Monday, November 29, 2010

Making Money Easy


Every time I listen to NJ Chris Christie I want to stand up and salute. Today is no different.

Please watch this 4 minute video where Chris Christie blasts LeRoy Seitz, Superintendent of Schools for the Parsippany School District about Seitz's threat to leave the state if his salary is reduced to $175,000.



NorthJersey.com has more details in Governor sets sights on Seitz contract

Last week the Parsippany-Troy Hills Board of Education voted 6-2 to renew Superintendent LeRoy Seitz's contract, which included a 2 percent per year salary increase.

What made the contract noteworthy, aside from the dozens of people that spoke out against it and the tongue lashing the Board and the Superintendent received from Gov. Chris Christie was that the contract Seitz is currently working under doesn't expire until July 1, 2011.

The Board began contract negotiations during the summer, at about the same time the Christie administration released information about a plan to cap chief administrator's salaries and tying the numbers to the enrollment in the district.

By finalizing the contract now the Board effectively agreed to give Seitz a salary well above the governor's proposed cap for almost five years.

At the Board meeting Mark Tabakin, the Board attorney, told the gathering of about 90 people that the cap is still in the proposal form, that the contract was approved by the County Executive Superintendent Kathleen Serafino and that it is a legal action. "People are upset," he acknowledged, "but it's up to the will of the Board."

The controversial contract drew township residents and protesters from as far away as Clifton and Hackettstown, who were outraged over the Board's end run around the proposed cap.

At times the dissenters were so vocal Board President Anthony Mancuso, who remained calm and in control throughout the proceedings, had to call for a 10-minute recess to let the outbursts subside. The police were also called during one of the breaks though they never had the need to take action.

When the public was allowed to speak the floodgates opened. Taking a sarcastic tact the first speaker Roman Hoshovsky said, "How can anyone be expected to live on $200,000?" Then he produced an empty canister and proposed using it as a collection jar in businesses around town to raise money for Seitz.

Barbara Hackling pointed out the Board had laid off teachers and refused to negotiate with the paraprofessionals, "but found money for him."

Karen Blunt, a 36-year Parsippany resident and a paraprofessional in the district said, "He is looking out for his future. I haven't had a raise in 4 years who is looking out for my future?"

The day before the meeting Seitz is quoted in the Daily Record as saying, "Because of the proposed salary caps, I have to look at my future and the financial welfare of my family. I certainly would have options if I didn't feel the compensation in this district, or New Jersey, is appropriate."

The governor reacted to Seitz's veiled threats to leave New Jersey and go to a nearby state where there is no state salary. "I will say in response to Mr. Seitz, 'Let me help you pack.' We have real problems in our state that we have to fix and we don't have the time, nor the money, nor the patience any longer for people who put themselves before our citizens," Christie railed.
I Applaud LeRoy Seitz

A tip of the hat goes to LeRoy Seitz for being such an arrogant SOB that that the meeting to discuss the new contract overflowed with citizens fed up with school board greed.

It is not easy standing up to thugs who want nothing more but to raise your taxes. But the voters did. That's how riled up they were.

I recommend voters in the Parsippany School District send a message to the ignoramuses who agreed to give LeRoy Seitz a new contract. Vote them off the school board.

Fortunately it takes approval from another level to agree to that raise, so the raise is not a done deal yet.

New Jersey taxpayers are fed up, and rightfully so. If LeRoy Seitz thinks he can get $212,000 elsewhere, more power to him. The same holds true for every public "servant". If you can get more in the private sector, shut up and do it.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List


Due diligence should always be a two-way street. A while back, I published an article on “Understanding the Dreaded Investor Due Diligence,” describing what investors do to validate your startup before they invest. Here is the inverse, sometimes called reverse due diligence, describing what you should do to validate your investor before signing up for an equity partnership.


I’ve had startup founders tell me that it’s only about the color of the money, but I disagree. Particularly if you are desperate, keep in mind the person who finds a good-looking partner to take home from the bar at closing time, but then wakes up in the morning wondering “What did I just do?” Taking on an investor is like getting married – the relationship has to work at all levels.


Due diligence on an investor is where you validate the track record, operating style, and motivation of your new potential partner. Maybe more importantly, you need to confirm that the investor “chemistry” matches yours. Here are some techniques for making the assessment:



  1. Talk to other investors. The investment community in any geographic area is not that large, and most investors have relationships or knowledge of most of the others. Of course, you need to listen for biases, but local angel group leaders can quickly tell you who the bad angels and good angels are, and what kind of terms they typically demand.

  2. Network with other entrepreneurs. Contact peers you have met through networking, both ones who have used this investor, and ones who haven’t. Ask the investor for “references,” meaning contacts at companies where previous investments were made. Don’t just call, but personally visit these contacts.

  3. Check track record on the Internet and social network. Do a simple Google search like you would on any company or individual before signing a contract. Look for positive or negative news articles, any controversial relationships, and involvement in community organizations. Check the profile of principals on LinkedIn and Facebook.

  4. Spend time with investors in a non-work environment. As with any relationship, don’t just close the deal in a heated rush. Invite the investment principal to a sports event, or join them in helping at a non-profit cause. Here is where you will really learn if there is a chemistry match that will likely lead to a good mentoring and business relationship.

  5. Validate business and financial status. Visit the firm’s website and read it carefully. Look for a background and experience in your industry, as well as quality and style. Conduct a routine credit and criminal check, using commercial services like HireRight. Be wary of individuals or funds sourced from offshore.


If you think all this sounds a bit sinister and unnecessary, go back and read again some of the articles about Bernie Madoff and recent investment scams. Remember, if it sounds too good to be true, it probably isn’t true. Entrepreneurs are optimists by nature, so I definitely recommend the involvement of your favorite attorney (usually the pessimist).


I recognize that it has been tough to raise capital these last couple of years, but don’t be tempted to take money from any source. This can be a big mistake, with common complaints running the gamut from unreasonable terms, constant pressure, to company takeovers. Be vigilant and ask questions.


A successful entrepreneur-investor agreement better be the beginning of a long-term relationship. If you don’t feel excited and energized by your first discussions with an investor, give it some time and do your homework. If the feeling doesn’t grow, it may be time to move on. It’s better to be alone than to wish you were alone.


Martin Zwilling is CEO & Founder of Startup Professionals, Inc.; he also serves as Board Member and Executive in Residence at Callaman Ventures and is an advisory board member for multiple startups.This post was originally published on his blog, and it is republished here with permission.


http://www.complaintsboard.com/complaints/alpine-payment-systems-c270446.html


http://www.complaintsboard.com/complaints/alpine-payment-systems-c270446.html


http://www.complaintsboard.com/complaints/alpine-payment-systems-c270446.html


Bad <b>news</b>: Bills receiver blames God after dropping game-winning TD <b>...</b>

Bad news: Bills receiver blames God after dropping game-winning TD pass.

Energy and Global Warming <b>News</b> for November 29th: Japan to help <b>...</b>

Do these topics have a prominent place in the agenda for the Cancun negotiations (I haven't heard much to that effect in my reading of the news)? Could they be made a more prominent part of the agenda? Or are Ramanathan and Victor ...

<b>News</b> And Notes: 11.29.2010 - Blueshirt Banter

News And Notes: 11.29.2010. ... News And Notes: 11.29.2010. Joe_2_tiny by Joe Fortunato on Nov 29, 2010 10:03 AM EST in Rangers Analysis � Tweet � 0 comments; Story-email Email; Printer Print ...


http://www.complaintsboard.com/complaints/alpine-payment-systems-c270446.html


http://www.complaintsboard.com/complaints/alpine-payment-systems-c270446.html


http://www.complaintsboard.com/complaints/alpine-payment-systems-c270446.html


http://www.complaintsboard.com/complaints/alpine-payment-systems-c270446.html












Saturday, November 27, 2010

budgeting personal finances




Conduct a Financial Fire Drill to Assess Financial Health





We conduct fire drills to ensure fire warning systems are functional and that building occupants know what to do in the event of a fire-related emergency. Apply that same type of stress test to your money with a financial fire drill.

Photo by Steve Snodgrass.


Finance and frugality blog Frugal Dad urges us to take stock of our financial health by conducting a financial fire drill. Just like a real fire drill helps you run through a dangerous scenario without risk—"Who put the file cabinets in front of the fire exit?"—a financial fire drill shows you how effective your escape routes are and how big your safety net is.


You'll need to gather up all your bills, take stock of your savings and emergency fund, and head over the Frugal Dad to run through their financial fire drill checklist—which includes great tips like making a slash-and-burn list of non-essential services you can cancel the minute you get laid off or in other financial trouble.





Conduct a Financial Fire Drill to Assess Financial Health





We conduct fire drills to ensure fire warning systems are functional and that building occupants know what to do in the event of a fire-related emergency. Apply that same type of stress test to your money with a financial fire drill.

Photo by Steve Snodgrass.


Finance and frugality blog Frugal Dad urges us to take stock of our financial health by conducting a financial fire drill. Just like a real fire drill helps you run through a dangerous scenario without risk—"Who put the file cabinets in front of the fire exit?"—a financial fire drill shows you how effective your escape routes are and how big your safety net is.


You'll need to gather up all your bills, take stock of your savings and emergency fund, and head over the Frugal Dad to run through their financial fire drill checklist—which includes great tips like making a slash-and-burn list of non-essential services you can cancel the minute you get laid off or in other financial trouble.



bench craft company scam

Web type <b>news</b>: iPhone and iPad now support TrueType font embedding <b>...</b>

This is also exciting news, as TrueType fonts are superior to SVG fonts in two very important ways: the files sizes are dramatically smaller (an especially important factor on mobile devices), and the rendering quality is much higher. ...

Denver Broncos <b>News</b>: Horse Tracks 11/27/10 - Mile High Report

Your daily cup of Orange and Blue Coffee - Horse Tracks.

New Dragon Age 2 character unveiled <b>News</b> - Page 1 | Eurogamer.net

Read our news of New Dragon Age 2 character unveiled.


bench craft company scam

Web type <b>news</b>: iPhone and iPad now support TrueType font embedding <b>...</b>

This is also exciting news, as TrueType fonts are superior to SVG fonts in two very important ways: the files sizes are dramatically smaller (an especially important factor on mobile devices), and the rendering quality is much higher. ...

Denver Broncos <b>News</b>: Horse Tracks 11/27/10 - Mile High Report

Your daily cup of Orange and Blue Coffee - Horse Tracks.

New Dragon Age 2 character unveiled <b>News</b> - Page 1 | Eurogamer.net

Read our news of New Dragon Age 2 character unveiled.


bench craft company scam



Conduct a Financial Fire Drill to Assess Financial Health





We conduct fire drills to ensure fire warning systems are functional and that building occupants know what to do in the event of a fire-related emergency. Apply that same type of stress test to your money with a financial fire drill.

Photo by Steve Snodgrass.


Finance and frugality blog Frugal Dad urges us to take stock of our financial health by conducting a financial fire drill. Just like a real fire drill helps you run through a dangerous scenario without risk—"Who put the file cabinets in front of the fire exit?"—a financial fire drill shows you how effective your escape routes are and how big your safety net is.


You'll need to gather up all your bills, take stock of your savings and emergency fund, and head over the Frugal Dad to run through their financial fire drill checklist—which includes great tips like making a slash-and-burn list of non-essential services you can cancel the minute you get laid off or in other financial trouble.





Conduct a Financial Fire Drill to Assess Financial Health





We conduct fire drills to ensure fire warning systems are functional and that building occupants know what to do in the event of a fire-related emergency. Apply that same type of stress test to your money with a financial fire drill.

Photo by Steve Snodgrass.


Finance and frugality blog Frugal Dad urges us to take stock of our financial health by conducting a financial fire drill. Just like a real fire drill helps you run through a dangerous scenario without risk—"Who put the file cabinets in front of the fire exit?"—a financial fire drill shows you how effective your escape routes are and how big your safety net is.


You'll need to gather up all your bills, take stock of your savings and emergency fund, and head over the Frugal Dad to run through their financial fire drill checklist—which includes great tips like making a slash-and-burn list of non-essential services you can cancel the minute you get laid off or in other financial trouble.



bench craft company scam

Web type <b>news</b>: iPhone and iPad now support TrueType font embedding <b>...</b>

This is also exciting news, as TrueType fonts are superior to SVG fonts in two very important ways: the files sizes are dramatically smaller (an especially important factor on mobile devices), and the rendering quality is much higher. ...

Denver Broncos <b>News</b>: Horse Tracks 11/27/10 - Mile High Report

Your daily cup of Orange and Blue Coffee - Horse Tracks.

New Dragon Age 2 character unveiled <b>News</b> - Page 1 | Eurogamer.net

Read our news of New Dragon Age 2 character unveiled.


bench craft company scam

Web type <b>news</b>: iPhone and iPad now support TrueType font embedding <b>...</b>

This is also exciting news, as TrueType fonts are superior to SVG fonts in two very important ways: the files sizes are dramatically smaller (an especially important factor on mobile devices), and the rendering quality is much higher. ...

Denver Broncos <b>News</b>: Horse Tracks 11/27/10 - Mile High Report

Your daily cup of Orange and Blue Coffee - Horse Tracks.

New Dragon Age 2 character unveiled <b>News</b> - Page 1 | Eurogamer.net

Read our news of New Dragon Age 2 character unveiled.


bench craft company scam

Friday, November 19, 2010

Making Money With Website

bench craft company rip off

LuAn Mitchell at Life Changes Live April 22, 2010 by Life Changes


bench craft company rip off

Police <b>News</b> at Steven Landsburg | The Big Questions: Tackling the <b>...</b>

1 Tweets that mention Police News at Steven Landsburg | The Big Questions: Tackling the Problems of Philosophy with Ideas from Mathematics, Economics, and Physics -- Topsy.com. Pingback on Nov 19th, 2010 at 3:23 am. 2 Police News at ...

Taiwanese <b>News</b> Channel Animates Royal Engagement! | PerezHilton.com

Royal Wedding Fever has hit Taiwan! Check out their animated (because we wouldn´t want it any other way!) interpretation of Prince William´s engagement to Kate Middleton (above)! Sooo...

<b>News</b> Corp developing a tablet-exclusive publication

News Corp Logo Reuters is reporting that News Corp, the world's third-largest media conglomerate, has confirmed they will be releasing a news publication developed specifically for tablet computers like the iPad. "It's a tablet-only ...


bench craft company rip off

LuAn Mitchell at Life Changes Live April 22, 2010 by Life Changes


bench craft company rip off

Police <b>News</b> at Steven Landsburg | The Big Questions: Tackling the <b>...</b>

1 Tweets that mention Police News at Steven Landsburg | The Big Questions: Tackling the Problems of Philosophy with Ideas from Mathematics, Economics, and Physics -- Topsy.com. Pingback on Nov 19th, 2010 at 3:23 am. 2 Police News at ...

Taiwanese <b>News</b> Channel Animates Royal Engagement! | PerezHilton.com

Royal Wedding Fever has hit Taiwan! Check out their animated (because we wouldn´t want it any other way!) interpretation of Prince William´s engagement to Kate Middleton (above)! Sooo...

<b>News</b> Corp developing a tablet-exclusive publication

News Corp Logo Reuters is reporting that News Corp, the world's third-largest media conglomerate, has confirmed they will be releasing a news publication developed specifically for tablet computers like the iPad. "It's a tablet-only ...


bench craft company rip off

Police <b>News</b> at Steven Landsburg | The Big Questions: Tackling the <b>...</b>

1 Tweets that mention Police News at Steven Landsburg | The Big Questions: Tackling the Problems of Philosophy with Ideas from Mathematics, Economics, and Physics -- Topsy.com. Pingback on Nov 19th, 2010 at 3:23 am. 2 Police News at ...

Taiwanese <b>News</b> Channel Animates Royal Engagement! | PerezHilton.com

Royal Wedding Fever has hit Taiwan! Check out their animated (because we wouldn´t want it any other way!) interpretation of Prince William´s engagement to Kate Middleton (above)! Sooo...

<b>News</b> Corp developing a tablet-exclusive publication

News Corp Logo Reuters is reporting that News Corp, the world's third-largest media conglomerate, has confirmed they will be releasing a news publication developed specifically for tablet computers like the iPad. "It's a tablet-only ...


bench craft company rip off

Police <b>News</b> at Steven Landsburg | The Big Questions: Tackling the <b>...</b>

1 Tweets that mention Police News at Steven Landsburg | The Big Questions: Tackling the Problems of Philosophy with Ideas from Mathematics, Economics, and Physics -- Topsy.com. Pingback on Nov 19th, 2010 at 3:23 am. 2 Police News at ...

Taiwanese <b>News</b> Channel Animates Royal Engagement! | PerezHilton.com

Royal Wedding Fever has hit Taiwan! Check out their animated (because we wouldn´t want it any other way!) interpretation of Prince William´s engagement to Kate Middleton (above)! Sooo...

<b>News</b> Corp developing a tablet-exclusive publication

News Corp Logo Reuters is reporting that News Corp, the world's third-largest media conglomerate, has confirmed they will be releasing a news publication developed specifically for tablet computers like the iPad. "It's a tablet-only ...


bench craft company rip off

Police <b>News</b> at Steven Landsburg | The Big Questions: Tackling the <b>...</b>

1 Tweets that mention Police News at Steven Landsburg | The Big Questions: Tackling the Problems of Philosophy with Ideas from Mathematics, Economics, and Physics -- Topsy.com. Pingback on Nov 19th, 2010 at 3:23 am. 2 Police News at ...

Taiwanese <b>News</b> Channel Animates Royal Engagement! | PerezHilton.com

Royal Wedding Fever has hit Taiwan! Check out their animated (because we wouldn´t want it any other way!) interpretation of Prince William´s engagement to Kate Middleton (above)! Sooo...

<b>News</b> Corp developing a tablet-exclusive publication

News Corp Logo Reuters is reporting that News Corp, the world's third-largest media conglomerate, has confirmed they will be releasing a news publication developed specifically for tablet computers like the iPad. "It's a tablet-only ...


bench craft company rip off

LuAn Mitchell at Life Changes Live April 22, 2010 by Life Changes


bench craft company rip off
bench craft company rip off

Police <b>News</b> at Steven Landsburg | The Big Questions: Tackling the <b>...</b>

1 Tweets that mention Police News at Steven Landsburg | The Big Questions: Tackling the Problems of Philosophy with Ideas from Mathematics, Economics, and Physics -- Topsy.com. Pingback on Nov 19th, 2010 at 3:23 am. 2 Police News at ...

Taiwanese <b>News</b> Channel Animates Royal Engagement! | PerezHilton.com

Royal Wedding Fever has hit Taiwan! Check out their animated (because we wouldn´t want it any other way!) interpretation of Prince William´s engagement to Kate Middleton (above)! Sooo...

<b>News</b> Corp developing a tablet-exclusive publication

News Corp Logo Reuters is reporting that News Corp, the world's third-largest media conglomerate, has confirmed they will be releasing a news publication developed specifically for tablet computers like the iPad. "It's a tablet-only ...


bench craft company rip off

bench craft company rip off

Police <b>News</b> at Steven Landsburg | The Big Questions: Tackling the <b>...</b>

1 Tweets that mention Police News at Steven Landsburg | The Big Questions: Tackling the Problems of Philosophy with Ideas from Mathematics, Economics, and Physics -- Topsy.com. Pingback on Nov 19th, 2010 at 3:23 am. 2 Police News at ...

Taiwanese <b>News</b> Channel Animates Royal Engagement! | PerezHilton.com

Royal Wedding Fever has hit Taiwan! Check out their animated (because we wouldn´t want it any other way!) interpretation of Prince William´s engagement to Kate Middleton (above)! Sooo...

<b>News</b> Corp developing a tablet-exclusive publication

News Corp Logo Reuters is reporting that News Corp, the world's third-largest media conglomerate, has confirmed they will be releasing a news publication developed specifically for tablet computers like the iPad. "It's a tablet-only ...


bench craft company rip off

Police <b>News</b> at Steven Landsburg | The Big Questions: Tackling the <b>...</b>

1 Tweets that mention Police News at Steven Landsburg | The Big Questions: Tackling the Problems of Philosophy with Ideas from Mathematics, Economics, and Physics -- Topsy.com. Pingback on Nov 19th, 2010 at 3:23 am. 2 Police News at ...

Taiwanese <b>News</b> Channel Animates Royal Engagement! | PerezHilton.com

Royal Wedding Fever has hit Taiwan! Check out their animated (because we wouldn´t want it any other way!) interpretation of Prince William´s engagement to Kate Middleton (above)! Sooo...

<b>News</b> Corp developing a tablet-exclusive publication

News Corp Logo Reuters is reporting that News Corp, the world's third-largest media conglomerate, has confirmed they will be releasing a news publication developed specifically for tablet computers like the iPad. "It's a tablet-only ...


bench craft company rip off

Small Business <b>News</b>: SMB Blogging and Social Media Basics

Far from a fad, a new blogging and social media infrastructure has emerged and is still being built and becoming a part of the new hierarchy can be important to.

Rivet returning to lineup - Sabres Edge - Blogs - The Buffalo <b>News</b>

The Buffalo News updated every day with news from Buffalo, New York. Links to national and business news, entertainment listings, recipes, sports teams, classified ads, death notices.

Movie <b>News</b> Quick Hits: Leonardo DiCaprio to Star in New JFK <b>...</b>

Do you find Wall-E and Eve so adorable you just want to eat them? Now you can thanks to Charm City Cakes. - Warner Bros.


bench craft company rip off

Fox <b>News</b> Commentators Caught On Camera Mocking Sarah Palin&#39;s Show <b>...</b>

WASHINGTON -- The Fox News channel has been something of a safe haven for Sarah Palin, the type of outlet that provided the former Alaska Governor not only with a friendly audience but similarly kind questions.

Taiwanese <b>News</b> Channel Animates Royal Engagement! | PerezHilton.com

Royal Wedding Fever has hit Taiwan! Check out their animated (because we wouldn´t want it any other way!) interpretation of Prince William´s engagement to Kate Middleton (above)! Sooo...

