What's Really Going On?

. . .

.

Iceberg! Right Ahead! The Triple A Rating Being Downgraded Started The 2009 Great Recession

.
August 8th, 2013
Written by John Wright
.
On Tuesday – August 6th, 2013 — the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed two separate civil lawsuits against Bank of America. The lawsuits basically allege that Bank of America made misleading statements and filings in disclosing important facts about the mortgages. This would require the DOJ and SEC to file separate lawsuits against Bank of America for what both the DOJ and the SEC regulators said was a “FRAUD ON THE INVESTORS”. The two parallel suits were filed in U.S. District Court in Charlotte last Tuesday on August 6th, 2013.

Both complaints allege that the fraud involved $850 million dollars worth of residential mortgage-backed securities. What does this do for HOMEOWNERS who claim to be a victim of mortgage fraud and are facing foreclosure? It does absolutely nothing. That’s right! The lawsuit is not about the fraud committed against the homeowner — it is about the fraud committed against the INVESTOR. Now this begs the obvious question. Why did the DOJ and U.S. Federal Government seem more interested in filing lawsuits that protect the INVESTOR from fraud – rather than – filing lawsuits that protect the HOMEOWNER from fraud? The answer might lie in the role the INVESTOR played in the Great Depression of 1929. That is why I thought we would take a walk down memory lane in American history.

The signs of the Great Depression started somewhere around September 4th, 1929 after stock prices began to fall. However – the shot that would be heard around the world – would actually be on the day the stock market crashed on October 29th, 1929. It would be a day that went down in the history books as Black Tuesday.

A stock market crash is basically triggered by a social phenomenon. External economic events — combined with public behavior — and psychology in a positive feedback caused many stock market participants to sell. This sell-off caused a significant loss of paper wealth and a dramatic decline of stock prices. This occurrence spanned over a significant cross-section of the stock market. It would trigger a disastrous chain of events. Practically overnight — the stock market crash of 1929 caused devastating consequences to each industry. Demands plummeted. Then practically every city – state — and country in the world was INSTANTLY affected. The countries hardest hit were the ones most dependent on “primary sector industries” such as cash cropping – mining — and logging. Farming and rural areas suffered catastrophic losses as crop prices fell by approximately 60%. Construction was virtually halted in many of the industrial countries. People lost jobs. Personal income and tax revenue – profits and prices dropped drastically – while international trading plunged by more than 50% percent. The social phenomenon of investors panicking might be better described by the phenomenon that occurs when swarm of locust breaks out in the form of a biblical plague. There are certain conditions that create the phenomenon.

.

There have been many economic historians that attribute the Great Depression to the sudden collapse of the United States stock market prices. However — many experts disputed this conclusion – because they said that the stock market crash was only a symptom rather than a cause. Other experts concluded that the main contributing factor was the failure of major banks. Sound familiar? They believed the bank failures were a result of the commercial banks’ involvement in investments on Wall Street. These failures would result in the banks not taking the risk to loan money. This was based on the uncertainty of the times. Loaning money simply carried the risk of default if no-one paid their loans back. Therefore – during times like this — the banks began to hoard their money. This was the beginning of a domino effect. This is based on the fact that large and small companies NEED LOANS to survive.

A perfect example is what happened to the automobile industry during that time. The automobile industry usually does not take in any money for the cars they make until they sell them nearly a year later. This means they need loans to make payroll. Sound familiar? Do you remember how the federal government had to bailout the automobile industry in 2009?

.

The industry’s inability to make loans resulted in massive unemployment and the loss of alternative job resources all at once for most major industries. Production was at a standstill. This created a domino effect; anyone who made money from selling their products to the automobile industries was now also suffering. This would be much the same for other industries that the nation’s economy depended on in 1929.

The entire global financial trade market was frozen the minute the banks stopped loaning money. Unfortunately — in 1929 this led the stock market investors to liquidate and sell their stock before it was worth zero. The problem was that they were all doing it at the same time. This was the breaking point in 1929. The massive sell-off would cause the stock market to crash. It was a dark time in American and world history. The effects of the Great Depression would not subside until after the end World War II.

As a result of the Great Depression — new laws were created to prevent a catastrophe like this from ever happening again. It was a phenomenon that experts would study even until today. This would result in laws being made to perhaps avoid another stock market crash and Great Depression in the future. The federal government and the laws simply needed to make sure the banks were never TOO BIG to cause the American economy to fail in the way it did in 1929.

There was only one problem with these laws and regulations in the future. The problem was that many experts during the Nixon years and after felt that the laws had eventually become outdated. They realized that these laws that were born in the 1930’s did not allow the banks to compete on the global market. This problem would lead up to the United States seeing more legislative and regulatory changes in these laws from the period of 1980 to 1994. It was not a diabolical plan to destroy the American economy though. It seemed to only make sense at the time. That is why both Democrats and Republicans had worked together in seeing more legislative and regulatory changes since the 1930’s.

One of the laws made in the 1930’s made it illegal for the banks to do business over state lines. This would then be repealed during the Reagan administration. Another one of the laws was created to stop the banks from messing with investments on Wall Street. This law was called the Glass-Steagall Act. This law would then by repealed by the Clinton administration in 1999.

