Here's the 64,000 dollar question, well, if you think in century long spans: Has there ever been such a aggregate stupid government in all of human history?

Quote:

The only thing Obama could do is issue some kind of Executive Order using some lame excuse like "national security" or "martial law". That ain't gonna fly with the people nor their representatives, let alone the courts...

Hmm...where have I heard that before?

http://market-ticker.org/cgi-ticker/akcs....

This is a self-defeating cycle, Spank. More nonsense statutes from the authorities will only lead to more people saying fuggit and refusing to pay for this. They already tried to pull this BS a couple of years ago and that's precisely the reason we're in even bigger cahoots now. I repeat, it's a self-defeating feedback loop. Great danger... Don't even go there...

Spank has pretty much nailed it.

The Federal government WILL step in an attempt to resolve this with a mandate, whether legal or not. It's already happening. The very same banks and mortgage companies responsible for the 2008 fiasco - all are named now and implicated here - including Wells Fargo, which the WSJ reported today are now investigating their own mess. The WSJ was almost two weeks late in reporting this, as Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae spelled this out clearly on Oct. 1. Wells certainly wasn't going to send out a press release.

Ask yourselves what these banks have in common? They all - every, single one implicated here - took federal bailout money. That's just one way the feds get in this door ... and RICO is another. I honestly doubt RICO would be used, as that would involve actual people in suits going to prison. Fines? Probably. But what's a few hundred million when you just sucked trillions out of taxpayers? Peanuts.

For a brief review, read what happened to all the bailout money.

http://articles.cnn.com/2008-12-22/us/ba....

Quote:

Where the money went is not clear.

"We are using the TARP funds to build our capital and make every good loan that we can," Bank of America said. The bank said it expects to release more information in its fourth quarter earning report.

Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo each received $25 billion -- the largest amount given to any bank.

Wells Fargo said it can't provide any details until it releases its fourth quarter statement, though the bank said it intends to use the money to help customers avoid foreclosure.

Citigroup said it was using TARP money to help expand the flow of credit and had formed a special committee to oversee the TARP money.

JPMorgan Chase pointed out that it recently bought more than $1 billion in Illinois bonds and plans to lend $5 billion to nonprofit and health care companies.

"What the banks have said largely is that we're using the money to stimulate the economy, to get the economy moving," said Sarah Binder, a senior fellow at The Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank. "That's far, far too general to know what ... the banks are doing with the money."

You can stomp your feet, declare it isn't a federal issue all you want and protest on the White House lawn for all I care, but the feds will step in and apply their 'fix,' which will more than likely be unconstitutional and lead to erosion of personal property rights. It will be done 'for the good of the country' or some **** equally retarded. Cases will be tied up in courts for years and lawyers make ****loads of money. A few years down the line, we may even see SCOTUS involved and then the coup on the American people and their 'legal rights' will be complete. Meanwhile, life will go on unless people everywhere simply stop paying their mortgages, which isn't likely.

Quote:

According to a letter sent out Oct. 1, Fannie Mae (short for Federal National Mortgage Association) directed all of its servicers to immediately start reviewing their procedures "relating to the execution of affidavits, verifications, and other legal documents in connection with the default process."

If the servicer has any problems, it "must advise its legal counsel to contact Fannie Mae in writing immediately," the letter says. The letter is signed by Gwen Muse-Evans, vice president and chief risk officer for credit portfolio management.

If a servicer falls short of the guidelines, "Fannie Mae may terminate the lender's contract," seek to be indemnified for any losses, or require the lender to repurchase a mortgage, according to the letter. Timothy Mayopolous, general counsel of Fannie Mae, declined to comment on the letter's warning.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Government....

In case anyone hasn't checked the facts, we've been operating as a nation under a declared 'state of emergency' for quit some time. 'Rights' aren't what you think they are ...

Quote:

STATE LAW problem.

Yes it is. Let's hope the FED doesn't reinstate measures from the �� National Bank Act" as it diod in 2003 to subvert powers by the states.


... addendum, by FED I meant the federal government, NOT the banking cartel.

Bohemian:

I hate to break this to you, but not ALL of the big banks could remain in the current state EVEN ABSENT "foreclosuregate." There wouldn't be serious discussion in Congress, Treasury, the FDIC and other bodies about how to slice and dice them into smaller pieces if they were all financially stable.

Too big to fail is still too big to fail. The big banks are just getting bigger and the small banks are vanishing, in case you missed that development in the last three years.

And I hate to break it to you, but if you are resting on 'hope' that the FED won't get involved here, you will probably be in for a disappointment. Gee, 'hope' ... where have I heard that before? Hmmm, I remember hearing that along with another curious phrase ... 'fundamental change.'

You can write STATE LAW problem in caps and pound on the keyboard all day, but the Big 3 (WellsFargo, BofA and JPMorgan/Chase) won't be going out of business and their CEOs won't be going to jail. It's a nice fantasy, but it won't happen.

Get ready for federal FED intervention. And with a Marxist maniac at the helm, this should be a fun ride, don't you think?

The last I read, Obama wanted to institute some bureaucracy to determine who would get credit and how much.

How would YOU get the banks to play along with this kind totalitarian dictatorship?

Think about it.

Call me naive then, because I really don't see how the Obamamessiah can make this whole without massive disruption.

FDR did that with his banking holiday. Obama would need to do the same by suspending all mortgage activity until "the experts" come up with a "fix". In the meantime, the real economy still goes to ****, and the question MUST still be answered in EVERY SINGLE CASE as to WHO OWNS WHAT.

This isn't simply a money matter where we can flood the banks with trillions; this is a property rights issue that is not quickly resolved. If Obama gets in the middle here, and he effectively nationalizes property, then I'm pretty sure 100 million "Homeowners" will be stopping mortgage payments and will be in the streets and in the face of DC over ****ing with probably the only "asset" a lot of people own.

No, the banks stepped in it bigtime when they started messing with people's houses. If you think there would be riots over the confiscations of 401k/IRAs, you will see the same over the ownership question of somebody's house. AND, those same people likely have pensions that were sold **** by these same banks.

Nope, THIS time the banks have ****ed too many people in every which way that they're not going to get away scott free.

Bohemian, why are you giving Karl such a ****ing hard time? Do you think the "people" really forced anybody's hand in foreclosuregate? This didn't come to a head because of some judges' decisions. No, it started when the banking industry itself, specifically the title insurers, realized what a mess they've made. It was the same story in '08 when the credit markets froze up. It's the banks that keep shooting themselves in the foot. As far as I'm concerned, let 'em keep doing it until they destroy themselves. Fine by me. But what we cannot allow to happen is for the Constitution to be trashed without at least exercising a vote and/or some sort of civil disobedience. That's the message Karl's trying to get across and all you do is keep knocking him down and belittling his posts. Please, enough already.

Spamming threads and repeating yourself dozens of times over doesn't make your opinion the outcome. Why can't we keep this debatable instead of "get it through your ****ing head, moron" and similar nonsense? It's getting tiresome...

Being discussed now on CNBC, pretty good as well