did not, then they'd still be chasing you, right? The note states how they will receive payment- by check or money order, not EFTS. So you are still in arrears.
The property is secured by the note. If they want to be paid the original note holder can sell the house- it's that simple, and not after 2-5 years of non payment.
I'm helping someone keep his house, it's not my house. I'll do whatever I can to help him.
The Notes states: I will make all payments under this Note in form of cash, check or money order.
The property is secured by the note. If they want to be paid, the original note holder can sell the house- it's that simple, and not after 2-5 years of non payment. In my opinion, the reason they haven't already sold the property is because the original note has been sold, securitized or whatever they do with it. A COPY of the Note is not enough. If they offer you a copy of the note, then offer them a copy of your house... as John Stewart once said. It's fair deal.
The property is secured by the note. If they want to be paid, the original note holder can sell the house- it's that simple, and not after 2-5 years of non payment.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/%22Equity+abhors+a+forfeiture.%22
"Equity aids the vigilant, not those who slumber on their rights."
This principle recognizes that an adversary can lose evidence, witnesses, and a fair chance to defend himself or herself after the passage of time from the date that the wrong was committed. If the defendant can show disadvantages because for a long time he or she relied on the fact that no lawsuit would be started, then the case should be dismissed in the interests of justice. The law encourages a speedy resolution for every dispute. It does not favor the cause of someone who suddenly wakes up to enforce his or her rights long after discovering that they exist. A long unreasonable delay like this is called Laches, and it is a defense to various forms of equitable relief.
From the WTF dept. The two NYC kids allegedly stabbed to death by the nanny belonged to Kevin Krim, a senior vice president for CNBC Digital and former Yahoo executive. this happened just hours after the Spire law suit (see previous post here) was posted to CNBC web site as well as the Market Watch site. The CNBC post was immediately removed. The market watch site is still up and of course this could all be a bad,bad,bad coincidence so if any sees new information pass it along.
We have posted different ideas and that's positive. Obviously the "Banks" keep moving the goal posts and it's going to take a concerted effort by by all of us to beat this evil. something more to ponder. Out of control appraisals fueled the Mortgage fraud and is still a weapon being leveraged against us.
The criminal banks are now stealing people's properties who have never been late on a payment! How? Through "appraisals"! They are requiring homeowners and commercial property owners have new appraisals. When those appraisals (in cohorts with the appraisers in getting them low) come back lower than the loan amount, at the property owners expense. They give the property owner 30 days to pay the difference of loan to value of the property otherwise they take over the property and kick the owners out! They are doing it to homeowners and commercial property owners! Property values have decreased 30% or more in areas around the U.S. We hear how property owners are underwater for the properties all the time. Well the banks are now out right stealing the properties via low appraisals that are less than the mortgage/loan amount! isn't this "calling in the loan". I have a clause in my deed of trust that says just that.
I don't understand how the lenders can kick people out if they are under water without a contract stating that? Are you saying the owner signed a clause in the contract allowing this if the property value goes down far enough, or they have to pay the mortgage difference? For example if the LTV is 80% you're saying on a $100,000 valued property the owner has to come up with $20,000 to pay the mortgage down or get foreclosed upon? Why would anyone sign such a thing? I've heard that some banks have to come up with more liquidity because of falling property values, or be placed in a position where the FDIC could shut them down on audit. You have to realize 31% of people are underwater right now.
OMO: I read the link on "equity" you posted, and it's a good link, thanks for posting it. I've put it in my favorites. But I could not find in that link where the note secures the property; it does not, the note is just an instrument showing an obligation or it is evidence of a debt. The mortgage secures the interest of the lender and allows them to foreclose, NOT THE NOTE.
As a home owner actually you have a "secured interest" in the property, due to:
(1) Your down payment
(2) Your maintenance costs on house since you've owned it,
(3) Your improvements to the property
(4) Your payments of principal and interest on the loan.
"Secured interest" is "equitable interest"), is not the same thing as equity which is (Current market value minus the mortgages on home).
You can have a "secured interest" in your home, that exceeds the value of your lender's "secured interest" and STILL BE UNDERWATER.