After the Glass-Steagall Act was repealed the banks were able to once again mess with Wall Street. Two of these investments created by and now available to the banks on Wall Street were Mortgage-Backed-Securities (MBS) and Collateralized Debt Obligations (CDOs). Mortgage-backed-securities are fixed-income investments that generate interest revenue through pools of home loan mortgages for investors. MBS investors basically own an interest in a pool of mortgages that serves as the underlying asset for the MBS. The commercial banks who originated these home loans turned them into mortgage-backed-securities (MBSs). The mortgage-backed-securities would then be sold to investors around the world. The credit agencies gave these securitization transactions (CDOs and MBSs) triple A (AAA) ratings. The investors were attracted to the AAA rating that basically assured the investors that there was no risk. THE ECONOMY WAS BOOMING!

There was only one problem. The banks were giving loans to people who could not necessarily afford the mortgage payment. They did not care because it would be somebody else’s problem once they sold them on the open market to investors. Consequently — on July 9th, 2007 — the credit agencies downgraded the AAA ratings once many homeowners began to default on paying their mortgage payments. It might have been soon after this that former Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and current Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke started yelling out “Iceberg right ahead” for the American economy.

They downgraded the AAA rating after less money streamed into these loan pools that investors in the United States and around the world had invested in. That is why it was what happened on July 9th, 2007 that would be the beginning of what would later be called the Great Mortgage and Great Economic Crisis of 2009.

The Great Economic Recession of 2009 was marked by a global economic decline that began in December of 2007. This decline began after the loans were downgraded from the AAA rating. The investors simply felt it was too risky to invest now. This was when practically –overnight — investors stopped buying Mortgage-Backed-Securities. This is where problem starts. The commercial banks no longer had anyone who wanted to buy the loans they originated because of AAA downgrade. The commercial banks were now stuck with the loans they had already originated before the downgrade in the rating of the loans. The investment banks were stuck with the loans they had bought from the commercial banks before the downgrade in the rating. Both the commercial and investment banks no longer had anyone who wanted to buy the loans after the downgrade. The commercial banks had borrowed the money to make the loans to the homeowners while thinking they could sell the loans to the investment banks. They were now stuck with the loans as a loss on their books. The investment banks had borrowed the money to buy the loans from the commercial banks while thinking they could sell them. The investment banks were now stuck with them as a loss on their books when there were no investors. Now there was no money to pay the loans back that the commercial and investment banks had taken out to sell these loans to the investors. They were planning on paying off their debt with the sale of those loans. Now there were no investors. No investors meant that the commercial banks would stop giving loans. It was at this point the game of musical chairs and hot potato had simply stopped. This meant that whoever was standing up when the music stopped playing lost money. In this example the ones who lost money were the homeowner and commercial banks and investment banks and investors and anyone connected to them. That is why in 2008 the American economy was now on its way to what would go down in history as the greatest economic collapse since the Great Depression. It would be called “The Great Recession of 2009.”

Therefore — in September of 2008 — the economy took a particularly sharp downward turn. Now — as mentioned before — investment banks such as Merrill Lynch and Lehman Brothers and Bear Sterns others were stuck with downgraded loans they bought from the commercial banks. This made it to where the investment banks were about to collapse like dominos. The collapse would make it to where the investor’s money would collapse with it. The problem was that some of those investments were in the form of Retirement Funds for teachers and firemen and things like that.

The commercial banks were frightened. They could see what was coming. THAT IS WHEN THE COMMERCIAL BANKS STOPPED LOANING MONEY IN 2008. Sound familiar? Do you remember that was what happened just before the stock market crashed in 1929? The banks had stopped loaning again in 2008. In 2008 the commercial banks would not loan money to new homeowners nor would they refinance existing loans. This was when the banks began withdrawing equity lines of credit. Do you remember that time? In 2008 many homeowners were confused as to why their equity line of credit had just been pulled. It was not just the homeowners the banks refused to loan money too though. Unfortunately — they also refused to loan to companies like GE or any of the automobile industry companies — even though these companies might have had excellent credit. Once again — the entire global financial market was frozen — just like before the stock market crash of 1929. This was when companies began laying people off. That was why unemployment rose dramatically in 2008.

This all seemed to be taking place during the time George Bush was President in 2008 and 2009. In 2009 former President Bush had just won the war in Iraq. So George Bush had secured the oil that our nation needed to be an economic superpower. Unfortunately – even though George Bush was reassured that America would continue to be an economic superpower on the global stage – he was about to find out that the greatest threat to the American economy was right here in own backyard the entire time. Former President Bush would find this out after Former Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke informed him that the United States and the world economy was about to collapse in 72 hours. It was reported later that this was when President Bush was informed that the only way to stop the events of 1929 from being repeated would be to force the commercial banks to take a bailout in the form of a government loan. They had simply learned from the Great Depression of 1929 that early government intervention could have stopped the Great Depression. It was reported that President Bush at this time asked what would happen if they did not give the bailout money to the banks. He was told that he would probably need to call in the military to control the streets of the United States of America once riots broke out. That is when Bush agreed that the banks needed the bailout. Now Bush needed to convince Congress and the American people that the federal government needed to bail out the banks to avoid disaster.

.

Problem One: They had less than 72 hours to convince both sides of the aisle in Congress to give them a blank check to give to the banks. Congress has not been known to agree on approving money for a toilet seat — let alone — approving a blank check to the banks from the Treasury Department in less than 72 hours.