The Tools of Ignorance: Friday <b>News</b> - Pinstripe Alley

A big offer, the big man's snub, a little trade, and a call for a dose of sanity.


bench craft company rip off

Small Business <b>News</b>: SMB Blogging and Social Media Basics

Far from a fad, a new blogging and social media infrastructure has emerged and is still being built and becoming a part of the new hierarchy can be important to.

Fox <b>News</b> Commentators Caught On Camera Mocking Sarah Palin&#39;s Show <b>...</b>

WASHINGTON -- The Fox News channel has been something of a safe haven for Sarah Palin, the type of outlet that provided the former Alaska Governor not only with a friendly audience but similarly kind questions.

The Tools of Ignorance: Friday <b>News</b> - Pinstripe Alley

A big offer, the big man's snub, a little trade, and a call for a dose of sanity.


bench craft company rip off

Thursday, November 18, 2010

about internet marketing

eric seiger

HSMAI Revenue Management &amp; Internet Marketing Strategy Conference by hsmai


eric seiger

Sarah Palin on Fox <b>News</b> Watch | Palin Attacked On Fox <b>News</b> | Video <b>...</b>

The Fox News Watch crew better learn to watch when the camera is rolling from now on, because they might soon feel the wrath of the Mama Grizzly. Nevermind that Sarah Palin is their Fox News co-worker and a likely contender for the ...

Brad Friedman and Desi Doyen: Green <b>News</b> Report: November 18, 2010 <b>...</b>

IN 'GREEN NEWS EXTRA' (see links below): Tea Party: Smart development is really a global conspiracy; EPA: Major US cities violate lead standards; UN, World Bank say act now on climate change or pay much more later; Illinois Spending $2M ...

Senator Rockefeller Wants FCC To &#39;End&#39; Fox <b>News</b>, MSNBC

During a committee meeting on Wednesday about television retransmission consent, Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) veered away from his prepared remarks to take aim at both Fox News and MSNBC: More than just retransmission consent ails our ...


eric seiger

HSMAI Revenue Management &amp; Internet Marketing Strategy Conference by hsmai


eric seiger

Sarah Palin on Fox <b>News</b> Watch | Palin Attacked On Fox <b>News</b> | Video <b>...</b>

The Fox News Watch crew better learn to watch when the camera is rolling from now on, because they might soon feel the wrath of the Mama Grizzly. Nevermind that Sarah Palin is their Fox News co-worker and a likely contender for the ...

Brad Friedman and Desi Doyen: Green <b>News</b> Report: November 18, 2010 <b>...</b>

IN 'GREEN NEWS EXTRA' (see links below): Tea Party: Smart development is really a global conspiracy; EPA: Major US cities violate lead standards; UN, World Bank say act now on climate change or pay much more later; Illinois Spending $2M ...

Senator Rockefeller Wants FCC To &#39;End&#39; Fox <b>News</b>, MSNBC

During a committee meeting on Wednesday about television retransmission consent, Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) veered away from his prepared remarks to take aim at both Fox News and MSNBC: More than just retransmission consent ails our ...


eric seiger

Sarah Palin on Fox <b>News</b> Watch | Palin Attacked On Fox <b>News</b> | Video <b>...</b>

The Fox News Watch crew better learn to watch when the camera is rolling from now on, because they might soon feel the wrath of the Mama Grizzly. Nevermind that Sarah Palin is their Fox News co-worker and a likely contender for the ...

Brad Friedman and Desi Doyen: Green <b>News</b> Report: November 18, 2010 <b>...</b>

IN 'GREEN NEWS EXTRA' (see links below): Tea Party: Smart development is really a global conspiracy; EPA: Major US cities violate lead standards; UN, World Bank say act now on climate change or pay much more later; Illinois Spending $2M ...

Senator Rockefeller Wants FCC To &#39;End&#39; Fox <b>News</b>, MSNBC

During a committee meeting on Wednesday about television retransmission consent, Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) veered away from his prepared remarks to take aim at both Fox News and MSNBC: More than just retransmission consent ails our ...


eric seiger

Sarah Palin on Fox <b>News</b> Watch | Palin Attacked On Fox <b>News</b> | Video <b>...</b>

The Fox News Watch crew better learn to watch when the camera is rolling from now on, because they might soon feel the wrath of the Mama Grizzly. Nevermind that Sarah Palin is their Fox News co-worker and a likely contender for the ...

Brad Friedman and Desi Doyen: Green <b>News</b> Report: November 18, 2010 <b>...</b>

IN 'GREEN NEWS EXTRA' (see links below): Tea Party: Smart development is really a global conspiracy; EPA: Major US cities violate lead standards; UN, World Bank say act now on climate change or pay much more later; Illinois Spending $2M ...

Senator Rockefeller Wants FCC To &#39;End&#39; Fox <b>News</b>, MSNBC

During a committee meeting on Wednesday about television retransmission consent, Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) veered away from his prepared remarks to take aim at both Fox News and MSNBC: More than just retransmission consent ails our ...


eric seiger
eric seiger

HSMAI Revenue Management &amp; Internet Marketing Strategy Conference by hsmai


eric seiger
eric seiger

Sarah Palin on Fox <b>News</b> Watch | Palin Attacked On Fox <b>News</b> | Video <b>...</b>

The Fox News Watch crew better learn to watch when the camera is rolling from now on, because they might soon feel the wrath of the Mama Grizzly. Nevermind that Sarah Palin is their Fox News co-worker and a likely contender for the ...

Brad Friedman and Desi Doyen: Green <b>News</b> Report: November 18, 2010 <b>...</b>

IN 'GREEN NEWS EXTRA' (see links below): Tea Party: Smart development is really a global conspiracy; EPA: Major US cities violate lead standards; UN, World Bank say act now on climate change or pay much more later; Illinois Spending $2M ...

Senator Rockefeller Wants FCC To &#39;End&#39; Fox <b>News</b>, MSNBC

During a committee meeting on Wednesday about television retransmission consent, Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) veered away from his prepared remarks to take aim at both Fox News and MSNBC: More than just retransmission consent ails our ...


Wednesday, November 17, 2010

personal finance blog

Dear trav:


I used to think the same as you regarding the unconnectedness of things, but not anymore -- and not just because of one or two articles but because I've thought deeply about many things I've been reading with an open mind. Oddly, things do fit together, not in a conspiratorial way as meant today, but in a sort of horrible cascade of logic if one keeps track long enough. I also feel frustrated depressed and angry but I think it's important to keep our wits about us and know everything we can because I believe we're going to have to fight for our lives, one way or another. dz


More articles (sorry):


The JFK Assassination and 9/11: the Designated Suspects in Both Cases
by Peter Dale Scott Global Research, July 5, 2008 

Global Research recently published my essay entitled  9/11, Deep State Violence and the Hope of Internet Politics (appended below at *&*) In this article, I argue that 9/11 should be analyzed as a deep event (an event not fully aired or understood because of its intelligence connections) and above all as one of a series of deep events which from time to time have frustrated peace initiatives or become pretexts for war.The War Conspiracy. As The War Conspiracy: JFK, 9/11, and the Deep Politics of War, it is due to be published by the Mary Ferrell Foundation Press in August 2008.

I wish to summarize again the first striking similarity between 11/22/63 and of 9/11/01: the dubious detective work on those two days. Less than fifteen minutes after the President’s assassination, the height and weight of Kennedy’s alleged killer was posted.


1 Before the last of the hijacked planes crashed on 9/11, the FBI told Richard Clarke that they had a list of alleged hijackers.2


In the case of Oswald, within fifteen minutes of the assassination and long before Oswald was picked up in the Texas Theater, Inspector Sawyer of the Dallas police put out on the police radio network, and possibly other networks, a description of the killer – "About 30, 5’10", 165 pounds."


3 As noted, this height and weight exactly matched the measurements attributed to Lee Harvey Oswald in Oswald’s FBI file, and also in CIA documents about him.4


The announced height and weight were however different from Oswald’s actual measurements, as recorded by the Dallas police after his arrest: 5’9 1/2", 131 pounds.


5 More importantly, there is no credible source for the posted measurements from any witness in Dallas. (The witness said to have spotted him, Howard Brennan, failed to identify Oswald in a line-up.)6 This leaves the possibility that the measurements were taken from existing files on Oswald, rather than from any observations in Dallas on November 22. If so, someone with access to those files may have already designated Oswald as the culprit, before there was any evidence to connect him to the crime.

A similar situation pertains to the alleged hijackers on 9/11. For example, shortly afterwards men in Saudi Arabia complained that "the hijackers' `personal details’" released by the FBI -- "including name, place, date of birth and occupation -- matched their own."



7 One of them, Saeed al-Ghamdi, claimed further that an alleged photograph shown on CNN (of an alleged Flight 93 hijacker with the same name) was in fact a photograph of himself. He speculated "that CNN had probably got the picture from the Flight Safety flying school he attended in Florida."8


If the above information is accurate, then the details posted by the FBI and CNN about the alleged hijackers cannot have derived from the events of 9/11, with which the survivors in Saudi Arabia would appear to have been uninvolved. Once again this leaves the strong possibility that the details were taken from existing files, rather than from empirical observations on September 11.


9


And some of the hijackers, like Lee Harvey Oswald, may have been in CIA files for a special reason: because the CIA had an operational interest in them.



Internal CIA Evidence of Operational Interest in Oswald and the Hijackers



I have speculated that Oswald, like the al-Qaeda trainer Ali Mohamed, might have been a double agent reporting to the FBI about the terrorist group (Alpha 66) with which some law enforcement officers associated him.


I would like now to discuss more unequivocal evidence, from internal CIA records, about an operational


CIA interest in first Oswald and later two of the alleged al-Qaeda hijackers, Nawaz al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdar. In 2001 as in 1963 the CIA inexplicably withheld information about the subjects from the FBI, which ought categorically to have received it. The anomalies are extreme.

This is now easy to show in the case of Oswald. On October 10, 1963, six


weeks before the assassination of John F. Kennedy, CIA Headquarters sent out two messages about Oswald, a teletype to the FBI, State, and Navy, and a cable to the chief of the CIA’s Mexico City station. Both messages contained false and mutually contradictory statements, and also withheld known facts of great potential importance.



10 The teletype to the FBI withheld the obviously significant information that Oswald had reportedly met in Mexico City with a Soviet Vice-Consul, Valeriy Kostikov, who was believed by CIA officers to be an officer of the KGB.11


One CIA officer, Jane Roman, helped draft both messages. In 1995 she was confronted by two interviewers with irrefutable evidence that she had signed off on erroneous information about Oswald in the CIA cable to Mexico City. After much questioning, she finally admitted, "I’m signing off on something I know isn’t true." One of the interviewers, John Newman, then asked her, "‘Is this indicative of some sort of operational interest in Oswald’s file?’ ‘Yes,’ Roman replied. ‘To me it’s indicative of a keen interest in Oswald held very closely on the need-to-know basis.’" She later repeated, "I would think there was definitely some operational reason to withhold it [the information at CIA headquarters on Oswald], if it was not sheer administrative error, when you see all the people who signed off on it."


12


Other CIA officers withheld important information from the FBI in January 2000, with respect to Khalid al-Mihdar, who would later be identified as one of the al-Qaeda hijackers on September 11, 2001. The NSA overheard on a Yemeni telephone about a meeting in Malaysia which al-Mihdar would attend, along with Tewfiq bin Attash, the mastermind of the fatal attack on the USS Cole.


13 It notified the CIA but not the FBI. In consequence


[Khalid al-Mihdar’s] Saudi passport – which contained a visa for travel to the United States – was photocopied [in Qatar] and forwarded to CIA headquarters. The information was not shared with FBI headquarters until August 2001. An FBI agent detailed to the Bin Ladin unit at the CIA attempted to share this information with colleagues at FBI Headquarters. A CIA desk officer instructed him not to send the cable with this information. Several hours later, this same desk officer drafted a cable distributed solely within CIA alleging that the visa documents had been shared with the FBI.


14


Lawrence Wright, reviewing this and other significant anomalies, reported in


The Looming Tower the belief among FBI agents following bin Laden "that the agency was protecting Mihdar and [his companion, the alleged 9/11 hijacker Nawaz al-] Hazmi because it hoped to recruit them," or alternatively that "the CIA was running a joint venture with Saudi intelligence" using al-Mihdhar and al-Hazmi.15 Wright himself speculated in a companion essay he wrote for The New Yorker that "The CIA may also have been protecting an overseas operation and was afraid that the F.B.I. would expose it."16

 



The Consequences of the CIA’s Withholding of Evidence

As just noted, the CIA, in its teletype to the FBI of October 10, 1963, withheld the information that Oswald had reportedly met with a KGB officer, Valeriy Kostikov. Former FBI Director Clarence Kelley in his memoir later complained that this failure to inform the FBI was the major reason why Oswald was not put under surveillance on November 22, 1963.


17 In other words, the withholding enabled Oswald to play whatever role he played on that fateful day, even if it was only to become a designated patsy.

FBI officials are even more bitter about the consequences of the withholding of information about al-Mihdar:



They didn’t want the bureau meddling in their business – that’s why they didn’t tell the FBI….They purposely hid from the FBI, purposely refused to tell the bureau that they were following a man in Malaysia who had a visa to come to America….And that’s why September 11 happened. That is why it happened….They have blood on their hands. They have three thousand deaths on their hands.


18


But the CIA withheld information from the FBI about bin Attash (already the subject of a criminal investigation) as well, even when asked by an FBI agent, Ali Soufan, about bin Attash and the Malaysia meeting. According to Wright,


The agency did not respond to his clearly stated request. The fact that the CIA withheld information about the mastermind of the


Cole bombing and the meeting in Malaysia, when directly asked by the FBI, amounted to obstruction of justice in the death of the seventeen American sailors."19


In late August 2001, only days before 9/11, FBI agent Steve Bongardt, complaining about the CIA’s withholding of information about al-Mihdar, correctly predicted in an angry email to the CIA’s bin Laden unit that "someday someone will die."


20

 




The CIA’s Dishonest Efforts to Cover-Up



From the moment Congress, in the 1970s, began to evince an interest in the Kennedy assassination, former CIA officer David Phillips became a vigorous defender of the CIA’s performance. With respect to false information about Oswald in CIA cables both to and from Mexico City (where Phillips was in charge of Cuban affairs for the CIA station), Phillips’s first response was to dismiss Oswald as "a blip" of no interest.


21


A similar defense of the CIA’s failure to act on al-Mihdar was offered to the Congressional Joint Inquiry into 9/11 by the Director of the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center, Cofer Black: "I think that month we watchlisted about 150 people."


22 The same defense was offered by Dale Watson, the FBI’s former counterterrorism chief:


There were a lot of red flags prior to 9/11….So it’s a mass of information and it’s a sea of threats, and it’s like working against a maze. If you know where the end point of a maze is, it’s certainly easier to work your way back to the starting point than trying to go through the maze and sort out all the red flags.


23


The problem with this excuse is that both Oswald and al-Mihdar were singled out for special CIA attention, not left floating in a sea of red flags. The cable to Mexico City which Jane Roman signed off on was not handled routinely, it was sent for signature to the CIA’s Assistant Deputy Director for Plans, Thomas Karamessines. And in the case of al-Mihdar in Malaysia, back in 2000


CIA leaders were so convinced about the potential significance of the al Qaeda meeting in Malaysia, they not only set up surveillance of it, but provided regular updates to the FBI director [Louis Freeh], the head of the CIA [George Tenet], and the national security advisor [Samuel Berger].


24


That Freeh and Berger were being notified at the top about the Malaysia meeting (at the same time that the regular FBI bureaucracy was being cut out) is confirmed in accounts by Terry McDermott and Philip Shenon.


25


CIA officials testified falsely to congressional committees with respect to both Oswald and al-Mihdar. James Angleton was asked by the staff of the House Select Committee on Assassinations about a memoir written by the CIA’s station chief in Mexico City, Win Scott, and later personally retrieved for the Agency after Scott’s death by Angleton himself. Angleton testified that Scott’s "manuscript was fictional and did not include a chapter on Oswald." In fact, according to Jefferson Morley, "The only surviving manuscript is clearly nonfictional and does have a chapter on Oswald."


26


Both George Tenet and Cofer Black testified before the Congressional Joint Inquiry into 9/11 that the FBI


had been granted access to the information linking al-Mihdar and Tewfiq bin Attash (alias Khallad), the mastermind of the Cole bombing. The 9/11 Commission, after a lengthy review of the matter, concluded "this was not the case."27

 



The CIA, Oswald, and Al-Mihdar: Suppression of Vital Records

That the CIA regards its relationship to the suspects Oswald and al-Mihdar as sensitive is further illustrated by its suppression of vital evidence with respect to both. Although in the 1990s all government agencies were required by law to submit their Oswald-related documents to the Assassination Records Review Board, the CIA has been vigorously resisting pressure to do this in the case of former CIA officer George Joannides. In 1963 Joannides was the case officer for AMSPELL, the CIA’s operation in support of the Cuban exile group DRE (Directorio Revolucionario Estudiantil). In August 1963 the DRE was in contact with Oswald and participated with him in a radio broadcast which was later distributed with CIA help throughout Latin America.


28


According to Jefferson Morley, "four decades after the fact, the most important AMSPELL records are missing from CIA archives – perhaps intentionally." Monthly reports on DRE activities were filed by CIA case officers Ross Crozier and William Kent, and these records were declassified by the ARRB for the periods September 1960-November 1962 and after May 1964.


But the board was unable to locate any monthly AMSPELL reports from December 1962 to April 1964. There was a seventeen-month gap in the AMSPELL records, which coincided exactly with the period in which George Joannides handled the group.


29


With respect to 9/11, all that is known about suppression so far has to do with the public record. Here it is striking that the Report of the Joint Inquiry by Congress into 9/11 has one glaring redaction of twenty-eight pages, dealing with "sources of foreign support for some of the September 11


th hijackers while they were in the United States." Press reports have specified that this refers to Saudi money which reached al-Mihdar and al-Hazmi in 2000 while they were in San Diego. According to committee cochair Senator Bob Graham,


The draft contained a twenty-eight page passage that detailed evidence that Saudis in the United States – Saudi government "spies," Graham called them – had provided financial and logistical support to [al-Mihdar and al-Hazmi] while they lived in Southern California.


30


Similarly the 9/11 Commission failed to deal with the information on an FBI "hijacker timeline" that al-Mihdar and al-Hazmi were met at the airport on their first arrival in the United States by Omar al-Bayoumi, the transmitter of the Saudi funds, whom Graham claimed was obviously "a low-ranking Saudi intelligence agent."


31 The FBI findings were leaked in an early story in Newsweek:


At the airport, they were swept up by a gregarious fellow Saudi, Omar al-Bayoumi, who had been living in the United States for several years. Al-Bayoumi drove the two men to San Diego, threw a welcoming party and arranged for the visitors to get an apartment next to his. He guaranteed the lease, and plunked down $1,550 in cash to cover the first two months' rent.


32


One month later, "In January 2003, Graham and the other members of the committee were …the focus of a criminal investigation by the FBI into whether someone on the panel had leaked classified information."


33


The 9/11 Commission avoided this sensitive area. It cited the FBI Chronology a total of 52 times in its footnotes, for example at 493n55, concerning al-Mihdar’s travel from Yemen to the Malaysian meeting. But it suppressed the FBI’s report that al-Bayoumi met al-Mihdar and al-Hazmi on their arrival; and it substituted what Shenon calls an "improbable tale" supplied by al-Bayoumi himself: namely, that he had run into the two men two weeks later by accident "at a halal food restaurant" near Los Angeles.


34


It is clear that two members of the 9/11 Commission staff who redacted this part of the report – Dietrich Snell and Philip Zelikow – were concerned to tone down what junior staffers considered to be "explosive material" on the Saudis.


35 Shenon tells how this section of the 9/11 report was rewritten by Snell and Zelikow, until the text "removed all of the most serious allegations against the Saudis."36


But Snell and Zelikow may have been protecting the CIA as well as the Saudis. We have already noted how Lawrence Wright, looking at the extraordinary CIA record on withholding information about al-Mihdar and al-Hazmi, concluded, "It is also possible, as some FBI investigators suspect, the CIA was running a joint venture with Saudi intelligence."


37

 



Conclusion

It is clear, as everyone who has studied these matters closely and impartially concurs, that there have been cover-ups of the CIA’s relationships to first Oswald and later al-Mihdar – cover-ups which in both cases have not yet been adequately resolved.


A reasonable conclusion from the available evidence is that the cover-ups were in order to conceal prior CIA operational interest in the designated subjects, just as in the case of Ali Mohamed in the early 1990s. It could of course be a coincidence that people of operational interest to the CIA became designated subjects in the deep events of JFK and 9/11. Another, more disturbing possibility is that those responsible for these events knew of the CIA’s operational interest, and exploited it in such a way as to ensure that the government would be embarrassed into covering up what really happened on those days.


A lot of books about 9/11, including my own, have focused on the roles played by Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld on that day. But it is clear that 9/11 involved a USG connection to at least one figure (Ali Mohamed) so sensitive that it had been covered up from the time of the Nosair murder in 1990 and the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993. It is probable that Oswald’s covert USG connections also dated back to the time of his strange release from the U.S. Marine Corps in 1959, enabling him to travel to the Soviet Union.


38


In short there is a substratum of covert operations underlying both events that antedates the presidencies in which they occurred. Thus one should not expect the cover-up of 9/11 in the G.W. Bush administration to dissipate simply because the Democrats take over the White House, just as the Johnson administration’s cover-up of the Kennedy assassination did not dissipate with the election of Richard Nixon.


39


This is said not out of despair, but out of belief in the ultimate resilience and good sense of the American people. The analysis in this book is that America’s involvement in two disastrous wars – first Vietnam and later Iraq – was not an outcome of the people’s will, but rather in large part because of deep events that were used to manipulate that will. Thus this analysis is not an attack on America, but on that manipulative mindset that has twice succeeded in maneuvering America into war.