Here's my point. Your "interest in equity" exceeds the value of your lender foreclosing.
Now, what was the principal in equity that was discussed?
"Equity abhors forfeiture (foreclosure).
Now since you can show a greater equity in your house than the lender, equity forbids the sale of your house, until your equity can be discussed, dealt with, and an opportunity for you to be paid before you are foreclosed upon, as anything else would be unconscionable and violate the rules of equity.
Here's the problem. You have not declared your "secured interest in the home"; it's not in the public record; so you must do so. This will throw a wrench into the foreclosure. The court assumes you have no "interest" "secured interest in the property" in the home, if you don't declare it & record it. This is one of the papers that must be filed.
OMO: You are incorrect.
The courts have said: “A tender of the proper amount due,
even if rejected, extinguishes the lien and precludes foreclosure” (See, e.g. Winnett v. Roberts, supra, 179 Cal App. 3d 909, 902, Lich tv v. Whitney, supra, 80 Cal. App 2d 696, 701; see also Code Civ. Proc. SS 2074.)
An EFT is equal to certified funds or cash. I've already shown that.
Creditors can't discriminate on how they are paid.
HJR 192 forbids the payment of any one particular type of coin or currency. There are court cases to affirm that too.
The deed of trust in most contracts allows payment through EFT.
EFT is legal currency, and is paid in US dollars.
For the bank to make the argument and say that EFT's are not: (1) US currency, (2) Not legal tender, (3) a bogus instrument, or (4) not acceptable
is not going to fly.
I'm not suggesting for you to pay the collection agency, I'm suggesting you pay the original creditor the EFT, and use the argument that the original debt is paid, and that you have no contract with the assignee.
PAYMENT IN EQUIVALENT KIND ALLOWED. U.C.C. Section 1-201(24) (Official Comment), notes that the definition of money is not limited to legal tender under the U.C.C. and was also affirmed in a Federal US court of appeals which ruled on Title
31 USC 5118, and said as of October 27, 1977, legal tender for discharge of debt is no longer required. In the case of Guaranty
Trust company vs. Henwood, 307 U.S. 247 (1939), the court affirmed since legal tender is not in circulation, and repayment of
debt is against Public Policy, since legal tender was not loaned [nor in circulation] they cannot demand payment in any
[particular] form of coin or currency or legal tender, and repayment for payment need only be made in equivalent kind; a negotiable instrument. 31 U.S.C. 5118 was enacted to remedy the specific evil of tying debt to any particular currency or
requiring payment in a greater number of dollars than promised.
DEBT IS LEGAL TENDER. In the case of Stanek v.White, 172 Minn. 390, 215 H.W. 784, the court explained the legal distinction between the words "payment" and "discharge": "There is a distinction between a debt discharged' and a `debt
paid.' When discharged the debt still exists. Thus, it is clear that, as a result of HJR 192 and from that day forward (June 5,
1933), no one has been able to pay a debt. The only thing they can do is tender in transfer of debts, and the debt is perpetual.
The suspension of the gold standard, and prohibition against paying debts, removed the substance for our common law to operate on, and created a void as far as the law is concerned. This substance was replaced with a PUBLIC NATIONAL CREDIT SYSTEM" where debt is "LEGAL TENDER" money.
BANK VIOLATIONS. Title 31 USC 5118 and HJR-192, Public Law 73-10 prohibits Banks and creditors from demanding any specific specie of payment. All Banks must process lawful United States currency. Failure to do so is “interference with commerce”, a felony under the RICO ACT, 18 USC 1951. If yur lender believed they had a lawful
reason to “Dishonor” this negotiable instrument they should have returned it to you with lawful reason(s) fully
stated and cited, sworn under their unlimited liability. Your lender will not do this but pretended to reject your financial instrument when in fact they will accept it. Failure to provide lawful reason(s), or to misdirect this instrument, the EFT
is grounds for a complaint to the FTC under the FDCPA (Fair Debt Collection Practices Act), 15 USC 1692a1. After the debt has
been discharged, the trustee must send a reconveyance of the title and the mortgage lien discharged of record within 90 days.
After 90 days of being paid off, the bank is in default of their legal responsibilities: http://tinyurl.com/9r59khu
If they have the right to sell, then they don't need to validate the debt.