Problem Two: The banks might not take the bailout money. They are private banks and the government cannot force them to take it. Why would the banks not take the bailout money? The banks were afraid that by taking a bailout they would appear to be weaker than their competitors resulting in loss of investors. This would require every major bank who was sitting at this table that day to accept the bailout money. This way one would not appear to be weaker or stronger than the other. The problem was that if one bank refused to take the bailout money — none of the banks would be given the bailout money. The other problem was that one of the banks at the table needed the money not to collapse. That bank was Citi. This day in 2007 would end up being an uncommon dialog for the banks. That is based on the fact that the banks are not usually in the business of spending time and money on saving their competitor from collapse. That is why the talks between the federal government and bank CEOs that day must have been equivalent to trying to teach a cat to not eat a bird. Not to mention that the federal government was also asking them to buy failing investment banks. That is why the federal government would need to create all sorts of incentives and sweet-heart deals to try and get the commercial banks to take the bailout money. Consequently — this is why banks were given the bailout money with no strings attached. The federal government was simply afraid they would not take the money unless there were no strings attached to the money. The end result would be that the commercial banks agreed to take the bailout money as a loan at 1% interest. Then in 2008 Bank of America bought investment banks such as Merrill Lynch. Wells Fargo bought Wachovia. JPMorgan acquired Washington Mutual and Bear Sterns. The banks bought what they were told to buy to prevent a collapse of the investment banks. However – in the case of Lehman Brothers – the federal government chose not to bail them out. This was based on the fact that Lehman Brothers had no assets to qualify for the bailout loan. The other investment banks did. Lehman Brothers only had those toxic mortgage-backed-security loans that nobody wanted. Lehman Brothers would be forced to file bankruptcy. This was the shot that was heard around the world. The domino effect had begun. The locust-like investors might now instantly start to swarm. The investors began to fear the other investment banks could collapse. That is why it was at this point the United States and the world could now be on a crash collision course with the events that caused the Great Depression over-night in 1929

.

It was at this point that countries in Europe began to INSTANTLY feel the metaphoric earthquake of their American investments collapsing at Lehman Brothers. The loss in these mortgage-backed-securities investments would result in riots breaking out in Greece. They even started to burn down the banks. They feared this would spread throughout Europe.

The United States of America’s economy in 2008 and 2009 might have been much like being on the Titanic just before it sank for investors. That might be why the Titanic (USA) was now trying to play music for the passengers (investors). This was done in hopes that the investors would not cause a stock market crash with panicking. It was ultimately why the federal government and the banks held closed door sessions about the crisis. They did not want investors to panic. It could lead to the stock market crashing. It could deliver in seconds the world to a Great Depression to biblical proportions. It was a very scary time in American history. All it would take would be the investors panicking like they did in 1929. There would simply be no bailout that could save us if that happened. It did not happen though. The United States would instead be delivered into a “Great Recession” instead of a “Great Depression.”

.

.
Therefore — like what they did or not — the bailouts would ultimately stop the United States of America from going into a Great Depression. The fact that the banks are now loaning money again could suggest they feel comfortable about the forecast of the future.

The United States of America still had a lot of problems after the bailout. Unfortunately — one of the major problem being – that six million foreclosures were about to hit the market all at same time. This would have made people’s houses practically worth zero. That is based on the fact that — if fewer homes available on the market meant home values went up – then more homes available on the market would mean home values would go down. That is why the federal government needed to stabilize the housing market by preventing six million foreclosures from hitting the market all at the same time. How would they do this? The Obama administration announced the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP). The problem with HAMP was that the banks were not ready to accommodate this kind of massive program the federal government forced them to offer. Bank of America only had 5,000 employees in their modification department. They actually needed 50,000 employees to accommodate it. This would result in all sorts of confusion. One of the confusions would be that they lost the paperwork the homeowners sent in. The banks also did not really understand the terms of the HAMP program. They were trying to figure it out while homeowners were sending in their paperwork. They were basically building the ship while the passengers were on it. Now homeowners were pissed off because they were not receiving their loan modification after they did what they were told. They resented getting the runaround. They resented being given false hope. It would result in protests breaking out against large banks such as Bank of America. The failures of HAMP would result in the internet now being filled with homeowners complaining about what the banks did to them during the loan modification process. It would end up giving birth to such protest sites like Piggybankblog.com. Piggybankblog was built to protest against the Bank of America loan modification process. The reality was that the real one at fault was the federal government. They were the ones who made the banks accommodate something they were not ready to accommodate. The failures of HAMP did not seem to matter to the federal government though. This was based on the reality that HAMP DAM was simply created to keep all the water in the lake from flooding the market with six million foreclosures. The federal government would substantiate this theory with saying that HAMP was announced to only create “foam on the runway” for the banks to have a soft landing. How does it feel to be foam on the runway? – Foam on the runway article

However — in the end — the action of the federal government loaning bailout money to the banks slowly brought the investors’ confidence back. Investors were now convinced that the banks might be ‘too big to fail’ and the United States of America could be relied upon to bail the banks out before they would collapse. This made them more of a safe investment. The commercial banks gradually became confident enough to slowly but surely start loaning money again after everything was stabilized. The federal government would do things to continue to bring the confidence of the investors. They might have even convinced Warren Buffet to invest into Bank of America and Wells Fargo. This would result in the investors feeling it was safe enough for them if it was safe enough for Warren Buffett. The federal government would also bring back the confidence of the investor by sending the message that the banks would be held accountable for any fraud that hurt investors.