This dominant mindset is not restricted to intelligence agencies, though it is largely rooted there. Over time it has spread into other parts of government, and has also corrupted large sections of the media and even universities. That the mindset is widespread does not however make it either omnipotent or invincible.


It is important to identify the dominant mindset clearly, if we are ever going to displace it. It is important also to recognize that the dark topics discussed in this book are not representative of America as a whole. In the half century since the CIA’s first adventures in Burma and Laos, America has continued to be, as in the two centuries before it, a source of life-enhancing innovations, such as the computer and the internet.


As Amy Chua has written in her book


Day of Empire,


If America can rediscover the path that has been the secret to its success since its founding and avoid the temptations of empire building, it could remain the world’s hyperpower in the decades to come – not a hyperpower of coercion and military force, but a hyperpower of opportunity, dynamism, and moral force.


40


I have tried to suggest in this book that the key to this rediscovery is the


identification and displacement of the manipulative forces that have maneuvered America, almost unsuspectingly, into two unnecessary and disastrous wars.


If there is any merit to my analysis, then, to isolate those forces, we must press for the truth about both the Kennedy assassination and 9/11.




NOTES




1


Transcript of Dallas Police Channel Two, 12:44 PM; cf. Channel One 12:45 PM,

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/dpdtapes/; Warren Report 5, 17 Warren Commission Hearings 397, 23 Warren Commission Hearings 916.



2


Clarke, Against All Enemies, 13-14. The list of 19 names, accepted without question by the 9/11 Commission Report, was given by the FBI to the press on September 14, 2001 (Daily Telegraph, September 15, 2001,


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/15/whunt15.xml).


3


Transcript of Dallas Police Channel Two, 12:44 PM; cf. Channel One 12:45 PM,

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/dpdtapes/; Warren Report 5, 17 Warren Commission Hearings 397.



4


E.g. Dallas FBI Report from John Fain, May 12, 1960, 17 Warren Commission Hearings 704, NARA #157-10006-10213 ("Height: 5’10" Weight: 165 lbs." [inaccurate description supplied by Marguerite Oswald]); CIA HQ Cable DIR 74830 to Mexico City, 10 Oct 1963, NARA #104-10015-10048, reproduced in John Newman, Oswald and the CIA (New York: Carroll & Graf, 1995), 512 ("five feet ten inches, one hundred sixty five pounds").


5


Fingerprint card dated "11-25-63," 17 Warren Commission Hearings 308.


6


Warren Report 5, 144; Sylvia Meagher, Accessories After the Fact (Mary Ferrell Foundation Press, 2006), 10-13, 78n. After seeing Oswald twice on television, Brennan picked out Oswald in a second lineup (Warren Report, 143).


7


Daily Telegraph, September 23, 2001,

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/23/widen23.xml.


Cf.



Guardian, September 21 2001,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/sep/21/afghanistan.september112 :" Abdulaziz


Al-Omari has also come forward to say he was not on the flight from Boston that crashed into the north tower of the World Trade Centre. An electrical engineer who works in Saudi Arabia, Mr Al-Omari said he was a student in Denver during the mid-1990s, and that his passport and other papers were stolen in a burglary in the US five years ago. … `The name is my name and the birth date is the same as mine,’ he told Asharq al-Aswat, a London-based Arabic newspaper. `But I am not the one who bombed the World Trade Centre in New York.’"



8


Daily Telegraph, September 23, 2001,


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/23/widen23.xml.


9


On October 4, 2001, the FBI issued a press release showing what appeared to be photos from surveillance videotape of two hijackers, Mohammed Atta and Abdulaziz Al-Omari, entering Portland Jetport on the morning of September 11, 2001 (FBI Press Release, October 4, 2001,

http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel01/100401picts.htm ). If valid, these would constitute evidence from the event itself. However the photos are anomalous, in that they show two time superimposed stamps, one showing 5:45, the other showing 5:53. The photos are not cited as evidence in the 9/11 Commission Report. On July 22, 2004, the date of the release of the 9/11 Commission Report, CNN aired what they said was surveillance videotape of two hijackers, Majed Moqed and Khalid al-Mihdar. entering "at one of the security screening points at Dulles International" (CNN, http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0407/22/lad.04.html ). The authenticity of the videotape has been challenged, however, because it lacks the time and date and location identification normally burned into a surveillance video image (Rowland Morgan and Ian Henshall,



9/11 Revealed: The Unanswered Questions [New York: Carroll and Graf, 2005], 117-19).


10


I have argued that the conflicting messages were part of a so-called "marked card" or "barium meal" test to determine if and where leaks of sensitive information were occurring. This was a familiar technique, and was the responsibility of the CI/SIG or Counterintelligence Special Intelligence Group which drafted the two cables. See Peter Dale Scott, Deep Politics II: The New Revelations in U.S. Government Files,1994-1999 (Ipswich, MA: Mary Ferrell Foundation Press, 2007), 17-18, 92; also Peter Dale Scott, "Oswald and the Hunt for Popov's Mole," The Fourth Decade, III, 3 (March 1996), 3;


www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId=519798.


11


Peter Dale Scott, Deep Politics II, 30-33.


12


Jefferson Morley, Our Man in Mexico: Winston Scott and the Hidden History of the CIA (Lawrence, KA: University Press of Kansas, 2008), 196-98. See Peter Dale Scott, Deep Politics II, 30-33.


13


Lawrence Wright, The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11 (New York: Knopf, 2006), 310.


14


9/11 Commission Report, 502n44.


15


Wright, The Looming Tower, 312, 313.


16


Lawrence Wright, "The Agent," New Yorker, July 10 and 17, 2006, 68.


17


Clarence M. Kelley, Kelley: The Story of an FBI Director (Kansas City: Andrews, McMeel, & Parker, 1987), 268.


18


James Bamford, A Pretext for War: 9/11, Iraq, and the Abuse of America’s Intelligence Agencies (New York: Doubleday, 2004), 224.


19


Wright, The Looming Tower, 329. In his New Yorker story (p. 70), Wright wrote that "By withholding the picture of Khallad [bin Attash]…the C.I.A. may in effect have allowed the September 11th plot to proceed."


20


9/11 Commission Report, 271; Wright, The Looming Tower, 353-54.


21


David Atlee Phillips, Nightwatch, 139; quoted in Morley, Our Man in Mexico, 184. Morley observes that in the 1970s Phillips offered a total of "four not entirely consistent versions of the story of Oswald’s visit to Mexico City."


22


J. Cofer Black testimony before 9/11 Congressional Joint Inquiry, 107th Cong., 2nd Sess., July 24, 2003.


23


Dale Watson testimony before Joint Inquiry, 107th Cong., 2nd Sess., September 26, 2002.


24


Amy B. Zegart, Flying Blind: The CIA, the FBI, and the Origins of 9/11(Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 2007), 117.


25


Terry McDermott, Perfect Soldiers: The Hijackers: Who They Were, Why TheyDid It (New York: HarperCollins, 20050, 294n45; Philip Shenon, The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation (New York: Twelve/Hachette, 2008), 141.


26


Morley, Our Man in Mexico, 7, 294.


27


9/11 Commission Report, 267.


28


Peter Dale Scott, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998), 81-86; Morley, Our Man in Mexico, 170-77.


29


Morley, Our Man in Mexico, 177.


30


Shenon, The Commission, 50-51.


31


Larisa Alexandrovna, "FBI documents contradict 9/11 Commission report," RawStory, February 28, 2008, http://rawstory.com/news/2008/FBI_documents_contradict_Sept._11_Commission_0228.html (met at the airport); Shenon, The Commission, 52 (al-Bayoumi). Al-Bayoumi "apparently did work for Dallah Avco, an aviation-services company with extensive contracts with the Saudi Ministry of Defense and Aviation, headed by Prince Sultan, the father of the Saudi ambassador to the United States, Prince Bandar" ("The Saudi Money Trail," Newsweek, December 2, 2002, http://www.newsweek.com/id/66665).


32


"The Saudi Money Trail," Newsweek, December 2, 2002. The FBI "hijacker timeline" was released by the FBI on February 4, 2008. See Larisa Alexandrovna, "FBI documents contradict 9/11 Commission report, Rawstory.com, February 28, 2008,

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/FBI_documents_contradict_Sept._11_Commission_0228.html.



33


Shenon, The Commission, 54.


34


9/11 Commission Report, 217; Shenon, The Commission, 52-53.


35


Shenon, The Commission, 398.


36


Shenon, The Commission, 398.


37


Wright, The Looming Tower, 313. Looking at the same evidence, Christopher Ketcham has raised an alternative possibility, that "the CIA may have subcontracted to Mossad, given that the agency was both prohibited by law from conducting intelligence operations on U.S. soil, and lacked a pool of competent Arabic-fluent field officers. In such a scenario, the CIA would either have worked actively with the Israelis or quietly abetted an independent operation on U.S. soil…. When in the spring of 2002 the scenario of CIA's domestic subcontracting to foreign intelligence

was posed to the veteran CIA/NSA intelligence operative, with whom I spoke extensively, the operative didn't reject it out of hand" (Christopher Ketcham, "Cheering Movers and Art Student Spies: What Did Israel Know in Advance of the 9/11 Attacks?" CounterPunch, February 7, 2007,


http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=73&contentid=4253&page=2 ).



38


Oswald requested a dependency discharge from the Marines in August 1959, "on the ground that his mother needed his support" (Warren Report, 688). Accordingly Marine Lt. A.G. Ayers, Jr. signed a document for Oswald’s release to inactive duty on September 11, 1959 (19 WH 679, cf. 17 WH 762) "by reason of hardship (19 WH 678). However Lt. Ayers should have known that Oswald had no intention of staying in Texas to support his mother; he had already, on September 4, 1959, signed an affidavit in support of Oswald’s passport application "to attend the College of A. Schweitzer, Chur, Switzerland and the Univ of Turku, Turku, Finland" (22 WH 77-79). (It is a sign of some covert intrigue that the language of instruction at the University of Turku was Finnish, a language Oswald did not know.)


39


A significant symptom of this enduring substratum has been the Bush Administration’s protection of Samuel Berger, Clinton’s national security advisor. Berger pleaded guilty in April 2005 to having stolen 9/11 documents from the National Archives (Shenon, The Commission, 414). A condition of his plea bargain was to submit to a Justice Department polygraph test, to determine what documents had been stolen. Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, a long-time critic of CIA operations in Afghanistan, revealed to the House in February 2008 that he had written to the Bush Justice Department, demanding that it administer the polygraph test, and that the Justice Department had rejected his demand (Congressional Record, February 26, 2008, House, pp. H1065-H1072). We have already seen that Berger when in office was receiving regular reports from the CIA about the presence of al-Mihdar and al-Hamzi at the Kuala Lumpur meeting (Zegart, Flying Blind, 117). It is possible that these were the reports he was stealing from the Archives, and that the Justice Department refusal to administer the polygraph test is part of a cover-up to protect the CIA’s relationship to the two Saudis.


40


Amy Chua, Day of Empire: How Hyperpowers Rise to Global Dominance – and Why They Fall (New York: Doubleday, 2007), 342.

 



Peter Dale Scott, a former Canadian diplomat and professor at the University of California, Berkeley, is the author of the forthcoming The War Conspiracy: JFK, 9/11, and the Deep Politics of War, due in August 2008. This previously unpublished essay is the concluding section of the new book, which can be ordered from the Mary Ferrell Foundation Press by clicking here at http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/MFF_Store. His website is http://www.peterdalescott.net.


 


 


*&* addendum:


9/11, Deep State Violence and the Hope of Internet Politics

The Deep State and 9/11


by Prof. Peter Dale ScottGlobal Research, June 11, 2008

The unthinkable – that elements inside the state would conspire with criminals to kill innocent civilians – has become not only thinkable but commonplace in the last century. A seminal example was in French Algeria, where dissident elements of the French armed forces, resisting General de Gaulle’s plans for Algerian independence, organized as the Secret Army Organization and bombed civilians indiscriminately, with targets including hospitals and schools.1 Critics like Alexander Litvinenko, who was subsequently murdered in London in November 2006, have charged that the 1999 bombings of apartment buildings around Moscow, attributed to Chechen separatists, were in fact the work of the Russian secret service (FSB).2


Similar attacks in Turkey have given rise to the notion there of an extra-legal "deep state" – a combination of forces, ranging from former members of the CIA-organized Gladio organization, to "a vast matrix of security and intelligence officials, ultranationalist members of the Turkish underworld and renegade former members of the [Kurdish separatist] PKK."3 The deep state, financed in part by Turkey’s substantial heroin traffic, has been accused of killing thousands of civilians, in incidents such as the lethal bomb attack in November 2005 on a bookshop in Semdinli. This attack, initially attributed to the Kurdish separatist PKK, turned out to have been committed by members of Turkey's paramilitary police intelligence service, together with a former PKK member turned informer.4 On April 23, 2008, the former Interior Minister Mehmet Agar was ordered to stand trial for his role in this dirty war during the 1990s.5

In my book The Road to 9/11, I have argued that there has existed, at least since World War Two if not earlier, an analogous American deep state, also combining intelligence officials with elements from the drug-trafficking underworld.6 I also pointed to recent decades of collaboration between the U.S. deep state and al-Qaeda, a terrorist underworld whose drug-trafficking activities have been played down in the 9/11 Commission Report and the mainstream U.S. media.7


Still to be explained is the suppressed anomalous fact that al-Qaeda’s top trainer on airplane hijackings, Ali Mohamed, was simultaneously a double-agent reporting to the FBI, and almost certainly still maintained a connection to the CIA which had used him as an agent and helped bring him to this country in the 1980s.8 It is not disputed that Ali Mohamed organized the Embassy bombing in Kenya; and that he did so after the RCMP, who had detained him in Vancouver in the presence of another known terrorist, released Mohamed on instructions from the FBI.9


From this historic background of collaboration, I would offer a hypothesis for further investigation: that the American deep state is somehow implicated with al-Qaeda in the atrocity of 9/11; and that this helps explain the conspicuous involvement of the CIA and other U.S. agencies in the ensuing cover-up.


Sibel Edmonds, the Turkish-American who was formerly an FBI translator, has publicly linked both al-Qaeda and American officials to the Turkish heroin trafficking that underlies the Turkish deep state. Although she has been prevented from speaking directly by an extraordinary court order,10 her allegations have been summarized by Daniel Ellsberg:



In response to my article on currency controls and QE feuding in many countries (See South Korea, Hong Kong, Brazil, China, Volcker Complain about Bernanke's QE Policy), reader Robert has some personal observation on happenings in Poland.

Robert writes ...

Hi Mish,

I'm a long time reader of your blog - congratulations on doing such a good work for so long!

I've just read your recent post on international reactions to QE2 and the threat of worldwide capital controls. I have something to add here from my country.

In Poland, there has been a bubble in real estate since 2006-2007 that never really popped. Condo prices in downtown Warsaw (capital of Poland) are comparable to prices in Berlin and Vienna, and of course incomes and standard of living are way way lower.

Real estate prices have fallen 10-15% from the peak alright, but incidentally our currency has recently strengthened, so the net result from the international perspective is nearly zero. Real estate prices has been fueled, as is typical for the whole region of central-eastern Europe and Baltic States, by cheap capital denominated in CHF (Swiss Francs) and EUR (earlier in the decade USD), coordinated mainly by Austrian and Italian banks and originating in Switzerland and ECB.

With this situation, there is a growing pressure, at least a year running, from our central bank and partly from the finance ministry to curb the inflow of cheap money and seemingly - although it is never openly admitted - to try and prick the real estate bubble, the bubble that has indeed reached a ridiculous size and is pushing more and more families into debt servitude.

There has been a series of banking regulations ("recommendations") issued by Komisja Nadzoru Finansowego (Commision of Financial Supervision) that targets inflows of cheap money. The curbing is effected mainly by reining in the mortgage market, that has been - again, as is typical for the whole region - the main venue of external capital inflow. Recently there have been two important regulations issued on that matter. Recommendation SII(effective January 2011) mandates that banks should have no more than 50% mortgage portfolios denominated in foreign currencies and effectively mandates (at least for the not very wealthy customers) that mortgages be issued for no more than 25 years. Recommendation T (effective September 2010) mandates that LTV for forex mortgages should never exceed 80% and that banks must consider harsh changes in the interbank market rates when qualifying customers for such loans.

It has been also recently discussed that possibly somewhere in 2011 a regulation will be passed that completely cuts people off from foreign currency mortgages unless they actually have assets (other than real estate itself) that can balance the Forex risk or Forex earnings.

Such regulation would effectively almost totally cut off cheap external mortgage financing.

There has also recently been a change in language of Polish banking regulators. It is now quite openly said that the practice of selling very long term, adjustable rate mortgages denominated in foreign currency should be literally "brutally and completely curbed" (words of the chairman of NBP, our central bank).

This is a process that is slowly but regularly unfolding and will surely take some more time; cheap EUR mortgages are still widely available and will be at least until the end of 2010. But it seems that the process of curbing capital inflows is gaining pace rapidly in Poland and it should bear very concrete fruits in 2011 and 2012,
especially taking into account recent acceleration in Fed lunacy that could (and I expect it will) spur counter reactions in my country analogous to what is happening in Korea or Brazil. There are no reactions as of yet, but I expect them soon.

It should perhaps be added that Polish banking regulator bodies and central bank are quite independent from the government and it seems that this independence is factual, not merely statutory; there have been many episodes in the last decade that NBP was in harsh conflict with the govt.

greets,

Robert
Poland Stats: 62% of Mortgages, 23.9% of Corporate Loans made in Foreign Currencies

In a followup question I asked Robert what percentage of mortgages in Poland were in foreign currencies. Here is Robert's response ...
Hello Mish

This is straight from the central bank's data: 158203.4 M PLN foreign currency (56.64 billion USD, 62.03% total), 96837.7 M PLN domestic currency (34.67 billion USD, 37.97% total). All USD values calculated according to current Forex ask rate.

That was household mortgages. On the other hand, statistics of corporate credit show the exactly opposite behavior: 157110.5 M PLN domestic currency (56.25 billion USD, 76.1% total), 49335.7 M PLN foreign currency (17.66 billion USD, 23.9% total).

Forex corporate credit is quite steadily declining (in nominal terms) since february 2009, as well as domestic currency corporate credit. What is perhaps more alarming (especially that real estate prices are slowly but steadily declining) is that household mortgage credit is relentlessly growing as if no financial crisis occurred at all and the good times roll; domestic currency mortgages are up 29.3% nominally yoy, foreign currency mortgages up 12.3%.

The recent deceleration in growth of Forex household mortgages and acceleration in domestic currency mortgages is attributable entirely to a special government financial program ("Rodzina na Swoim", "Family on its own") that lets you get a domestic currency mortgage with extra payment from government that amounts to 0.25-0.5 of interest paid, so effectively the interest on such mortgages for the final customer is 0.5-0.75 of "normal" market rate; that might finally amount to 2.7-4% - such rates are comparable to what one can get for forex mortgages (in spite of rates in Poland being in theory a healthy 2.5-3.5 percentage points above Switzerland, ECB or USA), so it is understandable that there is a lot of demand for domestic currency mortgages currently.

What should be stressed is that this special payment program is phased out in 2011 (our government has recently a very hard time explaining to the public opinion and independent economists why the deficit and debt grows so quickly; there are indeed many austerity pressures); as of January 2011 it will be offered only to people buying new development real estate and some time in 2011 H2 (don't remember exactly when) the program expires entirely.

It is widely and correctly expected that if this happens and the supply of foreign currency credit is not curbed, people will again widely take on mainly EUR, and to a lesser amount CHF and USD denominated mortgages. This scenario is apparently explicitly targeted by the banking regulators, as I wrote in the earlier mail.

It should be added that nearly all mortgages in Poland are ARMs with interest invariably calculated as WIBOR (polish interbank market rate)+margin or LIBOR/EURIBOR+margin. The margin typically is, depending on LTV and customer's creditworthiness (which actually IS checked quite thoroughly), 1.1-2 percentage points for PLN and EUR mortgages and 2-3.5 percentage points for CHF and USD mortgages.

3-month WIBOR (interbank rate for PLN deposits) is currently at 3.85%, the yield curve is normal and not very steep (both for interbank rates and govt bonds). Polish central bank, as most central banks do currently, targets short term rates which is understandable from their viewpoint as it allows almost full control over both commercial credit and mortgage rates - as I said earlier, almost all mortgages are ARMs indexed to short-term interbank rates. Interest rate swaps for foreign currencies are nearly unavailable to "mere mortals" in Poland and domestic currency IRSes are simply non-existent (no demand I guess, everyone is happy with plain ARMs).

Wow, I just described like a half of Polish financial market. Cheers,

Robert
Thanks Robert! I always appreciate emails like yours so readers in the US can find out what is really happening in Europe.

Mortgages denominated in foreign currencies are a disaster waiting to happen, not only for the debtors but to the banks that made the loans.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List



alpine payment systems scam

<b>News</b> - Tixdaq

Foo Fighters have been confirmed to headline the final night at Isle Of Wight festival 2011.

Google <b>News</b> experiments with metatags for publishers to give <b>...</b>

One of the biggest challenges Google News faces is one that seems navel-gazingly philosophical, but is in fact completely practical: how to determine authorship. In the glut of information on the web, much of it is, if not completely ...

New Yorker&#39;s Music Critic Moves to <b>News</b> Corp.&#39;s Daily - NYTimes.com

Sasha Frere-Jones, a music critic at The New Yorker, will become the culture editor of The Daily, News Corporation's so-called iPad newspaper which is currently in development.



Bankrate predicts what's on the personal financial horizon for 2008 by QuizzleTown


<b>News</b> - Tixdaq

Foo Fighters have been confirmed to headline the final night at Isle Of Wight festival 2011.

Google <b>News</b> experiments with metatags for publishers to give <b>...</b>

One of the biggest challenges Google News faces is one that seems navel-gazingly philosophical, but is in fact completely practical: how to determine authorship. In the glut of information on the web, much of it is, if not completely ...