_____________________________
They don't have the right to sell (collection agency) because MERS never received a real property interest in your property. They are only a nominee. MERS, a nominee, can't assign an interest in the house they never had.
This has already been proven in most States in court, although I don't think CA has made a ruling on this yet.
You can use the other State court rulings on MERS and the bill of rights to say that no one person of one State, and have any more rights than another person living in another state. It's the "equal rights" clause of the bill of rights. I think it might be the 14th amendment. If it's illegal for MERS or their assignees to foreclose because they never a right of sale, than they can't assign that right of sale to another.
If you pay the original creditor off (Bank of America), with an EFT the original debt is paid. You know can show the debt is paid & then show that evidence to the collection agency, showing law, to show they can't move forward. If the collection agency has any rights, they have to be settled with Bank of America.
Ohio courts have ruled and other States that you have no right of sale, without possession of the note or proper assignment of the note in an unbroken chain of title, and possession and assignments of the mortgage in an unbroken chain of title. Problem with MERS or assignments of MERS, is that there is always a broken chain of title, so they usually lose. There's so many court cases to show this.
If they want to be paid, the original note holder can sell the house- it's that simple,
__________________________________
BullSHIT!!!! Your fifth amendment rights will have been violated which assures you that “You will not be deprived of life, liberty or property without the due process of law.”
Due process of law assures you to the "right to a jury trial". ACCORDING TO THE PRINCIPALS OF COMMON LAW. (7th amendment TO THE BILL OF RIGHTS)
iF YOU WANT TO AGREE THAT YOUR RIGHTRS ARE MEANINGLESS, WHATEVER WORKS FOR YOU OMO. LOL
The constitution of the United States is still the "supreme law of the land", not statutes, or State laws that allow these unlawful non-judicial foreclosures that trampel all over your civil and constitutional rights.
You have no rights unless to assert them and stand on them.
OMO:
EFT's are the equivalent of cash:
http://tinyurl.com/97srktd
Page 651 reads: “A debt made by the receiving bank to the sender’s account ought to have been treated as payment regardless of the availability of cover.” Under U.C.C. section 4A-21(d), “an unaccepted payment order is canceled by operation of law at the close of the fifth funds –transfer business day of the receiving bank.” Page 653 paragraph 1 reads: “As long as the beneficiary’s banks has not timely rejected the payment order, acceptance under section 4A209(b)(3) is at the opening of
the next funds transfer business day if, at that time, the amount of the senders order is fully covered by a withdrawable credit balance in an authorized account of the sender or the bank has otherwise received full payment from the sender. That is, cover at the time debt is posted is irrelevant; what counts is the state of the account at the opening of the next funds-transfer
business day.” Page 655 paragraph 1 reads: “In the language of Sections 4a-40 3(a)(1), ‘final settlement’ through a Federal
Reserve Bank thus occurs by means of advise or credit to a Reserve account of the receiving bank.” ”Page 660-661 reads: “Discharge under English common law views the credit transfer as designed “to transfer an amount standing to the credit of [the originator] . . to the credit of [the beneficiary’s] account.” Royal Prods. v. Midland Bank, (1981) 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 194, 198 (Q.B.D.).
Such a transfer is carried out with the view of conferring on the beneficiary “the unconditional right to the immediate use of the
funds transferred.” The Brimnes,Tenax Steamship Co. Ltd. v. The Brimnes (Owners), (1973) 1 All E.R. 769, 782 (Q.B.D.).
The transfer constitutes payment made to the beneficiary at the beneficiary’s bank in the same way as “handing coins or banknotes” to the beneficiary’s bank for the beneficiary would constitute payment to the beneficiary. Mardorf Peach & Co. v. Attica Sea Carriers Corp. of Liberia (The Laconia), (1976) 2 All E.R. 249, 257 (appeal taken from Q.B.D.), rev’d, (1977) 1 All E.R. 545 (H.L.) explaining that nowdays financial obligations are not normally discharged by handling over coins or bank notes.