United States Accuses Bank of America of Mortgage Backed Securities Fraud on Tuesday August 6th, 2013

.

There might only be one problem for homeowners in litigation. The federal government and judicial system might want to also let the investors know that they will not lose their investment money from homeowners receiving justice in the courts.

The simple point is that in 2008 and 2009 the American economy resembled the Titanic who had just hit an iceberg right ahead. The only difference is that the United States of America did not sink to the bottom of the sea like the Titanic. The federal government and the banks and the world would use what they learned from the Great Depression to avoid that happening again. Now experts will spend many years studying what caused the Great Economic Recession of 2009 to avoid having it happen again. This brings to question who is responsible for the Titanic (American Economy) hitting that iceberg. Was it the laws and regulations being removed? Was it the banks reacting naturally to an environment the federal government created? Was it the greed of the banks? Was it because the regulators were asleep at the wheel? I don’t know. I only know that we would not have known about those weak rivets in the side of the Titanic if we had never hit that god damn iceberg.

Therefore – Ladies and Gentleman of the Court of Public Opinion – you have become the generation who lived through the Great Economic Recession of 2009. It was the greatest economic collapse since the stock market crash and Great Depression of 1929. I guess only time and the history books will tell if what the federal government did was the right to avoid another Great Depression.

Then again — I guess that depends on who is writing the history books.

 

My name is John Wright! AND I AM FIGHTING BACK!

All Rise! The Honorable Judge Wright has left The Court of Public Opinion!

.

Your donation makes a difference in my life.

….

.

.

It All Started With The Federal Reserve Conspiracy

.

Written by John Wright

July 18th, 2012

Bow down before the one you serve!  You’re going to get what you deserve Bank of Destroying America and JPMorgan Chase!

I think you will agree with me that the banks have had far too much control and power over countries and their governments throughout history.  Now I know Adolf Hitler would agree with me — because that is exactly what he blamed the depression on in Germany.  What I am saying is — even though I do not agree with his final solution — I do agree that it was the banks that caused the depression in Germany and caused the wars around the world.

Did he just say that he agreed with Adolf Hitler? Well before everybody here gets upset with that statement – I need to remind you that the Founding Forefathers of America agreed with him on the banking issue too.

Thomas Jefferson said:

‘I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.  If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.’

Then there was President Abraham Lincoln who flatly refused to allow these rich European influences back then bring a central bank to America.  That is when Americans used to use what was called the “greenback” for our currency.  The greenback was actually worth the paper it was put on because it was backed by gold back then. Abraham Lincoln simply knew there were powerful and wealthy families in Europe trying to get control of America by having us use a central bank to control our money and our country.  The simple fact is that Lincoln knew it is the central banks that have been known to collapse economies and start wars and finance wars — which if brought to America — it would leave our country and our people enslaved to having to pay high taxes to pay back the war debt.  The United States of America still uses these tactics today in other countries.  This is how we get control of their country — by controlling their debt.  The simple horrible fact is that the central banks simply make money on wars — which incidentally — might explain why we have so many of them. — Youtube about Abraham Lincoln and banking.

It would not be until good old President Woodrow Wilson that a central bank here in the United States was allowed to control our money and our country. (Abraham Lincoln shaking his head)  The name of this central bank would be called “The Federal Reserve”.  However, it is about as “federal” as “federal express” — because it is actually a PRIVATE BANK.

The Federal Reserve was created on December 23rd, 1913 with the enactment of the “Federal Reserve Act,” largely in response to a series of financial panics, particularly a severe panic in 1907.  Over time, the roles and responsibilities of the Federal Reserve System (more commonly known as the fed) have expanded and its structure evolved.  Events such as the Great Depression were a major factor leading to the changes in the system. — Youtube about Federal Reserve Act

The Honorable Louis McFadden, Chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee in the 1930s said:

“Some people think that the Federal Reserve Banks are United States Government institutions.  They are private monopolies which prey upon the people of these United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers; foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich and predatory money lenders.”

President Woodrow Wilson would later be quoted as saying on his deathbed:

“I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country.  A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit.  Our system of credit is concentrated.  The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.” – Woodrow Wilson after singing the Federal Reserve Act.

Then President John F. Kennedy tried to give us our America back by disolving the Federal Reserve.  Then something went terribly wrong in Texas that would change that.

Watch the Secret Service Agent look like he is saying, “Step down?  Why am I stepping down?”

.

The Current Federal Reserve:

Now according to globalresearch, the Federal Reserve (or Fed) has assumed sweeping new powers in the last year.  This is because in an unprecedented move in March of 2008, the New York Fed advanced the funds for JPMorgan Chase Bank to buy investment bank Bear Stearns for pennies on the dollar.

Now here is the best part!   Jaime Dimon (the current CEO of JPMorgan) SITS ON THE BOARD OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE!

.

That’s right! Jamie Godfather Dimon participated in the secret weekend negotiations between the Federal Reserve and the United States Government and the banks — when in September 2008, the Federal Reserve did something even more unprecedented.  It bought the world’s largest insurance company.  The Fed announced on September 16 that it was giving an $85 billion loan to American International Group (AIG) for a nearly 80% stake in the mega-insurer.  The Associated Press called it a “government takeover,” but this was no ordinary nationalization. Unlike the U.S. Treasury, which took over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac the week before, the Fed is not a government-owned agency.  Also unprecedented was the way the deal was funded. The Associated Press reported:

“The Treasury Department, for the first time in its history, said it would begin selling bonds for the Federal Reserve in an effort to help the central bank deal with its unprecedented borrowing needs.”