New Yorker&#39;s Music Critic Moves to <b>News</b> Corp.&#39;s Daily - NYTimes.com

Sasha Frere-Jones, a music critic at The New Yorker, will become the culture editor of The Daily, News Corporation's so-called iPad newspaper which is currently in development.


alpine payment systems scam

<b>News</b> - Tixdaq

Foo Fighters have been confirmed to headline the final night at Isle Of Wight festival 2011.

Google <b>News</b> experiments with metatags for publishers to give <b>...</b>

One of the biggest challenges Google News faces is one that seems navel-gazingly philosophical, but is in fact completely practical: how to determine authorship. In the glut of information on the web, much of it is, if not completely ...

New Yorker&#39;s Music Critic Moves to <b>News</b> Corp.&#39;s Daily - NYTimes.com

Sasha Frere-Jones, a music critic at The New Yorker, will become the culture editor of The Daily, News Corporation's so-called iPad newspaper which is currently in development.


foreclosure help


BR: That is not remotely what is going on with MERS. There is no parallel between the sharing of an asset between family members, and a fraudulent scheme designed to rip off filing fees from local towns, hide ownership of loans, and deceive the public thru an extra-legal technique that undermines 100s of years of property law.


It may only be Tuesday, but we have a winner for the dumbest comment of the week.








  • zell Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 4:37 pm

    FIFO: Felonies in; felonies out. The R.E. bubble was fostered by widespread deceit that has been ignored. It’s no surprise to see the same on the flip side.








  • Niskyboy Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 4:51 pm

    Hilarious.








  • Lugnut Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:03 pm

    Barry,


    You’ve hit upon a key topic that I took notice (at least with this particular issue) from day 1, and its one that drives me nuckin futz. Namely the absolute reluctance, if not outright refusal of the mainstream print and television media to characterize or hint that this situation is anything other than a mere ‘mistake’ that will cleaned up with some 409 and a paper towel, and we’ll all move happily on from there. That fact that its a persistant story, and not some one night mention little blurb, makes it all the more obvious and disquieting.


    What is it? Is it because they hadn’t done enough primary investigative journalism to feel comfortable in classifying it as fraud? Do they just not understand the nuances of the laws, paperwork, and complex relationships enough to not want to make an error in judgement in branding it fraud? Do the senior editors say “Lets wait till the Justice Department indicts them so we don’t have to make that judgement ourselves”? Or are there merely in the tank for the firms that devote a good chunk of their advertising dollars to their particular news organization, and/or are frequent guests?


    Whatever it is, I think it comes down to a total lack of balls, ethics, and conviction of purpose. They all guilty of it. Repeatedly. And quite franky it makes me sick. Its a Rorschach test for their continued Darwinistic self destruction of credibility.








  • Tarkus Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:14 pm

    Yes – everyone notices how the discussion of fraud when applied to financial companies is always handled with kiddie-glove euphemisms.


    It’s tiring, and the more they do it, the more you notice it.


    Fraud is rewitten using “mistakes”, “errors”, “oversights”, “incompetence” (until it is pay/bonus time), “didn’t see it coming”, etc, etc.


    WSJ and the rest are cowering, not reporting.








  • Andy T Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:33 pm

    Curmudgeon–


    You seem to have some knowledge on these type of matters and have an opinion that dissents from the “mob.”


    Thanks for the commentary on these matters.


    It’s a refreshing change of pace from almost every other comment I see here at TBP.








  • yoganmahew Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:37 pm

    That would be a syntactical error. If they had spelled it wrong, it would be a grammar error…








  • obsvr-1 Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 7:56 pm

    @ndy T Says (and Curmudgeon):


    Curmudgeon–


    You seem to have some knowledge on these type of matters and have an opinion that dissents from the “mob.”


    Thanks for the commentary on these matters.


    It’s a refreshing change of pace from almost every other comment I see here at TBP.


    —- Reply


    go watch the entire Senate Committee Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs hearing today on “Mortgage Services and Forclosure Processes”


    http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/296595-1


    The problem is much bigger that a technical issue of paperwork or process — amongst the criminal activities are fraud and unethical behavior throughout the servicer and banking industry which is magnifying the problem. Fraudclosure is just light that is illuminating a problem that is large enough for the Cong. Oversight Panel (COP) and the Senate Committee to call on the Financial Stability Oversight Committee to investigate systemic risk concerns.


    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/dodd-robo-signing-the-tip-of-the-iceberg-2010-11-16?dist=afterbell

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/watchdog-calls-for-second-round-of-stress-tests-2010-11-16?dist=afterbell


    And no, people who owe on their mortgage owe on their mortgage — arguing whether someone should get a free house because of a procedural problem is not the center of the issue (they shouldn’t). Questioning why nobody is going to jail for breaking, ignoring or circumventing the laws which is creating systemic risk (AGAIN) is a valid. The banks are in deep do-do and bail-outs are not on the menu this time around … a test of the FinReg resolution clauses may be in the near future.








  • RW Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:11 pm

    @Curmudgeon


    “…whether a third-party’s (the borrower) agreement to abide by assignments outside of the public records is enforceable against the borrower through a designated agent for doing so (Mers).”


    Seems reasonable but it appears that the structure and function of MERS itself has become the problem, not so?


    That is, the principle of MERS is not the problem — it does appear to be a legal entity even though it is essentially just a database, a filing cabinet, with no officers or employees — and all parties to the loan agreed to it as a nexus even though agency can clearly not be implemented directly by MERS.


    But then the integrity of MERS as that which establishes connection between buyer and seller(s), a nexus, becomes crucial so if suspicions arise that the filing cabinet is ‘damaged’ or otherwise unreliable — if it is not possible to go into the MERS database and pull up complete, accurate records with confirmable authenticity via accessible originals — then how is valid agency to be recreated?


    If a nexus between lenders (independent of their number or intra-agency agreements) and the third party cannot be established who then has standing to enforce a lien against the third party? It would seem that all agreements essentially become putative.








  • Jim67545 Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:23 pm

    Curmudgeon is entirely correct, based on my decent knowledge in the field. I would focus attention on whether the homeowner is actually delinquent, how far, whether they had tried to work out the situation in some way, whether they were ignored, whether they received due process, etc. Failures by the lenders in these areas should be punished. Otherwise, there is nothing nefarious about MERS, it is not some fraudulent conspiracy and the thought that it is a conspiracy to defraud title offices of recording costs is equally laughable. Yes, it no doubt has that intended effect but the task of tracking the recording of interests in mortgages every time they change hands would make the entire system unworkable.


    We have a housing financing market that is nearly totally constipated. Add into the mix a profound uncertainty over the legal standing that a mortgage holder may have and the few who might invest in this asset will run away – as will the 35% of the purchasers who are buying foreclosed properties. That direction leads to the government being the mortgage financier of only resort for as far as we can see. And, we should all know who puts up the $$ to make that happen. And, with foreclosed property sales dropping we would have a serious slowdown in absorption of foreclosed properties and farther price weaknesses (, losses to individuals and lenders, etc.)


    Collapse the current housing finance market and we are all back into 3 or 5 year ARMs. Kiss your 30 year fixed goodbye. That would seriously impact affordability not to mention the entire real estate industry not, need I point out, at the best of times. So, I suggest that most of those above look before they leap. This has to be worked out.








  • Fred C Dobbs Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:46 pm

    Let’s see if I understand what people are arguing about. 1) a bank makes a loan to someone, 2) the borrower secures the borrower promise to repay with a mortgage on the borrower’s residence, 3) the borrower fails or refuses to repay the loan, breaking his promise, 4) lender resorts to the security the borrower gave to secure his loan, that is, the bank initiates foreclosure, 5) borrower finds some defects in the loan or foreclosure paperwork and goes to a lawyer, 6) the lawyer tells the borrower it is cheaper to hire the lawyer to defeat foreclosure than for the borrower to keep his promise to repay, 7) the lawyer tells the court to rule the lender may not foreclose because ___(fill in the reason)_____, 8) the judge rules in favor of the borrower, 9) the lender now has an unsecured loan, for there can be no doubt that the borrower got the money and has not paid it back, (10) the borrower sells his mortgage-free residence, 11) borrower moves to another state taking his money with him, or otherwise makes him or his money unavailable to lender, 12) lender charges off the loan as uncollectible and takes a loss, the amount being equal to the unpaid loan balance plus accrued interest and costs. The bank lent the money in good faith, even though its processors may have made documentary mistakes, and likewise began foreclosure in good faith, even though it may have made documentary mistakes. Lender, in bad faith, fails or refuses to repay loan.


    Now, who thinks the poor, little down-trodden borrower deserves to keep the money, at the same time f___ his fellow members of society? Banks function as financial intermediaries for the benefit of all. Weakening a bank, giving a portion of its net worth to a bad faith borrower, weakens us all. The supply of lendable funds is reduced, and the demand causes the cost to rise.








  • Harry Lime Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:55 pm

    Classic, classic stuff. This reminds me that there is a God. Whether there is Justice or not is still to be determined.








  • DeDude Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 9:12 pm

    Cynic;


    You are not cynical enough. The reason treasuries are up is that somebody is about to sell a lot of treasuries to the Fed. Got to get those prices jammed up so you can sell at a profit.








  • LoveFreedomTruth.com Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 9:31 pm

    This Presidential veto override attempt should fix things


    Veto Override Attempt

    H.R. 3808:

    to require any Federal or State court to recognize any notarization made by a notary public licensed by a State other than the State where the court is located when such notarization occurs in or affects interstate commerce.


    http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=172452


    I suggest everyone follows the market tickers advice. Fast








  • hammerandtong2001 Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 9:49 pm

    ****It doesn’t matter when mortgage assignments and endorsements are recorded because the existence of the pooling and service agreement and purchase sale agreement is proof in itself that the loan was conveyed, said Stephen Ornstein, a partner in the Washington office of SNR Denton, a law firm that represents loan servicers and lenders.


    “If the assignment is missing, you can create it by having the old assignee reassign it to you,” Ornstein said.****


    I’ve heard this argument before, and none of the five experts who advise New York state on trust matters (and virtually all mortgage securitizations use New York trusts) accept that point of view. New York trusts can accept assets only as stipulated in their governing agreement. The pooling and servicing agreement made very specific provisions as to how the notes (the borrower IOUs) were to be endorsed and further required that the process be completed by specific dates, typically no later than 90 days after the trust was closed, with only very limited exceptions. And the trustee, on behalf of the trust, was required to provide multiple certifications that all these steps had been taken.


    Let’s put it another way: the industry position is that the underlying contract, the pooling and servicing agreement, can just be ignored if the industry screws up on a grand enough scale. Would any servicer tolerate this argument if someone, say Treasury, tried to cut their fees? Funny how the “sanctity of contract” argument is nowhere to be found when adherence to contracts might crimp industry profits.


    AND…


    “SIFMA rejects sweeping claims that fundamental flaws regarding the transfer and ownership of mortgage loans are endemic to secondary markets and mortgage securitization, and believes that such concerns are exaggerated and without merit. While each situation may have variations, SIFMA believes that the customary practices utilized in secondary markets to convey ownership of mortgage loans from originators to other parties, and into securitization trusts, are sound and in accordance with generally applicable legal principles.”


    The use of “sweeping claims” implies that the critics have no evidence for their views, when borrower attorneys all over the US report widespread errors. A group of nearly 100 attorneys who work with bankruptcy lawyer Max Gardner have reported that in their collective experience, they have yet to find a single note that was conveyed correctly in accordance with the requirements of the pooling and servicing agreement. Other investigations show widespread problems. As much as SIFMA tries to dismiss the use of the word “endemic”, all they offer is bluster, when the evidence on the ground to the contrary is extensive.


    And you have to love this part: “customary practices…are sound and in accordance with generally applicable legal principles.” This is simple an effort to divert attention from the fact that the contracts that the industry itself devised were often ignored. So a more accurate rendering would be “We did what was convenient instead of what we agreed to do, and if you pretend we didn’t have to satisfy a lot of complicated legal requirements to meet all the objectives of all the parties, we can find a way to justify what we did.”


    It’s all here:


    http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/11/more-mortgage-securitization-industry-propaganda-via-new-york-times-sifma.html


    And I’m the “dumbass”?


    Breaking the law to enforce a contract, no matter the material weight of breach on the offending parties’ side, is still breaking the law.


    There it is.


    .








  • Bill W Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:10 pm

    b_thunder,


    I agree with that sentiment. This could become an opportunity for Obama to reform the system the way it needs to be reformed. By letting the stupid and the greedy reap what they’ve sowed.


    The political opportunity for him is to steal some of the T-Party’s anti-establishment thunder.








  • The Curmudgeon Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:29 pm

    @hammerandtong2001:


    Mortgage assignments between mortgagees, whether or not they are recorded in the public records, are enforceable as between each other, according to whatever contract they have entered regarding the assignments.


    When borrowers signed the mortgages with the Mers as the nominee, they explicitly agreed, pursuant to the terms of the mortgage, that Mers had all the rights and obligations of the actual lender, so far as they are concerned, and that assignments could be made to other lenders in Mers which would not affect their relationship with Mers as the nominee agent for whatever lender made the assignment and to whom it was made.


    Mers has been operating without objection in all fifty states for over a decade now, and only became an issue when a few clever lawyers and populist nutcase attorneys general decided that the system might serve as a good whipping boy for all these poor folks losing their homes that incidentally also serve on jury pools and vote in attorneys general elections.


    If there was this terrible objection to the practices of Mers before, then why did the populists wait ’til now to present them? Same’s true of foreclosure affidavits in Florida and elsewhere. The structure of the foreclosure law in Florida made foreclosure mills a practical necessity if there were to be any Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac mortgages let in the state, and so foreclosure mills and robo-signers have been around a lot longer in Florida, and fully well-known by everyone, including preening attorneys general, than the financial crisis.


    You seem to claim laws were broken to enforce a contract amongst the mortgagees? That isn’t really the issue here. If they breached their contract with each other, that’s not breaking a public law.


    The issue here is whether a procedural misstep in foreclosure should yield a free house. I stand by my assertion that allowing such a thing would do great violence to the rule of law, far greater than simply requiring a correction to the procedure.


    I won’t call you a dumbass again, but you’ve still not got the facts straight. It is not “breaking the law” that every assignment between mortgagees is not recorded. It is simply choosing, amongst themselves, to operate a supplementary assignment system.


    and this:


    “BR: That is not remotely what is going on with MERS. There is no parallel between the sharing of an asset between family members, and a fraudulent scheme designed to rip off filing fees from local towns, hide ownership of loans, and deceive the public thru an extra-legal technique that undermines 100s of years of property law.”


    What, pray tell, is fraudulent about Mers? The borrowers agreed to Mers as the nominee lender at closing. There is no attempt to hide ownership of loans, it is simply a means of expediting the loan to the investor. Who owns the mortgage matters not a whit to the borrower–he is to pay whomever he is told to pay–and the ability to assign the loan is also agreed to by the borrower at closing. How, exactly, does Mers undermine hundreds of years of property law? There has never been a requirement as between the parties to a real property interest that the conveyance be recorded in the public records to make it enforceable as between the parties. I really don’ t get this outrage. Mers has been around a long time, and greatly facilitated the mortgage securitization process. Does it have flaws? Sure. Are mistakes occasionally made between the lenders within Mers as to who owns the loan or the servicing rights? Sure. But those sorts of things are rare and hardly rise to the level of criminality.








  • Mbuna Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:36 pm

    Barry, get ready to hire those ninjas…. http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=172452

    as early as tomorrow!








  • Effective Demand Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:38 pm

    Notice the number of cases that support MERS:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MERS#Litigation_and_major_legal_decisions


    MERS seems to be losing some small cases which of course gets lots of press and winning the big cases, which doesn’t get any press. Nobody wants to hear that it’s actually legal and that they won’t actually get that house they overpaid for for free.








  • bergsten Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:39 pm

    @Fred C — I can explain what people are arguing about, thought it might be simpler all round for you to just look at all that’s been written and reported on the subject to date.


    I can explain why people are arguing — because people will argue about anything.


    I can explain what I am worried about:


    1. I take out a mortgage. 2. I dutifully pay my mortgage month after month until it’s paid off. 3. I ask the bank for the paperwork to show I no longer have a mortgage and own the property free and clear. 4. The bank tells me to pound salt as they weren’t the holders of the note. 5. The (lack of) precedent thanks to “nobody caring” about a few shortcuts and paperwork errors, causes the courts to tell me to pound salt too.


    Finally, I can explain what I’m mad about, though to do so, I am forced to invoke that conversation-stopping bit of history that starts with “H,” done by those who start with “N.”


    Millions of people were eventually tortured and killed because (effectively) nobody complained as each individual indignity, infraction, policy, procedure, eviction, curfew, restriction, graffiti, insult, violence, theft, discrimination, law, and on and on were each excused as being non-material.


    Everybody asked “how can this happen?” and say “it can’t happen here.”


    Well, it happens one small step at a time, and it sure can happen here.


    All you have to do is marginalize the rule of law.


    Still want to blame the whole thing on “deadbeats”?








  • LoveFreedomTruth.com Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 12:35 am

    Presidential Veto Override Attempt 

    H.R. 3808:

    to require any Federal or State court to recognize any notarization made by a notary public licensed by a State other than the State where the court is located when such notarization occurs in or affects interstate commerce.


    http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=172452


    I suggest everyone follows the market tickers advice. Fast








  • JerseyCynic Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 4:17 am

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/7691500/Cyber-attack-could-fell-US-within-15-minutes.html








  • JerseyCynic Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 4:20 am

    http://ca.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idCATRE6AF4UX20101116


    So gates says there is a huge future threat and a considerable current threat…


    I say perfect timing to pull the plug and make all this bad bad go away








  • JerseyCynic Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 4:57 am

    http://ca.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idCATRE6AF4UX20101116


    gates yesterday on cyber attack:


    “I think there is a huge future threat. And there is a considerable current threat,” Gates told The Wall Street Journal CEO Council. “And that’s just the reality that we all face.”


    PULL THE PLUG


    what a perfect way to make all this bad bad go away!


    Mr. Ritholtz — maybe you can get that team of Ninjas to install a few dead drops around the area so we can keep in touch…


    http://deaddrops.com/












  • Leave a Reply



    You must be logged in to post a comment.




    BR: That is not remotely what is going on with MERS. There is no parallel between the sharing of an asset between family members, and a fraudulent scheme designed to rip off filing fees from local towns, hide ownership of loans, and deceive the public thru an extra-legal technique that undermines 100s of years of property law.


    It may only be Tuesday, but we have a winner for the dumbest comment of the week.








  • zell Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 4:37 pm

    FIFO: Felonies in; felonies out. The R.E. bubble was fostered by widespread deceit that has been ignored. It’s no surprise to see the same on the flip side.








  • Niskyboy Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 4:51 pm

    Hilarious.








  • Lugnut Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:03 pm

    Barry,


    You’ve hit upon a key topic that I took notice (at least with this particular issue) from day 1, and its one that drives me nuckin futz. Namely the absolute reluctance, if not outright refusal of the mainstream print and television media to characterize or hint that this situation is anything other than a mere ‘mistake’ that will cleaned up with some 409 and a paper towel, and we’ll all move happily on from there. That fact that its a persistant story, and not some one night mention little blurb, makes it all the more obvious and disquieting.


    What is it? Is it because they hadn’t done enough primary investigative journalism to feel comfortable in classifying it as fraud? Do they just not understand the nuances of the laws, paperwork, and complex relationships enough to not want to make an error in judgement in branding it fraud? Do the senior editors say “Lets wait till the Justice Department indicts them so we don’t have to make that judgement ourselves”? Or are there merely in the tank for the firms that devote a good chunk of their advertising dollars to their particular news organization, and/or are frequent guests?


    Whatever it is, I think it comes down to a total lack of balls, ethics, and conviction of purpose. They all guilty of it. Repeatedly. And quite franky it makes me sick. Its a Rorschach test for their continued Darwinistic self destruction of credibility.








  • Tarkus Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:14 pm

    Yes – everyone notices how the discussion of fraud when applied to financial companies is always handled with kiddie-glove euphemisms.


    It’s tiring, and the more they do it, the more you notice it.


    Fraud is rewitten using “mistakes”, “errors”, “oversights”, “incompetence” (until it is pay/bonus time), “didn’t see it coming”, etc, etc.


    WSJ and the rest are cowering, not reporting.








  • Andy T Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:33 pm

    Curmudgeon–


    You seem to have some knowledge on these type of matters and have an opinion that dissents from the “mob.”


    Thanks for the commentary on these matters.


    It’s a refreshing change of pace from almost every other comment I see here at TBP.








  • yoganmahew Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:37 pm

    That would be a syntactical error. If they had spelled it wrong, it would be a grammar error…








  • obsvr-1 Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 7:56 pm

    @ndy T Says (and Curmudgeon):


    Curmudgeon–


    You seem to have some knowledge on these type of matters and have an opinion that dissents from the “mob.”


    Thanks for the commentary on these matters.


    It’s a refreshing change of pace from almost every other comment I see here at TBP.


    —- Reply


    go watch the entire Senate Committee Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs hearing today on “Mortgage Services and Forclosure Processes”


    http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/296595-1


    The problem is much bigger that a technical issue of paperwork or process — amongst the criminal activities are fraud and unethical behavior throughout the servicer and banking industry which is magnifying the problem. Fraudclosure is just light that is illuminating a problem that is large enough for the Cong. Oversight Panel (COP) and the Senate Committee to call on the Financial Stability Oversight Committee to investigate systemic risk concerns.


    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/dodd-robo-signing-the-tip-of-the-iceberg-2010-11-16?dist=afterbell

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/watchdog-calls-for-second-round-of-stress-tests-2010-11-16?dist=afterbell


    And no, people who owe on their mortgage owe on their mortgage — arguing whether someone should get a free house because of a procedural problem is not the center of the issue (they shouldn’t). Questioning why nobody is going to jail for breaking, ignoring or circumventing the laws which is creating systemic risk (AGAIN) is a valid. The banks are in deep do-do and bail-outs are not on the menu this time around … a test of the FinReg resolution clauses may be in the near future.








  • RW Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:11 pm

    @Curmudgeon


    “…whether a third-party’s (the borrower) agreement to abide by assignments outside of the public records is enforceable against the borrower through a designated agent for doing so (Mers).”