It is thus the “unfettered and unrestricted”1 right to the use of the funds, effectively arising upon what is referred to in this article as payment finality, that discharge the debt paid by credit transfer as the equivalent of the deposit of cash to the account. 1The expression is taken from A/S Awilco v. Fulvia S.P.A. di Navigazione (The Chikuma) (1981) 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 371, 375 (H.L.).
Joseph said: "If you pay the original creditor off (Bank of America), with an EFT the original debt is paid."
____________________________
Why pay them off when they never loaned you anything?
he Notes states: I will make all payments under this Note in form of cash, check or money order.
_______________________________
The Bank wants certified funds. Not a problem!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The EFT funds are in fact "certified" as a reverse bank wire is irreversible, transfer is the euqivalen of cash to the account, and lender receives an immediate, and unrestrictred rights to the use of the funds transfered, so it fits all the criteria of ceritifed funds. See www.tinyurl.com/9tstfj4 and
www.tinyurl.com/9qgye9g.
"If you pay the original creditor off (Bank of America), with an EFT the original debt is paid. You know can show the debt is paid & then show that evidence to the collection agency, showing law, to show they can't move forward. If the collection agency has any rights, they have to be settled with Bank of America."
_______________________________
Show the evidence to the collection agency? What collection agency are you talking about? The one that is pretending to be a collection agency (ReConTrust Company, N.A.)?
The property is secured by the note
__________________________________
Without possession of the note and possession of the mortgage together a lender can't foreclose legally, so the note is not securing anything. With a note you have an UNSECURED INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY. An unsecured interest only does not ALLOW FORECLOSURE, IT'S JUST THAT SIMPLE. LOL
Why pay them off when they never loaned you anything?
_______________________________
Don't ask questions where the truth will never be revealed in court or agreed to.
You pay them off because you want to settle the matter, keep the home, not because they deserve the money and because you have better things to do with your time. Sometimes it's best to give people want they want, even if they don't deserve it.
The Bank wants certified funds. Not a problem!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
_________________________________
You can play their game if you want to... but they never loaned you anything, especially not cash, check or money order
The one that is pretending to be a collection agency (ReConTrust Company, N.A.)?
______________________________
Have you proven that they aren't a collection agency? No you haven't.
You are still trying to establish who they are and how they fight in the picture.
You assume they are a collection agency representing any rights of MERS until they are no longer a threat.
You assume anything else, and the house is going to be sold, and then you have lost the right to pay it off with an EFT.
You can play their game if you want to... but they never loaned you anything, especially not cash, check or money order
________________________________
Play their game and learn to win at playing their game.
You want to play our game, & I assure you, that your friend will be homeless.
Then he can be homeless and feel superior, justified, and happy in his financially distressed situation. I'm sure the two of you will be even more happy and feel morally superior because the bank never loaned anything. So what, who doesn't really know or understand that. You'll never prove that in a court of law, and have it affirmed, so don't even try.
You're not out to destroy the financial system, the banks, or the court, you're out to save your friends home.
Get your perspective and priorities straight.
OMO: Attorney Spielbauer witht he Dorean Group thought he was smarter than Kurt Johnson so he tried to prove that the banks never loaned any money, and he lost his perspective completely.
The result was he lost his job with Dorean, even stabbed his employer in the back, was fined $70,000, almost lost his law license, and he's smarter than you are on the subject of the fraud of lending; he couldn't prove anything, so leave certain areas alone where you can't win. The courts will never allow a court case that says that the banks never loaned anything, hence the obligation is void.
Win where you can, don't fight a losing battle. Fighting a losing battle is just foolishness, pride, and arrogance.
Have you proven that they aren't a collection agency?
_______________________
They have to prove they are a collection agency, which I already know they cannot. They will respond, probably with a copy of the note and may be the Allonge to the Note, which is non responsive to what I asked for. If I do not get what I asked for then it will be treated as a non response. Their non response is proof they are not a collection agency and therefore have no right to collect or sell the house.
Why they are pretending to be a debt collector I still don't understand, unless they somehow think it gives them the right to sell.
but they never loaned you anything, especially not cash, check or money order
_____________________________
And your friend never fought that idea (latches) until now, and now he's losing his house. Kind of late to argue that point, don't you think, according to the law of latches?