I hate to tell you this — but your America has been gone for a very long time.

.

And you just thought you were losing your house. (Wink)

That is why the American people have this message for all those CEO’s and executives at JPMorgan Chase and Bank of Destroying The America Dream.

CLICK HERE FOR BOW DOWN BEFORE THE ONE YOU SERVE. YOU SOON WILL GET WHAT YOU DESERVE MESSAGE!

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. 

Don’t you get it Jamie?  We The People are not going to stop until YOU and the OTHERS are FUCKING LOCKED UP FOR WHAT YOU DID TO OUR COUNTRY!
.
I just pray the United States Justice Department does something — before the American people do it for them. Tell Obama to lock them up.
.
The American people shall pour twice the measure into that cup you banks were about to have us drink from!  Yes!  I say twice the measure!
.
  1. Was George W. Bush Responsible For The Greatest Economic Collapse Since The Great Depression? Or Should Bill Clinton Go Down As The Worst American President In History?
  2. Ron Paul Finally GetsFed Audit
  3. Federal Reserve Youtubes
  4. Why is your loan mod being delayed
  5. Follow John’s Daily Blog

.

My name is John Wright! AND I AM FIGHTING BACK!

All Rise! .The Honorable Judge Wright has left The Court of Public Opinion!

.

Your donation makes a difference in my life.

….

.

.

Where Did The Crisis Start?  It Started With JP Morgan Chase Creating Credit Default Swaps and Bill Clinton!

.

Written by John Wright

May 4th, 2012

I finally found some time to watch the Frontline special titled: “Global Economic Crisis — Money, Power and Wall Street.”  It was pretty good too. It explained who, what, when, where, and why Credit Default Swaps were created. Basically Credit Default Swaps are a financial swap agreement that the seller of the CDS will compensate the buyer in the event of a loan default or other credit event. The buyer of the CDS makes a series of payments to the seller and, in exchange, receives a payoff if the loan defaults. This is what drove banks like Countrywide Home Loans to give loans to people for homes that people could not afford. This was because basically there would always be an investor interested in buying the loan if it was insured — because it meant they could not lose any money. Yet banks like Countrywide were basically committing an insurance scam. This is because they knew they were giving mortgages to people who could not afford them but did not care because they were interested in the insurance money. It was also why insurance giants like AIG would end up having to get a bailout when the bottom fell out of the housing market. This is because AIG did not have enough money on hand to pay out all these instant insurance claims all at once – and neither did any insurance company or bank for that matter.

Frontline goes on to explain that Credit Default Swaps were created by a few 20 something year olds from JP Morgan Chase at a retreat in Florida in Boca Raton at some hotel. They were trying to eliminate risk on these loans for the bank. That is when they came up with finding companies that would insure the loans. Frontline points out that the very first Credit Default Swap loan to be given was to Exxon because they needed money after the Exon Valdez oil spill. Yet the creators of the Credit Default Swap industry had no idea that the other banks would start using this process for home loans years down the line. That is why these young 20 something year old banking Credit Default Swap inventors much have felt much like Oppenheimer felt when he watched the world use his findings to create a weapon of massive destruction called the nuclear bomb — which incidentally — is not a bad comparison after you consider that Credit Default Swaps might be responsible for collapsing the entire world’s economy.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

 

The Frontline piece goes on to explain that United States Treasury Secretary Paulson FORCED THE BANKS TO TAKE THE BAILOUT MONEY by threatening to have the regulators shut them down if they did not take it. This would be done in a way that Communist China might have been saying - “What’s the matter America? Free unregulated market Capitalism not working for you?” Either way, if our government was going to turn into a dictatorship that was planning on interfering with the everyday business of private companies — I only wish they would have done it before Credit Default Swaps were created. This is because the simple fact is that this crisis would have never happened if the regulators were not asleep at the wheel when Credit Default Swaps were being created and used for home loans.

This youtube below explains why I believe we are not getting the home loan modification.

.

The “investors” and “banks” are simply leading you to foreclosure so they can get the insurance money. That is why a lot of them bought the loan in the first place — such in the case of newly formed Penny Mac. PennyMac is a perfect example of a new bank that is buying these loans at a discounted rate — but just to probably foreclose on the homeowner to get the insurance money. Here is the best part! The ones running Penny Mac are the same people who were running Countrywide. –Info on PennyMac

U.S. Senate Investigations Subcommittee Releases Levin-Coburn Report On the Financial Crisis

.

April 13, 2011

WASHINGTON – Concluding a two-year bipartisan investigation, Senator Carl Levin, D-Mich., and Senator Tom Coburn M.D., R-Okla., Chairman and Ranking Republican on the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, today released a 635-page final report (PDF, 6MB) on their inquiry into key causes of the financial crisis. The report catalogs conflicts of interest, heedless risk-taking and failures of federal oversight that helped push the country into the deepest recession since the Great Depression.