    Seems reasonable but it appears that the structure and function of MERS itself has become the problem, not so?


    That is, the principle of MERS is not the problem — it does appear to be a legal entity even though it is essentially just a database, a filing cabinet, with no officers or employees — and all parties to the loan agreed to it as a nexus even though agency can clearly not be implemented directly by MERS.


    But then the integrity of MERS as that which establishes connection between buyer and seller(s), a nexus, becomes crucial so if suspicions arise that the filing cabinet is ‘damaged’ or otherwise unreliable — if it is not possible to go into the MERS database and pull up complete, accurate records with confirmable authenticity via accessible originals — then how is valid agency to be recreated?


    If a nexus between lenders (independent of their number or intra-agency agreements) and the third party cannot be established who then has standing to enforce a lien against the third party? It would seem that all agreements essentially become putative.








  • Jim67545 Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:23 pm

    Curmudgeon is entirely correct, based on my decent knowledge in the field. I would focus attention on whether the homeowner is actually delinquent, how far, whether they had tried to work out the situation in some way, whether they were ignored, whether they received due process, etc. Failures by the lenders in these areas should be punished. Otherwise, there is nothing nefarious about MERS, it is not some fraudulent conspiracy and the thought that it is a conspiracy to defraud title offices of recording costs is equally laughable. Yes, it no doubt has that intended effect but the task of tracking the recording of interests in mortgages every time they change hands would make the entire system unworkable.


    We have a housing financing market that is nearly totally constipated. Add into the mix a profound uncertainty over the legal standing that a mortgage holder may have and the few who might invest in this asset will run away – as will the 35% of the purchasers who are buying foreclosed properties. That direction leads to the government being the mortgage financier of only resort for as far as we can see. And, we should all know who puts up the $$ to make that happen. And, with foreclosed property sales dropping we would have a serious slowdown in absorption of foreclosed properties and farther price weaknesses (, losses to individuals and lenders, etc.)


    Collapse the current housing finance market and we are all back into 3 or 5 year ARMs. Kiss your 30 year fixed goodbye. That would seriously impact affordability not to mention the entire real estate industry not, need I point out, at the best of times. So, I suggest that most of those above look before they leap. This has to be worked out.








  • Fred C Dobbs Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:46 pm

    Let’s see if I understand what people are arguing about. 1) a bank makes a loan to someone, 2) the borrower secures the borrower promise to repay with a mortgage on the borrower’s residence, 3) the borrower fails or refuses to repay the loan, breaking his promise, 4) lender resorts to the security the borrower gave to secure his loan, that is, the bank initiates foreclosure, 5) borrower finds some defects in the loan or foreclosure paperwork and goes to a lawyer, 6) the lawyer tells the borrower it is cheaper to hire the lawyer to defeat foreclosure than for the borrower to keep his promise to repay, 7) the lawyer tells the court to rule the lender may not foreclose because ___(fill in the reason)_____, 8) the judge rules in favor of the borrower, 9) the lender now has an unsecured loan, for there can be no doubt that the borrower got the money and has not paid it back, (10) the borrower sells his mortgage-free residence, 11) borrower moves to another state taking his money with him, or otherwise makes him or his money unavailable to lender, 12) lender charges off the loan as uncollectible and takes a loss, the amount being equal to the unpaid loan balance plus accrued interest and costs. The bank lent the money in good faith, even though its processors may have made documentary mistakes, and likewise began foreclosure in good faith, even though it may have made documentary mistakes. Lender, in bad faith, fails or refuses to repay loan.


    Now, who thinks the poor, little down-trodden borrower deserves to keep the money, at the same time f___ his fellow members of society? Banks function as financial intermediaries for the benefit of all. Weakening a bank, giving a portion of its net worth to a bad faith borrower, weakens us all. The supply of lendable funds is reduced, and the demand causes the cost to rise.








  • Harry Lime Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:55 pm

    Classic, classic stuff. This reminds me that there is a God. Whether there is Justice or not is still to be determined.








  • DeDude Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 9:12 pm

    Cynic;


    You are not cynical enough. The reason treasuries are up is that somebody is about to sell a lot of treasuries to the Fed. Got to get those prices jammed up so you can sell at a profit.








  • LoveFreedomTruth.com Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 9:31 pm

    This Presidential veto override attempt should fix things


    Veto Override Attempt

    H.R. 3808:

    to require any Federal or State court to recognize any notarization made by a notary public licensed by a State other than the State where the court is located when such notarization occurs in or affects interstate commerce.


    http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=172452


    I suggest everyone follows the market tickers advice. Fast








  • hammerandtong2001 Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 9:49 pm

    ****It doesn’t matter when mortgage assignments and endorsements are recorded because the existence of the pooling and service agreement and purchase sale agreement is proof in itself that the loan was conveyed, said Stephen Ornstein, a partner in the Washington office of SNR Denton, a law firm that represents loan servicers and lenders.


    “If the assignment is missing, you can create it by having the old assignee reassign it to you,” Ornstein said.****


    I’ve heard this argument before, and none of the five experts who advise New York state on trust matters (and virtually all mortgage securitizations use New York trusts) accept that point of view. New York trusts can accept assets only as stipulated in their governing agreement. The pooling and servicing agreement made very specific provisions as to how the notes (the borrower IOUs) were to be endorsed and further required that the process be completed by specific dates, typically no later than 90 days after the trust was closed, with only very limited exceptions. And the trustee, on behalf of the trust, was required to provide multiple certifications that all these steps had been taken.


    Let’s put it another way: the industry position is that the underlying contract, the pooling and servicing agreement, can just be ignored if the industry screws up on a grand enough scale. Would any servicer tolerate this argument if someone, say Treasury, tried to cut their fees? Funny how the “sanctity of contract” argument is nowhere to be found when adherence to contracts might crimp industry profits.


    AND…


    “SIFMA rejects sweeping claims that fundamental flaws regarding the transfer and ownership of mortgage loans are endemic to secondary markets and mortgage securitization, and believes that such concerns are exaggerated and without merit. While each situation may have variations, SIFMA believes that the customary practices utilized in secondary markets to convey ownership of mortgage loans from originators to other parties, and into securitization trusts, are sound and in accordance with generally applicable legal principles.”


    The use of “sweeping claims” implies that the critics have no evidence for their views, when borrower attorneys all over the US report widespread errors. A group of nearly 100 attorneys who work with bankruptcy lawyer Max Gardner have reported that in their collective experience, they have yet to find a single note that was conveyed correctly in accordance with the requirements of the pooling and servicing agreement. Other investigations show widespread problems. As much as SIFMA tries to dismiss the use of the word “endemic”, all they offer is bluster, when the evidence on the ground to the contrary is extensive.


    And you have to love this part: “customary practices…are sound and in accordance with generally applicable legal principles.” This is simple an effort to divert attention from the fact that the contracts that the industry itself devised were often ignored. So a more accurate rendering would be “We did what was convenient instead of what we agreed to do, and if you pretend we didn’t have to satisfy a lot of complicated legal requirements to meet all the objectives of all the parties, we can find a way to justify what we did.”


    It’s all here:


    http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/11/more-mortgage-securitization-industry-propaganda-via-new-york-times-sifma.html


    And I’m the “dumbass”?


    Breaking the law to enforce a contract, no matter the material weight of breach on the offending parties’ side, is still breaking the law.


    There it is.


    .








  • Bill W Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:10 pm

    b_thunder,


    I agree with that sentiment. This could become an opportunity for Obama to reform the system the way it needs to be reformed. By letting the stupid and the greedy reap what they’ve sowed.


    The political opportunity for him is to steal some of the T-Party’s anti-establishment thunder.








  • The Curmudgeon Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:29 pm

    @hammerandtong2001:


    Mortgage assignments between mortgagees, whether or not they are recorded in the public records, are enforceable as between each other, according to whatever contract they have entered regarding the assignments.


    When borrowers signed the mortgages with the Mers as the nominee, they explicitly agreed, pursuant to the terms of the mortgage, that Mers had all the rights and obligations of the actual lender, so far as they are concerned, and that assignments could be made to other lenders in Mers which would not affect their relationship with Mers as the nominee agent for whatever lender made the assignment and to whom it was made.


    Mers has been operating without objection in all fifty states for over a decade now, and only became an issue when a few clever lawyers and populist nutcase attorneys general decided that the system might serve as a good whipping boy for all these poor folks losing their homes that incidentally also serve on jury pools and vote in attorneys general elections.


    If there was this terrible objection to the practices of Mers before, then why did the populists wait ’til now to present them? Same’s true of foreclosure affidavits in Florida and elsewhere. The structure of the foreclosure law in Florida made foreclosure mills a practical necessity if there were to be any Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac mortgages let in the state, and so foreclosure mills and robo-signers have been around a lot longer in Florida, and fully well-known by everyone, including preening attorneys general, than the financial crisis.


    You seem to claim laws were broken to enforce a contract amongst the mortgagees? That isn’t really the issue here. If they breached their contract with each other, that’s not breaking a public law.


    The issue here is whether a procedural misstep in foreclosure should yield a free house. I stand by my assertion that allowing such a thing would do great violence to the rule of law, far greater than simply requiring a correction to the procedure.


    I won’t call you a dumbass again, but you’ve still not got the facts straight. It is not “breaking the law” that every assignment between mortgagees is not recorded. It is simply choosing, amongst themselves, to operate a supplementary assignment system.


    and this:


    “BR: That is not remotely what is going on with MERS. There is no parallel between the sharing of an asset between family members, and a fraudulent scheme designed to rip off filing fees from local towns, hide ownership of loans, and deceive the public thru an extra-legal technique that undermines 100s of years of property law.”


    What, pray tell, is fraudulent about Mers? The borrowers agreed to Mers as the nominee lender at closing. There is no attempt to hide ownership of loans, it is simply a means of expediting the loan to the investor. Who owns the mortgage matters not a whit to the borrower–he is to pay whomever he is told to pay–and the ability to assign the loan is also agreed to by the borrower at closing. How, exactly, does Mers undermine hundreds of years of property law? There has never been a requirement as between the parties to a real property interest that the conveyance be recorded in the public records to make it enforceable as between the parties. I really don’ t get this outrage. Mers has been around a long time, and greatly facilitated the mortgage securitization process. Does it have flaws? Sure. Are mistakes occasionally made between the lenders within Mers as to who owns the loan or the servicing rights? Sure. But those sorts of things are rare and hardly rise to the level of criminality.








  • Mbuna Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:36 pm

    Barry, get ready to hire those ninjas…. http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=172452

    as early as tomorrow!








  • Effective Demand Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:38 pm

    Notice the number of cases that support MERS:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MERS#Litigation_and_major_legal_decisions


    MERS seems to be losing some small cases which of course gets lots of press and winning the big cases, which doesn’t get any press. Nobody wants to hear that it’s actually legal and that they won’t actually get that house they overpaid for for free.








  • bergsten Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:39 pm

    @Fred C — I can explain what people are arguing about, thought it might be simpler all round for you to just look at all that’s been written and reported on the subject to date.


    I can explain why people are arguing — because people will argue about anything.


    I can explain what I am worried about:


    1. I take out a mortgage. 2. I dutifully pay my mortgage month after month until it’s paid off. 3. I ask the bank for the paperwork to show I no longer have a mortgage and own the property free and clear. 4. The bank tells me to pound salt as they weren’t the holders of the note. 5. The (lack of) precedent thanks to “nobody caring” about a few shortcuts and paperwork errors, causes the courts to tell me to pound salt too.


    Finally, I can explain what I’m mad about, though to do so, I am forced to invoke that conversation-stopping bit of history that starts with “H,” done by those who start with “N.”


    Millions of people were eventually tortured and killed because (effectively) nobody complained as each individual indignity, infraction, policy, procedure, eviction, curfew, restriction, graffiti, insult, violence, theft, discrimination, law, and on and on were each excused as being non-material.


    Everybody asked “how can this happen?” and say “it can’t happen here.”


    Well, it happens one small step at a time, and it sure can happen here.


    All you have to do is marginalize the rule of law.


    Still want to blame the whole thing on “deadbeats”?








  • LoveFreedomTruth.com Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 12:35 am

    Presidential Veto Override Attempt 

    H.R. 3808:

    to require any Federal or State court to recognize any notarization made by a notary public licensed by a State other than the State where the court is located when such notarization occurs in or affects interstate commerce.


    http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=172452


    I suggest everyone follows the market tickers advice. Fast








  • JerseyCynic Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 4:17 am

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/7691500/Cyber-attack-could-fell-US-within-15-minutes.html








  • JerseyCynic Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 4:20 am

    http://ca.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idCATRE6AF4UX20101116


    So gates says there is a huge future threat and a considerable current threat…


    I say perfect timing to pull the plug and make all this bad bad go away








  • JerseyCynic Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 4:57 am

    http://ca.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idCATRE6AF4UX20101116


    gates yesterday on cyber attack:


    “I think there is a huge future threat. And there is a considerable current threat,” Gates told The Wall Street Journal CEO Council. “And that’s just the reality that we all face.”


    PULL THE PLUG


    what a perfect way to make all this bad bad go away!


    Mr. Ritholtz — maybe you can get that team of Ninjas to install a few dead drops around the area so we can keep in touch…


    http://deaddrops.com/












  • Leave a Reply



    You must be logged in to post a comment.




    benchcraft company scam

    Good Economic <b>News</b> May Be Bad for Fed Recovery Plan

    Consumers, the life's blood of the American economy, have shown a growing willingness to spend, but this might play havoc with the Federal Reserve's bold plans to revive the recovery.

    Arrowheadlines: Chiefs <b>News</b> 11/17 - Arrowhead Pride

    Good morning, AP. Another round of Kansas City Chiefs news on the house. Please read responsibly.

    Breaking <b>News</b>: Humanities in Decline! Film at 11. — Crooked Timber

    But I just don't know of any realm of human endeavor in which a precipitous decline from 1967 to 1987, followed by a couple of decades of stability, counts as breaking news. It's the equivalent of saying “sales of Sgt. Pepper posters ...


    bench craft company scam


    BR: That is not remotely what is going on with MERS. There is no parallel between the sharing of an asset between family members, and a fraudulent scheme designed to rip off filing fees from local towns, hide ownership of loans, and deceive the public thru an extra-legal technique that undermines 100s of years of property law.


    It may only be Tuesday, but we have a winner for the dumbest comment of the week.








  • zell Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 4:37 pm

    FIFO: Felonies in; felonies out. The R.E. bubble was fostered by widespread deceit that has been ignored. It’s no surprise to see the same on the flip side.








  • Niskyboy Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 4:51 pm

    Hilarious.








  • Lugnut Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:03 pm

    Barry,


    You’ve hit upon a key topic that I took notice (at least with this particular issue) from day 1, and its one that drives me nuckin futz. Namely the absolute reluctance, if not outright refusal of the mainstream print and television media to characterize or hint that this situation is anything other than a mere ‘mistake’ that will cleaned up with some 409 and a paper towel, and we’ll all move happily on from there. That fact that its a persistant story, and not some one night mention little blurb, makes it all the more obvious and disquieting.


    What is it? Is it because they hadn’t done enough primary investigative journalism to feel comfortable in classifying it as fraud? Do they just not understand the nuances of the laws, paperwork, and complex relationships enough to not want to make an error in judgement in branding it fraud? Do the senior editors say “Lets wait till the Justice Department indicts them so we don’t have to make that judgement ourselves”? Or are there merely in the tank for the firms that devote a good chunk of their advertising dollars to their particular news organization, and/or are frequent guests?


    Whatever it is, I think it comes down to a total lack of balls, ethics, and conviction of purpose. They all guilty of it. Repeatedly. And quite franky it makes me sick. Its a Rorschach test for their continued Darwinistic self destruction of credibility.








  • Tarkus Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:14 pm

    Yes – everyone notices how the discussion of fraud when applied to financial companies is always handled with kiddie-glove euphemisms.


    It’s tiring, and the more they do it, the more you notice it.


    Fraud is rewitten using “mistakes”, “errors”, “oversights”, “incompetence” (until it is pay/bonus time), “didn’t see it coming”, etc, etc.


    WSJ and the rest are cowering, not reporting.








  • Andy T Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:33 pm

    Curmudgeon–


    You seem to have some knowledge on these type of matters and have an opinion that dissents from the “mob.”


    Thanks for the commentary on these matters.


    It’s a refreshing change of pace from almost every other comment I see here at TBP.








  • yoganmahew Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:37 pm

    That would be a syntactical error. If they had spelled it wrong, it would be a grammar error…








  • obsvr-1 Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 7:56 pm

    @ndy T Says (and Curmudgeon):


    Curmudgeon–


    You seem to have some knowledge on these type of matters and have an opinion that dissents from the “mob.”


    Thanks for the commentary on these matters.


    It’s a refreshing change of pace from almost every other comment I see here at TBP.


    —- Reply


    go watch the entire Senate Committee Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs hearing today on “Mortgage Services and Forclosure Processes”


    http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/296595-1


    The problem is much bigger that a technical issue of paperwork or process — amongst the criminal activities are fraud and unethical behavior throughout the servicer and banking industry which is magnifying the problem. Fraudclosure is just light that is illuminating a problem that is large enough for the Cong. Oversight Panel (COP) and the Senate Committee to call on the Financial Stability Oversight Committee to investigate systemic risk concerns.


    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/dodd-robo-signing-the-tip-of-the-iceberg-2010-11-16?dist=afterbell

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/watchdog-calls-for-second-round-of-stress-tests-2010-11-16?dist=afterbell


    And no, people who owe on their mortgage owe on their mortgage — arguing whether someone should get a free house because of a procedural problem is not the center of the issue (they shouldn’t). Questioning why nobody is going to jail for breaking, ignoring or circumventing the laws which is creating systemic risk (AGAIN) is a valid. The banks are in deep do-do and bail-outs are not on the menu this time around … a test of the FinReg resolution clauses may be in the near future.








  • RW Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:11 pm

    @Curmudgeon


    “…whether a third-party’s (the borrower) agreement to abide by assignments outside of the public records is enforceable against the borrower through a designated agent for doing so (Mers).”


    Seems reasonable but it appears that the structure and function of MERS itself has become the problem, not so?


    That is, the principle of MERS is not the problem — it does appear to be a legal entity even though it is essentially just a database, a filing cabinet, with no officers or employees — and all parties to the loan agreed to it as a nexus even though agency can clearly not be implemented directly by MERS.


    But then the integrity of MERS as that which establishes connection between buyer and seller(s), a nexus, becomes crucial so if suspicions arise that the filing cabinet is ‘damaged’ or otherwise unreliable — if it is not possible to go into the MERS database and pull up complete, accurate records with confirmable authenticity via accessible originals — then how is valid agency to be recreated?


    If a nexus between lenders (independent of their number or intra-agency agreements) and the third party cannot be established who then has standing to enforce a lien against the third party? It would seem that all agreements essentially become putative.








  • Jim67545 Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:23 pm

    Curmudgeon is entirely correct, based on my decent knowledge in the field. I would focus attention on whether the homeowner is actually delinquent, how far, whether they had tried to work out the situation in some way, whether they were ignored, whether they received due process, etc. Failures by the lenders in these areas should be punished. Otherwise, there is nothing nefarious about MERS, it is not some fraudulent conspiracy and the thought that it is a conspiracy to defraud title offices of recording costs is equally laughable. Yes, it no doubt has that intended effect but the task of tracking the recording of interests in mortgages every time they change hands would make the entire system unworkable.


    We have a housing financing market that is nearly totally constipated. Add into the mix a profound uncertainty over the legal standing that a mortgage holder may have and the few who might invest in this asset will run away – as will the 35% of the purchasers who are buying foreclosed properties. That direction leads to the government being the mortgage financier of only resort for as far as we can see. And, we should all know who puts up the $$ to make that happen. And, with foreclosed property sales dropping we would have a serious slowdown in absorption of foreclosed properties and farther price weaknesses (, losses to individuals and lenders, etc.)


    Collapse the current housing finance market and we are all back into 3 or 5 year ARMs. Kiss your 30 year fixed goodbye. That would seriously impact affordability not to mention the entire real estate industry not, need I point out, at the best of times. So, I suggest that most of those above look before they leap. This has to be worked out.








  • Fred C Dobbs Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:46 pm

    Let’s see if I understand what people are arguing about. 1) a bank makes a loan to someone, 2) the borrower secures the borrower promise to repay with a mortgage on the borrower’s residence, 3) the borrower fails or refuses to repay the loan, breaking his promise, 4) lender resorts to the security the borrower gave to secure his loan, that is, the bank initiates foreclosure, 5) borrower finds some defects in the loan or foreclosure paperwork and goes to a lawyer, 6) the lawyer tells the borrower it is cheaper to hire the lawyer to defeat foreclosure than for the borrower to keep his promise to repay, 7) the lawyer tells the court to rule the lender may not foreclose because ___(fill in the reason)_____, 8) the judge rules in favor of the borrower, 9) the lender now has an unsecured loan, for there can be no doubt that the borrower got the money and has not paid it back, (10) the borrower sells his mortgage-free residence, 11) borrower moves to another state taking his money with him, or otherwise makes him or his money unavailable to lender, 12) lender charges off the loan as uncollectible and takes a loss, the amount being equal to the unpaid loan balance plus accrued interest and costs. The bank lent the money in good faith, even though its processors may have made documentary mistakes, and likewise began foreclosure in good faith, even though it may have made documentary mistakes. Lender, in bad faith, fails or refuses to repay loan.


    Now, who thinks the poor, little down-trodden borrower deserves to keep the money, at the same time f___ his fellow members of society? Banks function as financial intermediaries for the benefit of all. Weakening a bank, giving a portion of its net worth to a bad faith borrower, weakens us all. The supply of lendable funds is reduced, and the demand causes the cost to rise.








  • Harry Lime Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:55 pm

    Classic, classic stuff. This reminds me that there is a God. Whether there is Justice or not is still to be determined.








  • DeDude Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 9:12 pm

    Cynic;


    You are not cynical enough. The reason treasuries are up is that somebody is about to sell a lot of treasuries to the Fed. Got to get those prices jammed up so you can sell at a profit.