And your friennd never accepted the deed on his house either, (latches) so since he has abandoned title to his home, since he never perfected it through his acknowledgment, the law allows the lender to sell it or a assignee of the lender in this case.
They have to prove they are a collection agency,
_______________________________
Not necessarily. They have as much proof they are an assignee and a collection agency than you have evidence they are not.
Besides, it's a moot point. They are going to foreclose if you don't bring it into the courts, so even if you show they are not a collection agency with no rights, how does that stop the foreclosure since it's done outside of court and without your consent? The person handling the sale of the home is not going to care if you have evidence to indicate they may not be a collection agency?
And your friend never fought that idea (latches) until now, and now he's losing his house. Kind of late to argue that point, don't you think, according to the law of latches?
______________________
The law of laches applies to the bank and their debt collectors, not my friend. The bank and their debt collectors are the ones who are a little too late.
Your friend needs to file a "lis pendens" with some exhibits bringing issues into the court, not to be settled outside of court:
(1) affidavit of EFT paid off note
invalidating the mortgage
(2) His secured interest in the home and the amount of his interest
(3) His Affidavit of status
And then give the evidence to the trustee, the person selling the home, and to the collection agency and indicating that anyone that interferes with his interests, including a foreclosure action will be added as a Defendant in your federal lawsuit alleging civil rights violations.
Not necessarily. They have as much proof they are an assignee and a collection agency than you have evidence they are not.
_______________________
Yes, necessarily. They make the claim they are a debt collector, so they need to prove it. I would never make a claim I couldn't prove.
It's not a moot point. You'll see...
I'm not making any predictions right now what will or won't happen.. Right now I'm calling their bluff... right now I'm starting a paper trail..
The law of laches applies to the bank and their debt collectors, not my friend. The bank and their debt collectors are the ones who are a little too late.
________________________________
The law of latches goes both ways. One entity can't have more rights than another entity, that violates the spirit of the constitution of equal rights. The law of latches is a two edged sword. Since there is a controversy that exists, you can't say the law only applies to one party. That makes you no better than the banksters.
Again, your perspective is totally wrong, and you choose to fight issues that aren't going to help your losing situation.
Do you want to possibly win one battle & lose the war because that's your best scenario at this point.
They make the claim they are a debt collector, so they need to prove it. I would never make a claim I couldn't prove.
_______________________________
All attorneys are considered debt collectors according to the law. They'll come up with documents to show that and then how are you going to respond? You've wasted time and energy on an issue that got you no where. Why not get rid of the obligation irregardless of who is claiming rights. That's just an unwise choice of your time.
'm not making any predictions right now what will or won't happen
___________________________
Exactly, you won't make predictions, because you don't know how they will respond. A waste of time, it doesn't solve the root of the problem which is your friend owes an obligation to someone, and it hasn't been paid. That's all the courts seem to care about, not whether a debt collection agency is an assignee of the debt.
How hard is it for Bank of America to give Recon Trust an agreement or an assignment? How hard is it for Recon to make up an agreement or even forge a copy? How difficult is it to prove otherwise? You're going down the wrong path. You'll see.
"I don't understand how the lenders can kick people out if they are under water without a contract stating that?"
I haven't been able to verify this information myself, but ask yourself from what you've seen over the last 5 or 6 years can you honestly be surprised?and actually your contract some where some how probably states or has verbage that contains such words as TERMINATE, COMPLIANCE and can RESCIND at any time. This the first time I've heard of this myself but if I was the Bank I wouldn't want to attract any attention to this strategy If I could, if so it is paving the way for eminent domain over all property within the U.S.
Here is what Bank of America said to another borrower who issued an EFT:
"This statement is being furnished for information purpose only and should not be construed to collect against your personally. While your obligation with Bank of America MAY BE DISCHARGED BY OPERATION OF LAW, Bank of America have retained the ability to enforce it's rights against the property securing this loan, SHOULD THERE BE A DEFAULT."