“Using emails, memos and other internal documents, this report tells the inside story of an economic assault that cost millions of Americans their jobs and homes, while wiping out investors, good businesses, and markets,” said Levin. “High risk lending, regulatory failures, inflated credit ratings, and Wall Street firms engaging in massive conflicts of interest, contaminated the U.S. financial system with toxic mortgages and undermined public trust in U.S. markets. Using their own words in documents subpoenaed by the Subcommittee, the report discloses how financial firms deliberately took advantage of their clients and investors, how credit rating agencies assigned AAA ratings to high risk securities, and how regulators sat on their hands instead of reining in the unsafe and unsound practices all around them. Rampant conflicts of interest are the threads that run through every chapter of this sordid story.”

Click here to see Countrywide emails mentioned in youtube above

“The free market has helped make America great, but it only functions when people deal with each other honestly and transparently. At the heart of the financial crisis were unresolved, and often undisclosed, conflicts of interest,” said Dr. Coburn. “Blame for this mess lies everywhere from federal regulators who cast a blind eye, Wall Street bankers who let greed run wild, and members of Congress who failed to provide oversight.”

The Levin-Coburn report expands on evidence gathered at four Subcommittee hearings in April 2010, examining four aspects of the crisis through detailed case studies: high-risk mortgage lending, using the case of Washington Mutual Bank, a $300 billion thrift that became the largest bank failure in U.S. history; regulatory inaction, focusing on the Office of Thrift Supervision’s failed oversight of Washington Mutual; inflated credit ratings that misled investors, examining the actions of the nation’s two largest credit rating agencies, Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s; and the role played by investment banks, focusing primarily on Goldman Sachs, creating and selling structured finance products that foisted billions of dollars of losses on investors, while the bank itself profited from betting against the mortgage market.

New Evidence. Today’s report presents new facts, new findings and recommendations, with more than 700 new documents totaling over 5,800 pages. It recounts how Washington Mutual aggressively issued and sold high-risk mortgages to Wall Street, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac, even as its executives predicted a housing bubble that would burst, and offers new detail about how its regulator deferred to the bank’s management. New documents show how Goldman used net short positions to benefit from the downturn in the mortgage market, and designed, marketed, and sold CDOs in ways that created conflicts of interest with the firm’s clients and at times led to the bank’s profiting from the same products that caused substantial losses for its clients. Other new information provides additional detail about how credit rating agencies rushed to rate new mortgage-backed securities and collect lucrative rating fees before issuing mass ratings downgrades that shocked the financial markets and triggered a collapse in the value of mortgage related securities. Over 120 new documents provide insights into how Deutsche Bank contributed to the mortgage mess.

“Our investigation found a financial snake pit rife with greed, conflicts of interest, and wrongdoing,” said Levin. – read rest of article on report of financial crisis

.

Yah! What he said!

In the end I guess we find out that President Obama’s HAMP program and his newly announced Financial Crime Unit he announced in the State of The Union speech might have something in common.

BOTH FAILED THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND REWARDED THE BANKS!

Welcome to the American Nightmare! Brought to you by the banks!

I say — “Vive La Greece!”

(Dramatic license used)

.

Read Secret FDIC & JPMorgan Chase Bank 118 Page Purchase and Assumption Agreement for Washington Mutual Bank Uncovered

.

My name is John Wright! AND I AM FIGHTING BACK!

All Rise! .The Honorable Judge Wright has left The Court of Public Opinion!

.

Your donation makes a difference in my life.

….

.

.

Who Is Responsible For Sinking The Titanic?

.

January 14th 2013

I think it is fair to say that I am a person who has evolved over the years with all the information and connections that I have with experts on both sides of this issue. That is why my investigation would simply conclude that the banks and mortgage industry were simply responding to the market environment that the federal government had created for nearly thirty years. That is why you heard me say that I concluded that the economic collapse would basically be caused by the federal government thinking that they could metaphorically put a bowl of cocaine down in front of a bunch of cocaine addicts (the banks) — but simply because they thought they would self-regulate. (rolling my eyes)

.

That is why in my last daily blog I compared the economy to being much like putting chemicals into a hot tob to keep the water balanced. The federal government would even throw a little shock into to the hot tub (the economy) to get things going sometimes. The unfortunate thing is that — just like a hot tub — too much of this chemical and that chemical can and will create mustard gas. This can happen purely on accident. This is exactly what I think happened too with our economy. So that is why I believe the whole system was only reacting to those chemicals that federal government put into the hot tub for nearly thirty years. It would all start with the deregulation of the banks.

The talk of deregulation would actually start in the Nixon years. This is because the American banks were really the only ones who seemed to be regulated in the world. This is why many theorized for many years that we needed to deregulate the banks. This way they could compete in the world market. That is why the talk of deregulation really started out with good intentions. Yet it was not until the Reagan years (1984) that deregulation had officially started. Then in the Clinton years the final ingredient was added to this hot tub of chemicals that might have created mustard gas. This is because the Clinton administration was able to get the Glass-Steagall Act repealed.

Wikipeadia: The Glass–Steagall Act is a term often applied to the entire Banking Act of 1933, after its Congressional sponsors, Senator Carter Glass (D) of Virginia, and Representative Henry B. Steagall (D) of Alabama. The term Glass–Steagall Act, however, is most often used to refer to four provisions of the Banking Act of 1933 that limited commercial bank securities activities and affiliations between commercial banks and securities firms. This article deals with that limited meaning of the Glass–Steagall Act. A separate article describes the entire Banking Act of 1933.