  • LoveFreedomTruth.com Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 9:31 pm

    This Presidential veto override attempt should fix things


    Veto Override Attempt

    H.R. 3808:

    to require any Federal or State court to recognize any notarization made by a notary public licensed by a State other than the State where the court is located when such notarization occurs in or affects interstate commerce.


    http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=172452


    I suggest everyone follows the market tickers advice. Fast








  • hammerandtong2001 Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 9:49 pm

    ****It doesn’t matter when mortgage assignments and endorsements are recorded because the existence of the pooling and service agreement and purchase sale agreement is proof in itself that the loan was conveyed, said Stephen Ornstein, a partner in the Washington office of SNR Denton, a law firm that represents loan servicers and lenders.


    “If the assignment is missing, you can create it by having the old assignee reassign it to you,” Ornstein said.****


    I’ve heard this argument before, and none of the five experts who advise New York state on trust matters (and virtually all mortgage securitizations use New York trusts) accept that point of view. New York trusts can accept assets only as stipulated in their governing agreement. The pooling and servicing agreement made very specific provisions as to how the notes (the borrower IOUs) were to be endorsed and further required that the process be completed by specific dates, typically no later than 90 days after the trust was closed, with only very limited exceptions. And the trustee, on behalf of the trust, was required to provide multiple certifications that all these steps had been taken.


    Let’s put it another way: the industry position is that the underlying contract, the pooling and servicing agreement, can just be ignored if the industry screws up on a grand enough scale. Would any servicer tolerate this argument if someone, say Treasury, tried to cut their fees? Funny how the “sanctity of contract” argument is nowhere to be found when adherence to contracts might crimp industry profits.


    AND…


    “SIFMA rejects sweeping claims that fundamental flaws regarding the transfer and ownership of mortgage loans are endemic to secondary markets and mortgage securitization, and believes that such concerns are exaggerated and without merit. While each situation may have variations, SIFMA believes that the customary practices utilized in secondary markets to convey ownership of mortgage loans from originators to other parties, and into securitization trusts, are sound and in accordance with generally applicable legal principles.”


    The use of “sweeping claims” implies that the critics have no evidence for their views, when borrower attorneys all over the US report widespread errors. A group of nearly 100 attorneys who work with bankruptcy lawyer Max Gardner have reported that in their collective experience, they have yet to find a single note that was conveyed correctly in accordance with the requirements of the pooling and servicing agreement. Other investigations show widespread problems. As much as SIFMA tries to dismiss the use of the word “endemic”, all they offer is bluster, when the evidence on the ground to the contrary is extensive.


    And you have to love this part: “customary practices…are sound and in accordance with generally applicable legal principles.” This is simple an effort to divert attention from the fact that the contracts that the industry itself devised were often ignored. So a more accurate rendering would be “We did what was convenient instead of what we agreed to do, and if you pretend we didn’t have to satisfy a lot of complicated legal requirements to meet all the objectives of all the parties, we can find a way to justify what we did.”


    It’s all here:


    http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/11/more-mortgage-securitization-industry-propaganda-via-new-york-times-sifma.html


    And I’m the “dumbass”?


    Breaking the law to enforce a contract, no matter the material weight of breach on the offending parties’ side, is still breaking the law.


    There it is.


    .








  • Bill W Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:10 pm

    b_thunder,


    I agree with that sentiment. This could become an opportunity for Obama to reform the system the way it needs to be reformed. By letting the stupid and the greedy reap what they’ve sowed.


    The political opportunity for him is to steal some of the T-Party’s anti-establishment thunder.








  • The Curmudgeon Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:29 pm

    @hammerandtong2001:


    Mortgage assignments between mortgagees, whether or not they are recorded in the public records, are enforceable as between each other, according to whatever contract they have entered regarding the assignments.


    When borrowers signed the mortgages with the Mers as the nominee, they explicitly agreed, pursuant to the terms of the mortgage, that Mers had all the rights and obligations of the actual lender, so far as they are concerned, and that assignments could be made to other lenders in Mers which would not affect their relationship with Mers as the nominee agent for whatever lender made the assignment and to whom it was made.


    Mers has been operating without objection in all fifty states for over a decade now, and only became an issue when a few clever lawyers and populist nutcase attorneys general decided that the system might serve as a good whipping boy for all these poor folks losing their homes that incidentally also serve on jury pools and vote in attorneys general elections.


    If there was this terrible objection to the practices of Mers before, then why did the populists wait ’til now to present them? Same’s true of foreclosure affidavits in Florida and elsewhere. The structure of the foreclosure law in Florida made foreclosure mills a practical necessity if there were to be any Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac mortgages let in the state, and so foreclosure mills and robo-signers have been around a lot longer in Florida, and fully well-known by everyone, including preening attorneys general, than the financial crisis.


    You seem to claim laws were broken to enforce a contract amongst the mortgagees? That isn’t really the issue here. If they breached their contract with each other, that’s not breaking a public law.


    The issue here is whether a procedural misstep in foreclosure should yield a free house. I stand by my assertion that allowing such a thing would do great violence to the rule of law, far greater than simply requiring a correction to the procedure.


    I won’t call you a dumbass again, but you’ve still not got the facts straight. It is not “breaking the law” that every assignment between mortgagees is not recorded. It is simply choosing, amongst themselves, to operate a supplementary assignment system.


    and this:


    “BR: That is not remotely what is going on with MERS. There is no parallel between the sharing of an asset between family members, and a fraudulent scheme designed to rip off filing fees from local towns, hide ownership of loans, and deceive the public thru an extra-legal technique that undermines 100s of years of property law.”


    What, pray tell, is fraudulent about Mers? The borrowers agreed to Mers as the nominee lender at closing. There is no attempt to hide ownership of loans, it is simply a means of expediting the loan to the investor. Who owns the mortgage matters not a whit to the borrower–he is to pay whomever he is told to pay–and the ability to assign the loan is also agreed to by the borrower at closing. How, exactly, does Mers undermine hundreds of years of property law? There has never been a requirement as between the parties to a real property interest that the conveyance be recorded in the public records to make it enforceable as between the parties. I really don’ t get this outrage. Mers has been around a long time, and greatly facilitated the mortgage securitization process. Does it have flaws? Sure. Are mistakes occasionally made between the lenders within Mers as to who owns the loan or the servicing rights? Sure. But those sorts of things are rare and hardly rise to the level of criminality.








  • Mbuna Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:36 pm

    Barry, get ready to hire those ninjas…. http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=172452

    as early as tomorrow!








  • Effective Demand Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:38 pm

    Notice the number of cases that support MERS:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MERS#Litigation_and_major_legal_decisions


    MERS seems to be losing some small cases which of course gets lots of press and winning the big cases, which doesn’t get any press. Nobody wants to hear that it’s actually legal and that they won’t actually get that house they overpaid for for free.








  • bergsten Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:39 pm

    @Fred C — I can explain what people are arguing about, thought it might be simpler all round for you to just look at all that’s been written and reported on the subject to date.


    I can explain why people are arguing — because people will argue about anything.


    I can explain what I am worried about:


    1. I take out a mortgage. 2. I dutifully pay my mortgage month after month until it’s paid off. 3. I ask the bank for the paperwork to show I no longer have a mortgage and own the property free and clear. 4. The bank tells me to pound salt as they weren’t the holders of the note. 5. The (lack of) precedent thanks to “nobody caring” about a few shortcuts and paperwork errors, causes the courts to tell me to pound salt too.


    Finally, I can explain what I’m mad about, though to do so, I am forced to invoke that conversation-stopping bit of history that starts with “H,” done by those who start with “N.”


    Millions of people were eventually tortured and killed because (effectively) nobody complained as each individual indignity, infraction, policy, procedure, eviction, curfew, restriction, graffiti, insult, violence, theft, discrimination, law, and on and on were each excused as being non-material.


    Everybody asked “how can this happen?” and say “it can’t happen here.”


    Well, it happens one small step at a time, and it sure can happen here.


    All you have to do is marginalize the rule of law.


    Still want to blame the whole thing on “deadbeats”?








  • LoveFreedomTruth.com Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 12:35 am

    Presidential Veto Override Attempt 

    H.R. 3808:

    to require any Federal or State court to recognize any notarization made by a notary public licensed by a State other than the State where the court is located when such notarization occurs in or affects interstate commerce.


    http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=172452


    I suggest everyone follows the market tickers advice. Fast








  • JerseyCynic Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 4:17 am

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/7691500/Cyber-attack-could-fell-US-within-15-minutes.html








  • JerseyCynic Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 4:20 am

    http://ca.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idCATRE6AF4UX20101116


    So gates says there is a huge future threat and a considerable current threat…


    I say perfect timing to pull the plug and make all this bad bad go away








  • JerseyCynic Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 4:57 am

    http://ca.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idCATRE6AF4UX20101116


    gates yesterday on cyber attack:


    “I think there is a huge future threat. And there is a considerable current threat,” Gates told The Wall Street Journal CEO Council. “And that’s just the reality that we all face.”


    PULL THE PLUG


    what a perfect way to make all this bad bad go away!


    Mr. Ritholtz — maybe you can get that team of Ninjas to install a few dead drops around the area so we can keep in touch…


    http://deaddrops.com/












  • Leave a Reply



    You must be logged in to post a comment.




    BR: That is not remotely what is going on with MERS. There is no parallel between the sharing of an asset between family members, and a fraudulent scheme designed to rip off filing fees from local towns, hide ownership of loans, and deceive the public thru an extra-legal technique that undermines 100s of years of property law.


    It may only be Tuesday, but we have a winner for the dumbest comment of the week.








  • zell Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 4:37 pm

    FIFO: Felonies in; felonies out. The R.E. bubble was fostered by widespread deceit that has been ignored. It’s no surprise to see the same on the flip side.








  • Niskyboy Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 4:51 pm

    Hilarious.








  • Lugnut Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:03 pm

    Barry,


    You’ve hit upon a key topic that I took notice (at least with this particular issue) from day 1, and its one that drives me nuckin futz. Namely the absolute reluctance, if not outright refusal of the mainstream print and television media to characterize or hint that this situation is anything other than a mere ‘mistake’ that will cleaned up with some 409 and a paper towel, and we’ll all move happily on from there. That fact that its a persistant story, and not some one night mention little blurb, makes it all the more obvious and disquieting.


    What is it? Is it because they hadn’t done enough primary investigative journalism to feel comfortable in classifying it as fraud? Do they just not understand the nuances of the laws, paperwork, and complex relationships enough to not want to make an error in judgement in branding it fraud? Do the senior editors say “Lets wait till the Justice Department indicts them so we don’t have to make that judgement ourselves”? Or are there merely in the tank for the firms that devote a good chunk of their advertising dollars to their particular news organization, and/or are frequent guests?


    Whatever it is, I think it comes down to a total lack of balls, ethics, and conviction of purpose. They all guilty of it. Repeatedly. And quite franky it makes me sick. Its a Rorschach test for their continued Darwinistic self destruction of credibility.








  • Tarkus Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:14 pm

    Yes – everyone notices how the discussion of fraud when applied to financial companies is always handled with kiddie-glove euphemisms.


    It’s tiring, and the more they do it, the more you notice it.


    Fraud is rewitten using “mistakes”, “errors”, “oversights”, “incompetence” (until it is pay/bonus time), “didn’t see it coming”, etc, etc.


    WSJ and the rest are cowering, not reporting.








  • Andy T Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:33 pm

    Curmudgeon–


    You seem to have some knowledge on these type of matters and have an opinion that dissents from the “mob.”


    Thanks for the commentary on these matters.


    It’s a refreshing change of pace from almost every other comment I see here at TBP.








  • yoganmahew Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:37 pm

    That would be a syntactical error. If they had spelled it wrong, it would be a grammar error…








  • obsvr-1 Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 7:56 pm

    @ndy T Says (and Curmudgeon):


    Curmudgeon–


    You seem to have some knowledge on these type of matters and have an opinion that dissents from the “mob.”


    Thanks for the commentary on these matters.


    It’s a refreshing change of pace from almost every other comment I see here at TBP.


    —- Reply


    go watch the entire Senate Committee Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs hearing today on “Mortgage Services and Forclosure Processes”


    http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/296595-1


    The problem is much bigger that a technical issue of paperwork or process — amongst the criminal activities are fraud and unethical behavior throughout the servicer and banking industry which is magnifying the problem. Fraudclosure is just light that is illuminating a problem that is large enough for the Cong. Oversight Panel (COP) and the Senate Committee to call on the Financial Stability Oversight Committee to investigate systemic risk concerns.


    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/dodd-robo-signing-the-tip-of-the-iceberg-2010-11-16?dist=afterbell

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/watchdog-calls-for-second-round-of-stress-tests-2010-11-16?dist=afterbell


    And no, people who owe on their mortgage owe on their mortgage — arguing whether someone should get a free house because of a procedural problem is not the center of the issue (they shouldn’t). Questioning why nobody is going to jail for breaking, ignoring or circumventing the laws which is creating systemic risk (AGAIN) is a valid. The banks are in deep do-do and bail-outs are not on the menu this time around … a test of the FinReg resolution clauses may be in the near future.








  • RW Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:11 pm

    @Curmudgeon


    “…whether a third-party’s (the borrower) agreement to abide by assignments outside of the public records is enforceable against the borrower through a designated agent for doing so (Mers).”


    Seems reasonable but it appears that the structure and function of MERS itself has become the problem, not so?


    That is, the principle of MERS is not the problem — it does appear to be a legal entity even though it is essentially just a database, a filing cabinet, with no officers or employees — and all parties to the loan agreed to it as a nexus even though agency can clearly not be implemented directly by MERS.


    But then the integrity of MERS as that which establishes connection between buyer and seller(s), a nexus, becomes crucial so if suspicions arise that the filing cabinet is ‘damaged’ or otherwise unreliable — if it is not possible to go into the MERS database and pull up complete, accurate records with confirmable authenticity via accessible originals — then how is valid agency to be recreated?


    If a nexus between lenders (independent of their number or intra-agency agreements) and the third party cannot be established who then has standing to enforce a lien against the third party? It would seem that all agreements essentially become putative.








  • Jim67545 Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:23 pm

    Curmudgeon is entirely correct, based on my decent knowledge in the field. I would focus attention on whether the homeowner is actually delinquent, how far, whether they had tried to work out the situation in some way, whether they were ignored, whether they received due process, etc. Failures by the lenders in these areas should be punished. Otherwise, there is nothing nefarious about MERS, it is not some fraudulent conspiracy and the thought that it is a conspiracy to defraud title offices of recording costs is equally laughable. Yes, it no doubt has that intended effect but the task of tracking the recording of interests in mortgages every time they change hands would make the entire system unworkable.


    We have a housing financing market that is nearly totally constipated. Add into the mix a profound uncertainty over the legal standing that a mortgage holder may have and the few who might invest in this asset will run away – as will the 35% of the purchasers who are buying foreclosed properties. That direction leads to the government being the mortgage financier of only resort for as far as we can see. And, we should all know who puts up the $$ to make that happen. And, with foreclosed property sales dropping we would have a serious slowdown in absorption of foreclosed properties and farther price weaknesses (, losses to individuals and lenders, etc.)


    Collapse the current housing finance market and we are all back into 3 or 5 year ARMs. Kiss your 30 year fixed goodbye. That would seriously impact affordability not to mention the entire real estate industry not, need I point out, at the best of times. So, I suggest that most of those above look before they leap. This has to be worked out.








  • Fred C Dobbs Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:46 pm

    Let’s see if I understand what people are arguing about. 1) a bank makes a loan to someone, 2) the borrower secures the borrower promise to repay with a mortgage on the borrower’s residence, 3) the borrower fails or refuses to repay the loan, breaking his promise, 4) lender resorts to the security the borrower gave to secure his loan, that is, the bank initiates foreclosure, 5) borrower finds some defects in the loan or foreclosure paperwork and goes to a lawyer, 6) the lawyer tells the borrower it is cheaper to hire the lawyer to defeat foreclosure than for the borrower to keep his promise to repay, 7) the lawyer tells the court to rule the lender may not foreclose because ___(fill in the reason)_____, 8) the judge rules in favor of the borrower, 9) the lender now has an unsecured loan, for there can be no doubt that the borrower got the money and has not paid it back, (10) the borrower sells his mortgage-free residence, 11) borrower moves to another state taking his money with him, or otherwise makes him or his money unavailable to lender, 12) lender charges off the loan as uncollectible and takes a loss, the amount being equal to the unpaid loan balance plus accrued interest and costs. The bank lent the money in good faith, even though its processors may have made documentary mistakes, and likewise began foreclosure in good faith, even though it may have made documentary mistakes. Lender, in bad faith, fails or refuses to repay loan.


    Now, who thinks the poor, little down-trodden borrower deserves to keep the money, at the same time f___ his fellow members of society? Banks function as financial intermediaries for the benefit of all. Weakening a bank, giving a portion of its net worth to a bad faith borrower, weakens us all. The supply of lendable funds is reduced, and the demand causes the cost to rise.








  • Harry Lime Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:55 pm

    Classic, classic stuff. This reminds me that there is a God. Whether there is Justice or not is still to be determined.








  • DeDude Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 9:12 pm

    Cynic;


    You are not cynical enough. The reason treasuries are up is that somebody is about to sell a lot of treasuries to the Fed. Got to get those prices jammed up so you can sell at a profit.








  • LoveFreedomTruth.com Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 9:31 pm

    This Presidential veto override attempt should fix things


    Veto Override Attempt

    H.R. 3808:

    to require any Federal or State court to recognize any notarization made by a notary public licensed by a State other than the State where the court is located when such notarization occurs in or affects interstate commerce.


    http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=172452


    I suggest everyone follows the market tickers advice. Fast








  • hammerandtong2001 Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 9:49 pm

    ****It doesn’t matter when mortgage assignments and endorsements are recorded because the existence of the pooling and service agreement and purchase sale agreement is proof in itself that the loan was conveyed, said Stephen Ornstein, a partner in the Washington office of SNR Denton, a law firm that represents loan servicers and lenders.


    “If the assignment is missing, you can create it by having the old assignee reassign it to you,” Ornstein said.****


    I’ve heard this argument before, and none of the five experts who advise New York state on trust matters (and virtually all mortgage securitizations use New York trusts) accept that point of view. New York trusts can accept assets only as stipulated in their governing agreement. The pooling and servicing agreement made very specific provisions as to how the notes (the borrower IOUs) were to be endorsed and further required that the process be completed by specific dates, typically no later than 90 days after the trust was closed, with only very limited exceptions. And the trustee, on behalf of the trust, was required to provide multiple certifications that all these steps had been taken.


    Let’s put it another way: the industry position is that the underlying contract, the pooling and servicing agreement, can just be ignored if the industry screws up on a grand enough scale. Would any servicer tolerate this argument if someone, say Treasury, tried to cut their fees? Funny how the “sanctity of contract” argument is nowhere to be found when adherence to contracts might crimp industry profits.


    AND…


    “SIFMA rejects sweeping claims that fundamental flaws regarding the transfer and ownership of mortgage loans are endemic to secondary markets and mortgage securitization, and believes that such concerns are exaggerated and without merit. While each situation may have variations, SIFMA believes that the customary practices utilized in secondary markets to convey ownership of mortgage loans from originators to other parties, and into securitization trusts, are sound and in accordance with generally applicable legal principles.”


    The use of “sweeping claims” implies that the critics have no evidence for their views, when borrower attorneys all over the US report widespread errors. A group of nearly 100 attorneys who work with bankruptcy lawyer Max Gardner have reported that in their collective experience, they have yet to find a single note that was conveyed correctly in accordance with the requirements of the pooling and servicing agreement. Other investigations show widespread problems. As much as SIFMA tries to dismiss the use of the word “endemic”, all they offer is bluster, when the evidence on the ground to the contrary is extensive.


    And you have to love this part: “customary practices…are sound and in accordance with generally applicable legal principles.” This is simple an effort to divert attention from the fact that the contracts that the industry itself devised were often ignored. So a more accurate rendering would be “We did what was convenient instead of what we agreed to do, and if you pretend we didn’t have to satisfy a lot of complicated legal requirements to meet all the objectives of all the parties, we can find a way to justify what we did.”


    It’s all here:


    http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/11/more-mortgage-securitization-industry-propaganda-via-new-york-times-sifma.html


    And I’m the “dumbass”?


    Breaking the law to enforce a contract, no matter the material weight of breach on the offending parties’ side, is still breaking the law.


    There it is.


    .








  • Bill W Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:10 pm

    b_thunder,


    I agree with that sentiment. This could become an opportunity for Obama to reform the system the way it needs to be reformed. By letting the stupid and the greedy reap what they’ve sowed.


    The political opportunity for him is to steal some of the T-Party’s anti-establishment thunder.








  • The Curmudgeon Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:29 pm

    @hammerandtong2001:


    Mortgage assignments between mortgagees, whether or not they are recorded in the public records, are enforceable as between each other, according to whatever contract they have entered regarding the assignments.


    When borrowers signed the mortgages with the Mers as the nominee, they explicitly agreed, pursuant to the terms of the mortgage, that Mers had all the rights and obligations of the actual lender, so far as they are concerned, and that assignments could be made to other lenders in Mers which would not affect their relationship with Mers as the nominee agent for whatever lender made the assignment and to whom it was made.


    Mers has been operating without objection in all fifty states for over a decade now, and only became an issue when a few clever lawyers and populist nutcase attorneys general decided that the system might serve as a good whipping boy for all these poor folks losing their homes that incidentally also serve on jury pools and vote in attorneys general elections.


    If there was this terrible objection to the practices of Mers before, then why did the populists wait ’til now to present them? Same’s true of foreclosure affidavits in Florida and elsewhere. The structure of the foreclosure law in Florida made foreclosure mills a practical necessity if there were to be any Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac mortgages let in the state, and so foreclosure mills and robo-signers have been around a lot longer in Florida, and fully well-known by everyone, including preening attorneys general, than the financial crisis.


    You seem to claim laws were broken to enforce a contract amongst the mortgagees? That isn’t really the issue here. If they breached their contract with each other, that’s not breaking a public law.