________________________
Here's what ReCONtrust said in their Debt Validation Notice:
IMPORTANT BANKRUPCY NOTICE: IF YOU PREVIOUSLY HAVE RECEIVED A DISCHARGE OF THE HOME LOAN DEBT, THIS IS NOT AN ATTEMPT TO COLLECT THE DEBT FROM YOU PERSONALLY, BUT IS AN ACT TO ENFORCE THE CREDITOR'S VALID LIEN RIGHTS AGAINST THE PROPERTY WHICH SECURES THE DEBT.
...BUT IS AN ACT TO ENFORCE THE CREDITOR'S VALID LIEN RIGHTS AGAINST THE PROPERTY WHICH SECURES THE DEBT.
_________________
So there you have it. You can discharge until the cows come home.
Even if they cannot validate the debt, they will enforce the lien which they believe is valid even if the debt is not.
Even if they cannot validate the debt, they will enforce the lien which they believe is valid even if the debt is not.
__________________________________
They are required to release the lien when the note is paid off. The lien at that time is void. Lender can pretend to foreclose, and even foreclose, but they aren't suppose to. You need to notify them of their error. The EFT paid off the debt.
ERROR RESOLUTION NEVER RESOLVED TIMELY Law: 15 USC SEC. 1693 a-f See Exhibit “G”
(a) Notification to financial institution of error--If a financial institution, within sixty days after having transmitted to a consumer documentation pursuant to section 1693d (a), (c), or (d) of this title or notification pursuant to section 1693d (b) of this title, receives oral or written notice in which the consumer—(1) sets forth or otherwise enables the financial institution to identify the name and account number of the consumer; (2) indicates the consumer’s belief that the documentation, or, in the case of notification pursuant to section 1693d (b) of this title, the consumer’s account, contains an error and the amount of such error; and (3) sets forth the reasons for the consumer’s belief (where applicable) that an error has occurred, the financial institution shall investigate the alleged error, determine whether an error has occurred, and report or mail the results of such investigation and determination to the consumer within ten business days. The financial institution may require written confirmation to be provided to it within ten business days of an oral notification of error if, when the oral notification is made, the consumer is advised of such requirement and the address to which such confirmation should be sent. A financial institution which requires written confirmation in accordance with the previous sentence need not provisionally recredit a consumer’s account in accordance with subsection (c) of this section, nor shall the financial institution be liable under subsection (e) of this section if the written confirmation is not received within the ten-day period referred to in the previous sentence.
(e) Treble damages-- If in any action under section 1693m [1] of this title, the court finds that—(1) the financial institution did not provisionally recredit a consumer’s account within the ten-day period specified in subsection (c) of this section, and the financial institution (A) did not make a good faith investigation of the alleged error, or (B) did not have a reasonable basis for believing that the consumer’s account was not in error; or (2) the financial institution knowingly and willfully concluded that the consumer’s account was not in error when such conclusion could not reasonably have been drawn from the evidence available to the financial institution at the time of its investigation, then the consumer shall be entitled to treble damages determined under section 1693m (a)(1) [1] of this title.
(f) Acts constituting error For the purpose of this section, an error consists of— (3) the omission from a periodic statement of an electronic fund transfer affecting the consumer’s account which should have been included;
: “A tender of the proper amount due, even if rejected, extinguishes the lien and precludes foreclosure” (See, e.g. Winnett v. Roberts, supra, 179 Cal App. 3d 909, 902, Lich tv v. Whitney, supra, 80 Cal. App 2d 696, 701; see also Code Civ. Proc. SS 2074.)
If they foreclose they are liable for 3 times in damages, and they are violating the law.
SET OFF IS SATISFACTION OF MORTGAGE “Set off” means satisfaction of the debt: http://tinyurl.com/9l8fqxm
“Satisfaction” means receiving payment: http://tinyurl.com/9fm44js Zeroing out the account is “satisfaction”, “set off”, and “discharge of the debt.” As in a bankruptcy, when a debt is discharged, it is no longer owed, and the account is zeroed out.
After the bank accepting an EFT, what’s done is done, and the bank can’t legally reverse this through a charge back since the receiving beneficiary, WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE got paid. WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE is negligent in not
sending me a billing statement showing that Account has been discharged and is in fact committing mail fraud by
sending me bills demanding payment. (See exhibit “I”)
You still have some learnin to do.