Starting in the early 1960s federal banking regulators interpreted provisions of the Glass–Steagall Act to permit commercial banks and especially commercial bank affiliates to engage in an expanding list and volume of securities activities. By the time the affiliation restrictions in the Glass–Steagall Act were repealed through the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act of 1999 (GLBA), many commentators argued Glass–Steagall was already “dead.” Most notably, Citibank’s 1998 affiliation with Salomon Smith Barney, one of the largest US securities firms, was permitted under the Federal Reserve Board’s then existing interpretation of the Glass–Steagall Act. President Bill Clinton publicly declared “the Glass–Steagall law is no longer appropriate.” Many commentators have stated that the GLBA’s repeal of the affiliation restrictions of the Glass–Steagall Act was an important cause of the late-2000s financial crisis. Some critics of that repeal argue it permitted Wall Street investment banking firms to gamble with their depositors’ money that was held in affiliated commercial banks. Others have argued that the activities linked to the financial crisis were not prohibited (or, in most cases, even regulated) by the Glass–Steagall Act. Commentators, including former President Clinton in 2008 and the American Bankers Association in January 2010, have also argued that the ability of commercial banking firms to acquire securities firms (and of securities firms to convert into bank holding companies) helped mitigate the financial crisis.

That is why we can blame the crisis on every administration since the Reagan years. Then the Bush administration would simply be guilty for being asleep at the wheel. That is because his administration was simply too busy in Iraq to understand that the real threat was right here in our backyard. Then the Obama administration would be guilty for creating what I like to call the HAMP DAM. I like to call it “HAMP DAM” because it was basically created by the Obama administration to stop millions of foreclosures from hitting the market all at one time. They simply feared that the banks would collapse if that happened. That is why HAMP DAM allowed the federal government and the banks to control how many foreclosures would hit the market at any given time. This would be done much in the same way that a dam lets out the water in a lake. The unfortunate thing was that the Obama administration would find it reasonable to give millions of Americans false hope in getting a loan modification to save their homes to save the economy. That is why I said that the federal governments meeting behind closed doors about HAMP must have been a lot like this youtube below.

.

Yeah I know. It pisses me off too. However — at the same time — I do not think anyone here really expects the government to allow the American economy to collapse either. This is even though I have heard some say that they should have just let the economy and the bank’s collapse. Well I think that is just crazy thinking. This is because I do not think most people know what that would have meant. For example — it would have meant that practically every company in the United States would have been forced to shut down in a few days. This would have resulted in millions of Americans being unemployed. Grocery stores would have shut down. This would cause millions of Americans to starve to death. Riots would have instantly broke out across the nation in a way that would have made the Los Angeles riots look like nothing. Then street gangs would have taken over. That is why you would live in fear every single day that someone was going to break into your house and kill you for your food and money. That means that you could end up watching people that you know and love die right in front of you. The police would be working with no pay. This might result in many of them just not showing up for work. That is why there would be so much looting. The American economy collapsing would cause a domino effect almost instantly across the world. For example — we can conclude that the riots in Greece were because of happened here with the United States economy. — Footage of Greece riots This would have happened all over the world at the same time. That is why it would be considered the shot that was heard around the world if the American economy were to collapse in 2008. Then billions would have died from starvation in the world. The President of the United States would have to declare martial law in the United States. This would result in tanks driving down residential streets on a daily basis. This is because all constitutional rights would cease immediately. You could be shot on the spot. People would be rounded up and put into concentration camps if they were considered to be a threat to the federal government. This even includes people of particular religions. This is even means some of you protesters out there. The United Nations would probably have to come into the United States to help try restoring the peace at some point. This is because of a law that George Bush Sr. signed just before he left office saying they could do so if the federal government could not keep peace under these circumstances. This would basically be a foreign takeover. Instantly milltias would rise up all over the United States in war against the federal government and United Nation. This would result in civil war. It would be a living nightmare that would not end.
.
Therefore — Ladies and Gentleman of the Court of Public Opinion — I think you should know that Treasury Secretary Paulson told former President George Bush in 2008 that we were 72 hours away from the scenario I just explained to you above.
.
.
.
I will say it again. We were 72 hours away from total collapse of the United States of America.
.
It would have been a good time to start believing in Jesus. This is because it would simply have been the end of the world as we know it.
.
72 hours.
.

..

My name John Wright AND I AM FIGHTING BACK!

All Rise! The Honorable Judge Wright has left The Courtroom of Public Opinion!

.

Your donation makes a difference in my life.

….

.

.

President Clinton’s Tomorrow Is Our Today

.

Written by John Wright

So yesterday I posted something in my blog that sort of showed a time line of where the great mortgage crisis all started. I concluded that it was the Clinton administration that is to blame because they repealed the Glass-Steagall Act. The Glass-Steagall Act was basically put in place to keep the banks from “improper banking activity” — or what was considered overzealous commercial bank involvement in the stock market. This was because it was this kind of activity that they believed was the main culprit of the financial crash which led to the great depression. However, President Bill Clinton would achieve removing that protection by getting the Glass-Steagle Act repealed. This would of course allow the banks to begin selling our mortgages on Wall Street — yet it would not really take effect until the year 1999.

Look at the chart below to see how immediately the price of homes would start to go up. This is because the banks were now beginning to flood market with new homeowners — and as many of you already know — less inventory of homes on the market will drive the price of homes up.