    The issue here is whether a procedural misstep in foreclosure should yield a free house. I stand by my assertion that allowing such a thing would do great violence to the rule of law, far greater than simply requiring a correction to the procedure.


    I won’t call you a dumbass again, but you’ve still not got the facts straight. It is not “breaking the law” that every assignment between mortgagees is not recorded. It is simply choosing, amongst themselves, to operate a supplementary assignment system.


    and this:


    “BR: That is not remotely what is going on with MERS. There is no parallel between the sharing of an asset between family members, and a fraudulent scheme designed to rip off filing fees from local towns, hide ownership of loans, and deceive the public thru an extra-legal technique that undermines 100s of years of property law.”


    What, pray tell, is fraudulent about Mers? The borrowers agreed to Mers as the nominee lender at closing. There is no attempt to hide ownership of loans, it is simply a means of expediting the loan to the investor. Who owns the mortgage matters not a whit to the borrower–he is to pay whomever he is told to pay–and the ability to assign the loan is also agreed to by the borrower at closing. How, exactly, does Mers undermine hundreds of years of property law? There has never been a requirement as between the parties to a real property interest that the conveyance be recorded in the public records to make it enforceable as between the parties. I really don’ t get this outrage. Mers has been around a long time, and greatly facilitated the mortgage securitization process. Does it have flaws? Sure. Are mistakes occasionally made between the lenders within Mers as to who owns the loan or the servicing rights? Sure. But those sorts of things are rare and hardly rise to the level of criminality.








  • Mbuna Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:36 pm

    Barry, get ready to hire those ninjas…. http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=172452

    as early as tomorrow!








  • Effective Demand Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:38 pm

    Notice the number of cases that support MERS:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MERS#Litigation_and_major_legal_decisions


    MERS seems to be losing some small cases which of course gets lots of press and winning the big cases, which doesn’t get any press. Nobody wants to hear that it’s actually legal and that they won’t actually get that house they overpaid for for free.








  • bergsten Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:39 pm

    @Fred C — I can explain what people are arguing about, thought it might be simpler all round for you to just look at all that’s been written and reported on the subject to date.


    I can explain why people are arguing — because people will argue about anything.


    I can explain what I am worried about:


    1. I take out a mortgage. 2. I dutifully pay my mortgage month after month until it’s paid off. 3. I ask the bank for the paperwork to show I no longer have a mortgage and own the property free and clear. 4. The bank tells me to pound salt as they weren’t the holders of the note. 5. The (lack of) precedent thanks to “nobody caring” about a few shortcuts and paperwork errors, causes the courts to tell me to pound salt too.


    Finally, I can explain what I’m mad about, though to do so, I am forced to invoke that conversation-stopping bit of history that starts with “H,” done by those who start with “N.”


    Millions of people were eventually tortured and killed because (effectively) nobody complained as each individual indignity, infraction, policy, procedure, eviction, curfew, restriction, graffiti, insult, violence, theft, discrimination, law, and on and on were each excused as being non-material.


    Everybody asked “how can this happen?” and say “it can’t happen here.”


    Well, it happens one small step at a time, and it sure can happen here.


    All you have to do is marginalize the rule of law.


    Still want to blame the whole thing on “deadbeats”?








  • LoveFreedomTruth.com Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 12:35 am

    Presidential Veto Override Attempt 

    H.R. 3808:

    to require any Federal or State court to recognize any notarization made by a notary public licensed by a State other than the State where the court is located when such notarization occurs in or affects interstate commerce.


    http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=172452


    I suggest everyone follows the market tickers advice. Fast








  • JerseyCynic Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 4:17 am

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/7691500/Cyber-attack-could-fell-US-within-15-minutes.html








  • JerseyCynic Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 4:20 am

    http://ca.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idCATRE6AF4UX20101116


    So gates says there is a huge future threat and a considerable current threat…


    I say perfect timing to pull the plug and make all this bad bad go away








  • JerseyCynic Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 4:57 am

    http://ca.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idCATRE6AF4UX20101116


    gates yesterday on cyber attack:


    “I think there is a huge future threat. And there is a considerable current threat,” Gates told The Wall Street Journal CEO Council. “And that’s just the reality that we all face.”


    PULL THE PLUG


    what a perfect way to make all this bad bad go away!


    Mr. Ritholtz — maybe you can get that team of Ninjas to install a few dead drops around the area so we can keep in touch…


    http://deaddrops.com/












  • Leave a Reply



    You must be logged in to post a comment.




    bench craft company scam

    Good Economic <b>News</b> May Be Bad for Fed Recovery Plan

    Consumers, the life's blood of the American economy, have shown a growing willingness to spend, but this might play havoc with the Federal Reserve's bold plans to revive the recovery.

    Arrowheadlines: Chiefs <b>News</b> 11/17 - Arrowhead Pride

    Good morning, AP. Another round of Kansas City Chiefs news on the house. Please read responsibly.

    Breaking <b>News</b>: Humanities in Decline! Film at 11. — Crooked Timber

    But I just don't know of any realm of human endeavor in which a precipitous decline from 1967 to 1987, followed by a couple of decades of stability, counts as breaking news. It's the equivalent of saying “sales of Sgt. Pepper posters ...


    bench craft company scam

    bench craft company scam

    Mayor David Cicilline, Councilman Kevin Jackson Announce New Help for Homeowners and Tenants Facing Foreclosure (August 6, 2009) by mayordavidcicilline


    bench craft company scam

    Good Economic <b>News</b> May Be Bad for Fed Recovery Plan

    Consumers, the life's blood of the American economy, have shown a growing willingness to spend, but this might play havoc with the Federal Reserve's bold plans to revive the recovery.

    Arrowheadlines: Chiefs <b>News</b> 11/17 - Arrowhead Pride

    Good morning, AP. Another round of Kansas City Chiefs news on the house. Please read responsibly.

    Breaking <b>News</b>: Humanities in Decline! Film at 11. — Crooked Timber

    But I just don't know of any realm of human endeavor in which a precipitous decline from 1967 to 1987, followed by a couple of decades of stability, counts as breaking news. It's the equivalent of saying “sales of Sgt. Pepper posters ...


    bench craft company scam


    BR: That is not remotely what is going on with MERS. There is no parallel between the sharing of an asset between family members, and a fraudulent scheme designed to rip off filing fees from local towns, hide ownership of loans, and deceive the public thru an extra-legal technique that undermines 100s of years of property law.


    It may only be Tuesday, but we have a winner for the dumbest comment of the week.








  • zell Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 4:37 pm

    FIFO: Felonies in; felonies out. The R.E. bubble was fostered by widespread deceit that has been ignored. It’s no surprise to see the same on the flip side.








  • Niskyboy Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 4:51 pm

    Hilarious.








  • Lugnut Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:03 pm

    Barry,


    You’ve hit upon a key topic that I took notice (at least with this particular issue) from day 1, and its one that drives me nuckin futz. Namely the absolute reluctance, if not outright refusal of the mainstream print and television media to characterize or hint that this situation is anything other than a mere ‘mistake’ that will cleaned up with some 409 and a paper towel, and we’ll all move happily on from there. That fact that its a persistant story, and not some one night mention little blurb, makes it all the more obvious and disquieting.


    What is it? Is it because they hadn’t done enough primary investigative journalism to feel comfortable in classifying it as fraud? Do they just not understand the nuances of the laws, paperwork, and complex relationships enough to not want to make an error in judgement in branding it fraud? Do the senior editors say “Lets wait till the Justice Department indicts them so we don’t have to make that judgement ourselves”? Or are there merely in the tank for the firms that devote a good chunk of their advertising dollars to their particular news organization, and/or are frequent guests?


    Whatever it is, I think it comes down to a total lack of balls, ethics, and conviction of purpose. They all guilty of it. Repeatedly. And quite franky it makes me sick. Its a Rorschach test for their continued Darwinistic self destruction of credibility.








  • Tarkus Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:14 pm

    Yes – everyone notices how the discussion of fraud when applied to financial companies is always handled with kiddie-glove euphemisms.


    It’s tiring, and the more they do it, the more you notice it.


    Fraud is rewitten using “mistakes”, “errors”, “oversights”, “incompetence” (until it is pay/bonus time), “didn’t see it coming”, etc, etc.


    WSJ and the rest are cowering, not reporting.








  • Andy T Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:33 pm

    Curmudgeon–


    You seem to have some knowledge on these type of matters and have an opinion that dissents from the “mob.”


    Thanks for the commentary on these matters.


    It’s a refreshing change of pace from almost every other comment I see here at TBP.








  • yoganmahew Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:37 pm

    That would be a syntactical error. If they had spelled it wrong, it would be a grammar error…








  • obsvr-1 Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 7:56 pm

    @ndy T Says (and Curmudgeon):


    Curmudgeon–


    You seem to have some knowledge on these type of matters and have an opinion that dissents from the “mob.”


    Thanks for the commentary on these matters.


    It’s a refreshing change of pace from almost every other comment I see here at TBP.


    —- Reply


    go watch the entire Senate Committee Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs hearing today on “Mortgage Services and Forclosure Processes”


    http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/296595-1


    The problem is much bigger that a technical issue of paperwork or process — amongst the criminal activities are fraud and unethical behavior throughout the servicer and banking industry which is magnifying the problem. Fraudclosure is just light that is illuminating a problem that is large enough for the Cong. Oversight Panel (COP) and the Senate Committee to call on the Financial Stability Oversight Committee to investigate systemic risk concerns.


    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/dodd-robo-signing-the-tip-of-the-iceberg-2010-11-16?dist=afterbell

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/watchdog-calls-for-second-round-of-stress-tests-2010-11-16?dist=afterbell


    And no, people who owe on their mortgage owe on their mortgage — arguing whether someone should get a free house because of a procedural problem is not the center of the issue (they shouldn’t). Questioning why nobody is going to jail for breaking, ignoring or circumventing the laws which is creating systemic risk (AGAIN) is a valid. The banks are in deep do-do and bail-outs are not on the menu this time around … a test of the FinReg resolution clauses may be in the near future.








  • RW Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:11 pm

    @Curmudgeon


    “…whether a third-party’s (the borrower) agreement to abide by assignments outside of the public records is enforceable against the borrower through a designated agent for doing so (Mers).”


    Seems reasonable but it appears that the structure and function of MERS itself has become the problem, not so?


    That is, the principle of MERS is not the problem — it does appear to be a legal entity even though it is essentially just a database, a filing cabinet, with no officers or employees — and all parties to the loan agreed to it as a nexus even though agency can clearly not be implemented directly by MERS.


    But then the integrity of MERS as that which establishes connection between buyer and seller(s), a nexus, becomes crucial so if suspicions arise that the filing cabinet is ‘damaged’ or otherwise unreliable — if it is not possible to go into the MERS database and pull up complete, accurate records with confirmable authenticity via accessible originals — then how is valid agency to be recreated?


    If a nexus between lenders (independent of their number or intra-agency agreements) and the third party cannot be established who then has standing to enforce a lien against the third party? It would seem that all agreements essentially become putative.








  • Jim67545 Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:23 pm

    Curmudgeon is entirely correct, based on my decent knowledge in the field. I would focus attention on whether the homeowner is actually delinquent, how far, whether they had tried to work out the situation in some way, whether they were ignored, whether they received due process, etc. Failures by the lenders in these areas should be punished. Otherwise, there is nothing nefarious about MERS, it is not some fraudulent conspiracy and the thought that it is a conspiracy to defraud title offices of recording costs is equally laughable. Yes, it no doubt has that intended effect but the task of tracking the recording of interests in mortgages every time they change hands would make the entire system unworkable.


    We have a housing financing market that is nearly totally constipated. Add into the mix a profound uncertainty over the legal standing that a mortgage holder may have and the few who might invest in this asset will run away – as will the 35% of the purchasers who are buying foreclosed properties. That direction leads to the government being the mortgage financier of only resort for as far as we can see. And, we should all know who puts up the $$ to make that happen. And, with foreclosed property sales dropping we would have a serious slowdown in absorption of foreclosed properties and farther price weaknesses (, losses to individuals and lenders, etc.)


    Collapse the current housing finance market and we are all back into 3 or 5 year ARMs. Kiss your 30 year fixed goodbye. That would seriously impact affordability not to mention the entire real estate industry not, need I point out, at the best of times. So, I suggest that most of those above look before they leap. This has to be worked out.








  • Fred C Dobbs Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:46 pm

    Let’s see if I understand what people are arguing about. 1) a bank makes a loan to someone, 2) the borrower secures the borrower promise to repay with a mortgage on the borrower’s residence, 3) the borrower fails or refuses to repay the loan, breaking his promise, 4) lender resorts to the security the borrower gave to secure his loan, that is, the bank initiates foreclosure, 5) borrower finds some defects in the loan or foreclosure paperwork and goes to a lawyer, 6) the lawyer tells the borrower it is cheaper to hire the lawyer to defeat foreclosure than for the borrower to keep his promise to repay, 7) the lawyer tells the court to rule the lender may not foreclose because ___(fill in the reason)_____, 8) the judge rules in favor of the borrower, 9) the lender now has an unsecured loan, for there can be no doubt that the borrower got the money and has not paid it back, (10) the borrower sells his mortgage-free residence, 11) borrower moves to another state taking his money with him, or otherwise makes him or his money unavailable to lender, 12) lender charges off the loan as uncollectible and takes a loss, the amount being equal to the unpaid loan balance plus accrued interest and costs. The bank lent the money in good faith, even though its processors may have made documentary mistakes, and likewise began foreclosure in good faith, even though it may have made documentary mistakes. Lender, in bad faith, fails or refuses to repay loan.


    Now, who thinks the poor, little down-trodden borrower deserves to keep the money, at the same time f___ his fellow members of society? Banks function as financial intermediaries for the benefit of all. Weakening a bank, giving a portion of its net worth to a bad faith borrower, weakens us all. The supply of lendable funds is reduced, and the demand causes the cost to rise.








  • Harry Lime Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:55 pm

    Classic, classic stuff. This reminds me that there is a God. Whether there is Justice or not is still to be determined.








  • DeDude Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 9:12 pm

    Cynic;


    You are not cynical enough. The reason treasuries are up is that somebody is about to sell a lot of treasuries to the Fed. Got to get those prices jammed up so you can sell at a profit.








  • LoveFreedomTruth.com Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 9:31 pm

    This Presidential veto override attempt should fix things


    Veto Override Attempt

    H.R. 3808:

    to require any Federal or State court to recognize any notarization made by a notary public licensed by a State other than the State where the court is located when such notarization occurs in or affects interstate commerce.


    http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=172452


    I suggest everyone follows the market tickers advice. Fast








  • hammerandtong2001 Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 9:49 pm

    ****It doesn’t matter when mortgage assignments and endorsements are recorded because the existence of the pooling and service agreement and purchase sale agreement is proof in itself that the loan was conveyed, said Stephen Ornstein, a partner in the Washington office of SNR Denton, a law firm that represents loan servicers and lenders.


    “If the assignment is missing, you can create it by having the old assignee reassign it to you,” Ornstein said.****


    I’ve heard this argument before, and none of the five experts who advise New York state on trust matters (and virtually all mortgage securitizations use New York trusts) accept that point of view. New York trusts can accept assets only as stipulated in their governing agreement. The pooling and servicing agreement made very specific provisions as to how the notes (the borrower IOUs) were to be endorsed and further required that the process be completed by specific dates, typically no later than 90 days after the trust was closed, with only very limited exceptions. And the trustee, on behalf of the trust, was required to provide multiple certifications that all these steps had been taken.


    Let’s put it another way: the industry position is that the underlying contract, the pooling and servicing agreement, can just be ignored if the industry screws up on a grand enough scale. Would any servicer tolerate this argument if someone, say Treasury, tried to cut their fees? Funny how the “sanctity of contract” argument is nowhere to be found when adherence to contracts might crimp industry profits.


    AND…


    “SIFMA rejects sweeping claims that fundamental flaws regarding the transfer and ownership of mortgage loans are endemic to secondary markets and mortgage securitization, and believes that such concerns are exaggerated and without merit. While each situation may have variations, SIFMA believes that the customary practices utilized in secondary markets to convey ownership of mortgage loans from originators to other parties, and into securitization trusts, are sound and in accordance with generally applicable legal principles.”


    The use of “sweeping claims” implies that the critics have no evidence for their views, when borrower attorneys all over the US report widespread errors. A group of nearly 100 attorneys who work with bankruptcy lawyer Max Gardner have reported that in their collective experience, they have yet to find a single note that was conveyed correctly in accordance with the requirements of the pooling and servicing agreement. Other investigations show widespread problems. As much as SIFMA tries to dismiss the use of the word “endemic”, all they offer is bluster, when the evidence on the ground to the contrary is extensive.


    And you have to love this part: “customary practices…are sound and in accordance with generally applicable legal principles.” This is simple an effort to divert attention from the fact that the contracts that the industry itself devised were often ignored. So a more accurate rendering would be “We did what was convenient instead of what we agreed to do, and if you pretend we didn’t have to satisfy a lot of complicated legal requirements to meet all the objectives of all the parties, we can find a way to justify what we did.”


    It’s all here:


    http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/11/more-mortgage-securitization-industry-propaganda-via-new-york-times-sifma.html


    And I’m the “dumbass”?


    Breaking the law to enforce a contract, no matter the material weight of breach on the offending parties’ side, is still breaking the law.


    There it is.


    .








  • Bill W Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:10 pm

    b_thunder,


    I agree with that sentiment. This could become an opportunity for Obama to reform the system the way it needs to be reformed. By letting the stupid and the greedy reap what they’ve sowed.


    The political opportunity for him is to steal some of the T-Party’s anti-establishment thunder.








  • The Curmudgeon Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:29 pm

    @hammerandtong2001:


    Mortgage assignments between mortgagees, whether or not they are recorded in the public records, are enforceable as between each other, according to whatever contract they have entered regarding the assignments.


    When borrowers signed the mortgages with the Mers as the nominee, they explicitly agreed, pursuant to the terms of the mortgage, that Mers had all the rights and obligations of the actual lender, so far as they are concerned, and that assignments could be made to other lenders in Mers which would not affect their relationship with Mers as the nominee agent for whatever lender made the assignment and to whom it was made.


    Mers has been operating without objection in all fifty states for over a decade now, and only became an issue when a few clever lawyers and populist nutcase attorneys general decided that the system might serve as a good whipping boy for all these poor folks losing their homes that incidentally also serve on jury pools and vote in attorneys general elections.


    If there was this terrible objection to the practices of Mers before, then why did the populists wait ’til now to present them? Same’s true of foreclosure affidavits in Florida and elsewhere. The structure of the foreclosure law in Florida made foreclosure mills a practical necessity if there were to be any Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac mortgages let in the state, and so foreclosure mills and robo-signers have been around a lot longer in Florida, and fully well-known by everyone, including preening attorneys general, than the financial crisis.


    You seem to claim laws were broken to enforce a contract amongst the mortgagees? That isn’t really the issue here. If they breached their contract with each other, that’s not breaking a public law.


    The issue here is whether a procedural misstep in foreclosure should yield a free house. I stand by my assertion that allowing such a thing would do great violence to the rule of law, far greater than simply requiring a correction to the procedure.


    I won’t call you a dumbass again, but you’ve still not got the facts straight. It is not “breaking the law” that every assignment between mortgagees is not recorded. It is simply choosing, amongst themselves, to operate a supplementary assignment system.


    and this:


    “BR: That is not remotely what is going on with MERS. There is no parallel between the sharing of an asset between family members, and a fraudulent scheme designed to rip off filing fees from local towns, hide ownership of loans, and deceive the public thru an extra-legal technique that undermines 100s of years of property law.”


    What, pray tell, is fraudulent about Mers? The borrowers agreed to Mers as the nominee lender at closing. There is no attempt to hide ownership of loans, it is simply a means of expediting the loan to the investor. Who owns the mortgage matters not a whit to the borrower–he is to pay whomever he is told to pay–and the ability to assign the loan is also agreed to by the borrower at closing. How, exactly, does Mers undermine hundreds of years of property law? There has never been a requirement as between the parties to a real property interest that the conveyance be recorded in the public records to make it enforceable as between the parties. I really don’ t get this outrage. Mers has been around a long time, and greatly facilitated the mortgage securitization process. Does it have flaws? Sure. Are mistakes occasionally made between the lenders within Mers as to who owns the loan or the servicing rights? Sure. But those sorts of things are rare and hardly rise to the level of criminality.








  • Mbuna Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:36 pm

    Barry, get ready to hire those ninjas…. http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=172452

    as early as tomorrow!








  • Effective Demand Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:38 pm

    Notice the number of cases that support MERS:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MERS#Litigation_and_major_legal_decisions


    MERS seems to be losing some small cases which of course gets lots of press and winning the big cases, which doesn’t get any press. Nobody wants to hear that it’s actually legal and that they won’t actually get that house they overpaid for for free.








  • bergsten Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:39 pm

    @Fred C — I can explain what people are arguing about, thought it might be simpler all round for you to just look at all that’s been written and reported on the subject to date.


    I can explain why people are arguing — because people will argue about anything.


    I can explain what I am worried about:


    1. I take out a mortgage. 2. I dutifully pay my mortgage month after month until it’s paid off. 3. I ask the bank for the paperwork to show I no longer have a mortgage and own the property free and clear. 4. The bank tells me to pound salt as they weren’t the holders of the note. 5. The (lack of) precedent thanks to “nobody caring” about a few shortcuts and paperwork errors, causes the courts to tell me to pound salt too.


    Finally, I can explain what I’m mad about, though to do so, I am forced to invoke that conversation-stopping bit of history that starts with “H,” done by those who start with “N.”


    Millions of people were eventually tortured and killed because (effectively) nobody complained as each individual indignity, infraction, policy, procedure, eviction, curfew, restriction, graffiti, insult, violence, theft, discrimination, law, and on and on were each excused as being non-material.


    Everybody asked “how can this happen?” and say “it can’t happen here.”


    Well, it happens one small step at a time, and it sure can happen here.


    All you have to do is marginalize the rule of law.


    Still want to blame the whole thing on “deadbeats”?