SHOW ME THE LOAN and MOCK COURT - Search in Youtube for them. Take notes.
Even if they cannot validate the debt, they will enforce the lien which they believe is valid even if the debt is not.
_______________________________
I'm not talking about bankruptcy where the debt is forgiven, I'm talking about issuing an EFT where the creditor in fact gets paid the equivalent of cash. Are you not smart enough to see the difference and appreciate everything I've sent so you can see the whole picture?
Look banks can do whatever they want, but there is legal consequences. We already know they are bold and brazen & they violate the law. The law says they can't do what they threaten. Do you believe everything you read in these stupid form letters that banks send which only purpose is to intimidate, not to inform?
You still have some learnin to do.
SHOW ME THE LOAN and MOCK COURT - Search in Youtube for them. Take notes.
_____________________________
wHAT SPECIFIC POINTS ARE YOU TRYING TO MAKE HERE?
lIEN RIGHTS DOES NOT ENTITLE YOU TO POSSESSION RIGHTS OF THE HOME.
Banks can't even foreclose and then evict you from your house, because you are an owner and NOT A RENTER.
Forcible entry & detainer actions are ONLY TO BE USED AGAINST RENTERS, SO WHEN BANKS ATTEMPT TO EVICT YOU FROM YOUR HOME, THEY ARE AGAIN VIOLATING THE LAW, THE SHERIFF DEPT. IS VIOLATING THE LAW, AND YOU'LL FIND ON THE FORCIBLE ENTRY & DETAINER, IT MAY NOT EVEN BE PROPERLY SIGNED BY THE JUDGE, WHICH MAKES IT A WRONGFUL EVICTION.
So how is the bank going to get you out of your home if you purposely don't leave? Arrest you?
That's more damages when you sue all the clowns & pretenders in Federal Court.
It's called "theft by deception." And it's a felony.
So there you have it. You can discharge until the cows come home.
________________________________
tHE EFT takes care of the NOTE PROBLEM ONLY.
Look, did I not say that you should ALSO "accept the deed" too in order to take any temptation away from the lender FROM VIOLATING THE LAW? Accepting the deed throws the lender off title, (THAT TAKES CARE OF THE MORTGAGE PROBLEM) so when that happens they don't have any more lien rights, so what reason are they going to give now to foreclose when that happens AND THE BANK IS THROWN OFF TITLE & THEIR INTEREST IS NO LONGER THERE ONCE YOUR ACCEPTANCE OF THE DEED IS RECORDED?
You take bits & pieces of what I say, & think you know it all & MAKE WRONG CONCLUSIONS. Take everything I say & PUT IT ALL IN context.
They still don't have a right to foreclose if you pay off the note only, but I'm not saying that some banks won't try & violate the law anyway.
You said your bank forbade your friend from paying other than cash or money order? Wrong!!!!!!!!!! SHOULD HAVE BEEN INCLUDED. SIMPLE ENOUGH. You have the legal right to pay by EFT.
(3) the omission from a periodic statement of an electronic fund transfer affecting the consumer’s account which should have been included;
___________________________
(e) Treble damages-- If in any action under section 1693m [1] of this title, the court finds that—(1) the financial institution did not provisionally recredit a consumer’s account within the ten-day period specified in subsection (c) of this section, and the financial institution (A) did not make a good faith investigation of the alleged error, or (B) did not have a reasonable basis for believing that the consumer’s account was not in error; or (2) the financial institution knowingly and willfully concluded that the consumer’s account was not in error when such conclusion could not reasonably have been drawn from the evidence available to the financial institution at the time of its investigation, then the consumer shall be entitled to treble damages determined under section 1693m (a)(1) [1] of this title.
(f) Acts constituting error For the purpose of this section, an error consists of— (3) the omission from a periodic statement of an electronic fund transfer affecting the consumer’s account which should have been included;
iF YOU WERE A BANK, WOULD YOU STEAL THE HOUSE, SO YOU WOULD HAVE TO PAY 3 TIMES THE VALUE OF THE HOUSE YOU STOLE? THE LAW IS SIMPLE AND CLEAR HERE.
Post a Comment