  • LoveFreedomTruth.com Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 12:35 am

    Presidential Veto Override Attempt 

    H.R. 3808:

    to require any Federal or State court to recognize any notarization made by a notary public licensed by a State other than the State where the court is located when such notarization occurs in or affects interstate commerce.


    http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=172452


    I suggest everyone follows the market tickers advice. Fast








  • JerseyCynic Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 4:17 am

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/7691500/Cyber-attack-could-fell-US-within-15-minutes.html








  • JerseyCynic Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 4:20 am

    http://ca.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idCATRE6AF4UX20101116


    So gates says there is a huge future threat and a considerable current threat…


    I say perfect timing to pull the plug and make all this bad bad go away








  • JerseyCynic Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 4:57 am

    http://ca.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idCATRE6AF4UX20101116


    gates yesterday on cyber attack:


    “I think there is a huge future threat. And there is a considerable current threat,” Gates told The Wall Street Journal CEO Council. “And that’s just the reality that we all face.”


    PULL THE PLUG


    what a perfect way to make all this bad bad go away!


    Mr. Ritholtz — maybe you can get that team of Ninjas to install a few dead drops around the area so we can keep in touch…


    http://deaddrops.com/












  • Leave a Reply



    You must be logged in to post a comment.




    BR: That is not remotely what is going on with MERS. There is no parallel between the sharing of an asset between family members, and a fraudulent scheme designed to rip off filing fees from local towns, hide ownership of loans, and deceive the public thru an extra-legal technique that undermines 100s of years of property law.


    It may only be Tuesday, but we have a winner for the dumbest comment of the week.








  • zell Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 4:37 pm

    FIFO: Felonies in; felonies out. The R.E. bubble was fostered by widespread deceit that has been ignored. It’s no surprise to see the same on the flip side.








  • Niskyboy Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 4:51 pm

    Hilarious.








  • Lugnut Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:03 pm

    Barry,


    You’ve hit upon a key topic that I took notice (at least with this particular issue) from day 1, and its one that drives me nuckin futz. Namely the absolute reluctance, if not outright refusal of the mainstream print and television media to characterize or hint that this situation is anything other than a mere ‘mistake’ that will cleaned up with some 409 and a paper towel, and we’ll all move happily on from there. That fact that its a persistant story, and not some one night mention little blurb, makes it all the more obvious and disquieting.


    What is it? Is it because they hadn’t done enough primary investigative journalism to feel comfortable in classifying it as fraud? Do they just not understand the nuances of the laws, paperwork, and complex relationships enough to not want to make an error in judgement in branding it fraud? Do the senior editors say “Lets wait till the Justice Department indicts them so we don’t have to make that judgement ourselves”? Or are there merely in the tank for the firms that devote a good chunk of their advertising dollars to their particular news organization, and/or are frequent guests?


    Whatever it is, I think it comes down to a total lack of balls, ethics, and conviction of purpose. They all guilty of it. Repeatedly. And quite franky it makes me sick. Its a Rorschach test for their continued Darwinistic self destruction of credibility.








  • Tarkus Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:14 pm

    Yes – everyone notices how the discussion of fraud when applied to financial companies is always handled with kiddie-glove euphemisms.


    It’s tiring, and the more they do it, the more you notice it.


    Fraud is rewitten using “mistakes”, “errors”, “oversights”, “incompetence” (until it is pay/bonus time), “didn’t see it coming”, etc, etc.


    WSJ and the rest are cowering, not reporting.








  • Andy T Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:33 pm

    Curmudgeon–


    You seem to have some knowledge on these type of matters and have an opinion that dissents from the “mob.”


    Thanks for the commentary on these matters.


    It’s a refreshing change of pace from almost every other comment I see here at TBP.








  • yoganmahew Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 5:37 pm

    That would be a syntactical error. If they had spelled it wrong, it would be a grammar error…








  • obsvr-1 Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 7:56 pm

    @ndy T Says (and Curmudgeon):


    Curmudgeon–


    You seem to have some knowledge on these type of matters and have an opinion that dissents from the “mob.”


    Thanks for the commentary on these matters.


    It’s a refreshing change of pace from almost every other comment I see here at TBP.


    —- Reply


    go watch the entire Senate Committee Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs hearing today on “Mortgage Services and Forclosure Processes”


    http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/296595-1


    The problem is much bigger that a technical issue of paperwork or process — amongst the criminal activities are fraud and unethical behavior throughout the servicer and banking industry which is magnifying the problem. Fraudclosure is just light that is illuminating a problem that is large enough for the Cong. Oversight Panel (COP) and the Senate Committee to call on the Financial Stability Oversight Committee to investigate systemic risk concerns.


    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/dodd-robo-signing-the-tip-of-the-iceberg-2010-11-16?dist=afterbell

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/watchdog-calls-for-second-round-of-stress-tests-2010-11-16?dist=afterbell


    And no, people who owe on their mortgage owe on their mortgage — arguing whether someone should get a free house because of a procedural problem is not the center of the issue (they shouldn’t). Questioning why nobody is going to jail for breaking, ignoring or circumventing the laws which is creating systemic risk (AGAIN) is a valid. The banks are in deep do-do and bail-outs are not on the menu this time around … a test of the FinReg resolution clauses may be in the near future.








  • RW Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:11 pm

    @Curmudgeon


    “…whether a third-party’s (the borrower) agreement to abide by assignments outside of the public records is enforceable against the borrower through a designated agent for doing so (Mers).”


    Seems reasonable but it appears that the structure and function of MERS itself has become the problem, not so?


    That is, the principle of MERS is not the problem — it does appear to be a legal entity even though it is essentially just a database, a filing cabinet, with no officers or employees — and all parties to the loan agreed to it as a nexus even though agency can clearly not be implemented directly by MERS.


    But then the integrity of MERS as that which establishes connection between buyer and seller(s), a nexus, becomes crucial so if suspicions arise that the filing cabinet is ‘damaged’ or otherwise unreliable — if it is not possible to go into the MERS database and pull up complete, accurate records with confirmable authenticity via accessible originals — then how is valid agency to be recreated?


    If a nexus between lenders (independent of their number or intra-agency agreements) and the third party cannot be established who then has standing to enforce a lien against the third party? It would seem that all agreements essentially become putative.








  • Jim67545 Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:23 pm

    Curmudgeon is entirely correct, based on my decent knowledge in the field. I would focus attention on whether the homeowner is actually delinquent, how far, whether they had tried to work out the situation in some way, whether they were ignored, whether they received due process, etc. Failures by the lenders in these areas should be punished. Otherwise, there is nothing nefarious about MERS, it is not some fraudulent conspiracy and the thought that it is a conspiracy to defraud title offices of recording costs is equally laughable. Yes, it no doubt has that intended effect but the task of tracking the recording of interests in mortgages every time they change hands would make the entire system unworkable.


    We have a housing financing market that is nearly totally constipated. Add into the mix a profound uncertainty over the legal standing that a mortgage holder may have and the few who might invest in this asset will run away – as will the 35% of the purchasers who are buying foreclosed properties. That direction leads to the government being the mortgage financier of only resort for as far as we can see. And, we should all know who puts up the $$ to make that happen. And, with foreclosed property sales dropping we would have a serious slowdown in absorption of foreclosed properties and farther price weaknesses (, losses to individuals and lenders, etc.)


    Collapse the current housing finance market and we are all back into 3 or 5 year ARMs. Kiss your 30 year fixed goodbye. That would seriously impact affordability not to mention the entire real estate industry not, need I point out, at the best of times. So, I suggest that most of those above look before they leap. This has to be worked out.








  • Fred C Dobbs Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:46 pm

    Let’s see if I understand what people are arguing about. 1) a bank makes a loan to someone, 2) the borrower secures the borrower promise to repay with a mortgage on the borrower’s residence, 3) the borrower fails or refuses to repay the loan, breaking his promise, 4) lender resorts to the security the borrower gave to secure his loan, that is, the bank initiates foreclosure, 5) borrower finds some defects in the loan or foreclosure paperwork and goes to a lawyer, 6) the lawyer tells the borrower it is cheaper to hire the lawyer to defeat foreclosure than for the borrower to keep his promise to repay, 7) the lawyer tells the court to rule the lender may not foreclose because ___(fill in the reason)_____, 8) the judge rules in favor of the borrower, 9) the lender now has an unsecured loan, for there can be no doubt that the borrower got the money and has not paid it back, (10) the borrower sells his mortgage-free residence, 11) borrower moves to another state taking his money with him, or otherwise makes him or his money unavailable to lender, 12) lender charges off the loan as uncollectible and takes a loss, the amount being equal to the unpaid loan balance plus accrued interest and costs. The bank lent the money in good faith, even though its processors may have made documentary mistakes, and likewise began foreclosure in good faith, even though it may have made documentary mistakes. Lender, in bad faith, fails or refuses to repay loan.


    Now, who thinks the poor, little down-trodden borrower deserves to keep the money, at the same time f___ his fellow members of society? Banks function as financial intermediaries for the benefit of all. Weakening a bank, giving a portion of its net worth to a bad faith borrower, weakens us all. The supply of lendable funds is reduced, and the demand causes the cost to rise.








  • Harry Lime Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 8:55 pm

    Classic, classic stuff. This reminds me that there is a God. Whether there is Justice or not is still to be determined.








  • DeDude Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 9:12 pm

    Cynic;


    You are not cynical enough. The reason treasuries are up is that somebody is about to sell a lot of treasuries to the Fed. Got to get those prices jammed up so you can sell at a profit.








  • LoveFreedomTruth.com Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 9:31 pm

    This Presidential veto override attempt should fix things


    Veto Override Attempt

    H.R. 3808:

    to require any Federal or State court to recognize any notarization made by a notary public licensed by a State other than the State where the court is located when such notarization occurs in or affects interstate commerce.


    http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=172452


    I suggest everyone follows the market tickers advice. Fast








  • hammerandtong2001 Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 9:49 pm

    ****It doesn’t matter when mortgage assignments and endorsements are recorded because the existence of the pooling and service agreement and purchase sale agreement is proof in itself that the loan was conveyed, said Stephen Ornstein, a partner in the Washington office of SNR Denton, a law firm that represents loan servicers and lenders.


    “If the assignment is missing, you can create it by having the old assignee reassign it to you,” Ornstein said.****


    I’ve heard this argument before, and none of the five experts who advise New York state on trust matters (and virtually all mortgage securitizations use New York trusts) accept that point of view. New York trusts can accept assets only as stipulated in their governing agreement. The pooling and servicing agreement made very specific provisions as to how the notes (the borrower IOUs) were to be endorsed and further required that the process be completed by specific dates, typically no later than 90 days after the trust was closed, with only very limited exceptions. And the trustee, on behalf of the trust, was required to provide multiple certifications that all these steps had been taken.


    Let’s put it another way: the industry position is that the underlying contract, the pooling and servicing agreement, can just be ignored if the industry screws up on a grand enough scale. Would any servicer tolerate this argument if someone, say Treasury, tried to cut their fees? Funny how the “sanctity of contract” argument is nowhere to be found when adherence to contracts might crimp industry profits.


    AND…


    “SIFMA rejects sweeping claims that fundamental flaws regarding the transfer and ownership of mortgage loans are endemic to secondary markets and mortgage securitization, and believes that such concerns are exaggerated and without merit. While each situation may have variations, SIFMA believes that the customary practices utilized in secondary markets to convey ownership of mortgage loans from originators to other parties, and into securitization trusts, are sound and in accordance with generally applicable legal principles.”


    The use of “sweeping claims” implies that the critics have no evidence for their views, when borrower attorneys all over the US report widespread errors. A group of nearly 100 attorneys who work with bankruptcy lawyer Max Gardner have reported that in their collective experience, they have yet to find a single note that was conveyed correctly in accordance with the requirements of the pooling and servicing agreement. Other investigations show widespread problems. As much as SIFMA tries to dismiss the use of the word “endemic”, all they offer is bluster, when the evidence on the ground to the contrary is extensive.


    And you have to love this part: “customary practices…are sound and in accordance with generally applicable legal principles.” This is simple an effort to divert attention from the fact that the contracts that the industry itself devised were often ignored. So a more accurate rendering would be “We did what was convenient instead of what we agreed to do, and if you pretend we didn’t have to satisfy a lot of complicated legal requirements to meet all the objectives of all the parties, we can find a way to justify what we did.”


    It’s all here:


    http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/11/more-mortgage-securitization-industry-propaganda-via-new-york-times-sifma.html


    And I’m the “dumbass”?


    Breaking the law to enforce a contract, no matter the material weight of breach on the offending parties’ side, is still breaking the law.


    There it is.


    .








  • Bill W Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:10 pm

    b_thunder,


    I agree with that sentiment. This could become an opportunity for Obama to reform the system the way it needs to be reformed. By letting the stupid and the greedy reap what they’ve sowed.


    The political opportunity for him is to steal some of the T-Party’s anti-establishment thunder.








  • The Curmudgeon Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:29 pm

    @hammerandtong2001:


    Mortgage assignments between mortgagees, whether or not they are recorded in the public records, are enforceable as between each other, according to whatever contract they have entered regarding the assignments.


    When borrowers signed the mortgages with the Mers as the nominee, they explicitly agreed, pursuant to the terms of the mortgage, that Mers had all the rights and obligations of the actual lender, so far as they are concerned, and that assignments could be made to other lenders in Mers which would not affect their relationship with Mers as the nominee agent for whatever lender made the assignment and to whom it was made.


    Mers has been operating without objection in all fifty states for over a decade now, and only became an issue when a few clever lawyers and populist nutcase attorneys general decided that the system might serve as a good whipping boy for all these poor folks losing their homes that incidentally also serve on jury pools and vote in attorneys general elections.


    If there was this terrible objection to the practices of Mers before, then why did the populists wait ’til now to present them? Same’s true of foreclosure affidavits in Florida and elsewhere. The structure of the foreclosure law in Florida made foreclosure mills a practical necessity if there were to be any Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac mortgages let in the state, and so foreclosure mills and robo-signers have been around a lot longer in Florida, and fully well-known by everyone, including preening attorneys general, than the financial crisis.


    You seem to claim laws were broken to enforce a contract amongst the mortgagees? That isn’t really the issue here. If they breached their contract with each other, that’s not breaking a public law.


    The issue here is whether a procedural misstep in foreclosure should yield a free house. I stand by my assertion that allowing such a thing would do great violence to the rule of law, far greater than simply requiring a correction to the procedure.


    I won’t call you a dumbass again, but you’ve still not got the facts straight. It is not “breaking the law” that every assignment between mortgagees is not recorded. It is simply choosing, amongst themselves, to operate a supplementary assignment system.


    and this:


    “BR: That is not remotely what is going on with MERS. There is no parallel between the sharing of an asset between family members, and a fraudulent scheme designed to rip off filing fees from local towns, hide ownership of loans, and deceive the public thru an extra-legal technique that undermines 100s of years of property law.”


    What, pray tell, is fraudulent about Mers? The borrowers agreed to Mers as the nominee lender at closing. There is no attempt to hide ownership of loans, it is simply a means of expediting the loan to the investor. Who owns the mortgage matters not a whit to the borrower–he is to pay whomever he is told to pay–and the ability to assign the loan is also agreed to by the borrower at closing. How, exactly, does Mers undermine hundreds of years of property law? There has never been a requirement as between the parties to a real property interest that the conveyance be recorded in the public records to make it enforceable as between the parties. I really don’ t get this outrage. Mers has been around a long time, and greatly facilitated the mortgage securitization process. Does it have flaws? Sure. Are mistakes occasionally made between the lenders within Mers as to who owns the loan or the servicing rights? Sure. But those sorts of things are rare and hardly rise to the level of criminality.








  • Mbuna Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:36 pm

    Barry, get ready to hire those ninjas…. http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=172452

    as early as tomorrow!








  • Effective Demand Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:38 pm

    Notice the number of cases that support MERS:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MERS#Litigation_and_major_legal_decisions


    MERS seems to be losing some small cases which of course gets lots of press and winning the big cases, which doesn’t get any press. Nobody wants to hear that it’s actually legal and that they won’t actually get that house they overpaid for for free.








  • bergsten Says:



    November 16th, 2010 at 10:39 pm

    @Fred C — I can explain what people are arguing about, thought it might be simpler all round for you to just look at all that’s been written and reported on the subject to date.


    I can explain why people are arguing — because people will argue about anything.


    I can explain what I am worried about:


    1. I take out a mortgage. 2. I dutifully pay my mortgage month after month until it’s paid off. 3. I ask the bank for the paperwork to show I no longer have a mortgage and own the property free and clear. 4. The bank tells me to pound salt as they weren’t the holders of the note. 5. The (lack of) precedent thanks to “nobody caring” about a few shortcuts and paperwork errors, causes the courts to tell me to pound salt too.


    Finally, I can explain what I’m mad about, though to do so, I am forced to invoke that conversation-stopping bit of history that starts with “H,” done by those who start with “N.”


    Millions of people were eventually tortured and killed because (effectively) nobody complained as each individual indignity, infraction, policy, procedure, eviction, curfew, restriction, graffiti, insult, violence, theft, discrimination, law, and on and on were each excused as being non-material.


    Everybody asked “how can this happen?” and say “it can’t happen here.”


    Well, it happens one small step at a time, and it sure can happen here.


    All you have to do is marginalize the rule of law.


    Still want to blame the whole thing on “deadbeats”?








  • LoveFreedomTruth.com Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 12:35 am

    Presidential Veto Override Attempt 

    H.R. 3808:

    to require any Federal or State court to recognize any notarization made by a notary public licensed by a State other than the State where the court is located when such notarization occurs in or affects interstate commerce.


    http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=172452


    I suggest everyone follows the market tickers advice. Fast








  • JerseyCynic Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 4:17 am

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/7691500/Cyber-attack-could-fell-US-within-15-minutes.html








  • JerseyCynic Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 4:20 am

    http://ca.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idCATRE6AF4UX20101116


    So gates says there is a huge future threat and a considerable current threat…


    I say perfect timing to pull the plug and make all this bad bad go away








  • JerseyCynic Says:



    November 17th, 2010 at 4:57 am

    http://ca.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idCATRE6AF4UX20101116


    gates yesterday on cyber attack:


    “I think there is a huge future threat. And there is a considerable current threat,” Gates told The Wall Street Journal CEO Council. “And that’s just the reality that we all face.”


    PULL THE PLUG


    what a perfect way to make all this bad bad go away!


    Mr. Ritholtz — maybe you can get that team of Ninjas to install a few dead drops around the area so we can keep in touch…


    http://deaddrops.com/












  • Leave a Reply



    You must be logged in to post a comment.




    bench craft company scam

    Mayor David Cicilline, Councilman Kevin Jackson Announce New Help for Homeowners and Tenants Facing Foreclosure (August 6, 2009) by mayordavidcicilline


    bench craft company scam

    Good Economic <b>News</b> May Be Bad for Fed Recovery Plan

    Consumers, the life's blood of the American economy, have shown a growing willingness to spend, but this might play havoc with the Federal Reserve's bold plans to revive the recovery.

    Arrowheadlines: Chiefs <b>News</b> 11/17 - Arrowhead Pride

    Good morning, AP. Another round of Kansas City Chiefs news on the house. Please read responsibly.

    Breaking <b>News</b>: Humanities in Decline! Film at 11. — Crooked Timber

    But I just don't know of any realm of human endeavor in which a precipitous decline from 1967 to 1987, followed by a couple of decades of stability, counts as breaking news. It's the equivalent of saying “sales of Sgt. Pepper posters ...


    bench craft company scam

    Mayor David Cicilline, Councilman Kevin Jackson Announce New Help for Homeowners and Tenants Facing Foreclosure (August 6, 2009) by mayordavidcicilline


    bench craft company scam

    Good Economic <b>News</b> May Be Bad for Fed Recovery Plan

    Consumers, the life's blood of the American economy, have shown a growing willingness to spend, but this might play havoc with the Federal Reserve's bold plans to revive the recovery.

    Arrowheadlines: Chiefs <b>News</b> 11/17 - Arrowhead Pride

    Good morning, AP. Another round of Kansas City Chiefs news on the house. Please read responsibly.

    Breaking <b>News</b>: Humanities in Decline! Film at 11. — Crooked Timber

    But I just don't know of any realm of human endeavor in which a precipitous decline from 1967 to 1987, followed by a couple of decades of stability, counts as breaking news. It's the equivalent of saying “sales of Sgt. Pepper posters ...


    benchcraft company scam

    Good Economic <b>News</b> May Be Bad for Fed Recovery Plan

    Consumers, the life's blood of the American economy, have shown a growing willingness to spend, but this might play havoc with the Federal Reserve's bold plans to revive the recovery.

    Arrowheadlines: Chiefs <b>News</b> 11/17 - Arrowhead Pride

    Good morning, AP. Another round of Kansas City Chiefs news on the house. Please read responsibly.

    Breaking <b>News</b>: Humanities in Decline! Film at 11. — Crooked Timber

    But I just don't know of any realm of human endeavor in which a precipitous decline from 1967 to 1987, followed by a couple of decades of stability, counts as breaking news. It's the equivalent of saying “sales of Sgt. Pepper posters ...


    bench craft company scam

    Good Economic <b>News</b> May Be Bad for Fed Recovery Plan

    Consumers, the life's blood of the American economy, have shown a growing willingness to spend, but this might play havoc with the Federal Reserve's bold plans to revive the recovery.

    Arrowheadlines: Chiefs <b>News</b> 11/17 - Arrowhead Pride

    Good morning, AP. Another round of Kansas City Chiefs news on the house. Please read responsibly.

    Breaking <b>News</b>: Humanities in Decline! Film at 11. — Crooked Timber

    But I just don't know of any realm of human endeavor in which a precipitous decline from 1967 to 1987, followed by a couple of decades of stability, counts as breaking news. It's the equivalent of saying “sales of Sgt. Pepper posters ...


    how to lose weight fast benchcraft company scam
    bench craft company scam

    Mayor David Cicilline, Councilman Kevin Jackson Announce New Help for Homeowners and Tenants Facing Foreclosure (August 6, 2009) by mayordavidcicilline


    benchcraft company scam