.

When President Bush took office the subprime lending market was in its infancy. Most borrowers got conventional or “prime loans”. However, within a few years the subprime mortgage market exploded as commercial and investment banks competed fiercely to originate more and more home mortgages by dropping their lending standards lower and lower. Many mortgage lenders — such as Countrywide, laid the groundwork for the home foreclosure crisis by using misleading business practices to entice millions of home buyers into unaffordable adjustable-rate mortgages. The greed-driven explosion in subprime mortgage lending was accompanied by the growth of a massive market in risky new financial products that no one really understood. – original article

President Clinton’s decision to have the Glass-Steagall Act repealed might have been a decision that would end up hurting people. This is because that decision would end up sacrificing future Americans. Having the Glass-Steagle Act repealed could only serve one thing — and one thing only — and that is the greedy intentions of the banks. What I am saying is — President Clinton might have had the Glass-Steagall Act repealed so he could go down in history for creating one of our nation’s largest economic boom times — even if it was a blueprint for disaster. This is because we already know that the Glass-Steagall Act was put in place because it was activity like this that caused the great depression. It damn near almost caused it again — and the Bush administration would end up having to clean up Clintons mess. This is much like how the Reagan administration would end up having to clean up President Carter’s mess. Yet I am not so sure that President Reagan would have allowed our home mortgages to be sold to overseas countries — such as the Bush administration allowed. Nevertheless, let history show that President Clinton’s decision almost destroyed the United States of America.

In closing — I remember that President Clinton’s theme song was “don’t stop thinking about tomorrow”. However, unfortunately, his tomorrow would end up being our today. The simple fact is that we have not been able to stop thinking about his tomorrow, ever since he was successful in getting the Glass-Steagall Act repealed.

.

The movie “Inside Job” describes accurately what caused the financial and mortgage crisis.
.
Inside Job yutubes: Click here

.

My name is John Wright! AND I AM FIGHTING BACK!

All Rise! .The Honorable Judge Wright has left The Court of Public Opinion!

.

Your donation makes a difference in my life.

….

.

.

Me George Bush, me play joke, me go pee, pee in their coke!

.

December 20th, 2010

Written by John Wright

Many of you have been wondering who is responsible for causing this crisis with HAMP. As you probably already know, the Congressional Oversight Panel blamed the Treasury department (The Govt.) for not policing, but ultimately blamed the Servicers, such as Bank of Betraying America for taking advantage of the crisis. This is because Bank of Betraying America potentially concluded that they were not paid enough by the government, so they decided that they disserved more money, and began foreclosing on Americans homes. However, this does not reveal the greater conspiracy that used Americans to facilitate winning an economic war against China. This is what I would like to talk to you about next.

To understand the bigger picture of what is really going on, you must understand that the age of the nuclear bomb is gone. The new war that countries fight is an economic war. You see, Ronald Reagan collapsed Communist Russia, by not dropping one nuclear bomb, but rather making them spend more money on building more nuclear weapons. This is why Ronald Reagan would attempt to bring peace, by not getting rid of nuclear bombs, but rather building more. You see, back then everyone wanted PEACE when it was a nuclear war, but in an economic war everyone wants PIECE. Ronald Reagan won the cold war with Russia based on this theory, because this company called Communist Russia went bankrupt. The minute Ronald Reagan announced “Star Wars,” Russia could not afford to compete, thus Ronald Reagan won the cold war for us. However, In retrospect, the United States could not afford it either, but this is why Ronald Reagan would fight this war on the backs of the American people, by taking money from government supported programs, such social security. This made him very unpopular with the Democrats, who at the time did not know why he was doing it. Nevertheless, it made him the President who was responsible for bringing down Communist Russia. Considering that I am right that Reagan used this kind of thinking, might make more sense when you realize that Ronald Reagan majored in economics. This is why it might also make sense to vote in a President who is an economist, instead of an attorney (wink). However, at that time they warned President Reagan that he was causing a deficit, but Reagan figured that it was the next Presidents problem, because there was a bigger threat called Communist Russia. This s where the “spend now and worry later” blueprint would really start. In fact, President Reagan is what I like to refer to as the “Visa and Master Card President,” because that is when all of you preppies were receiving credit cards in the mail. This would make Americans spend money, while helping the American economy and making President Reagan look good for re-election. You all remember that right? That was when President Ronald Reagan’s campaign slogan became “Are you happier than you were before, ” or something like that. Nevertheless, it worked, and he was re-elected. However, the real question was “Were you still happy when you received the bill?” This is because now it put Americans deeper in debt.

Now, President Bush would use the same “Spend now and worry about it later” policy, while he would end up saying that he knew nothing about economics, which might equal to nothing else other than Ronald Reagan saying that he knew nothing about the Iran Contras (lol). This is because it is called “official denial,” which means it might be his way of making sure that he is not blamed for the current housing crisis that he might have created to win the economic war with China. Either way, President Bush would willingly admitted that he was leaning upon former Treasury Secretary Paulson and former Chairman of the Federal Reserve Ben Bernanke for how to deal with things concerning the economy. President Bush would have to fight this economic war with China on many fronts. One them would be in Iraq because there is a shit load of oil there mamma! This is also important when you consider that Saudi Arabia is running out of oil. Not to worry though, we had set up a guy there name Saddam Hussein to make sure that his country would sign oil contracts with us in the future. That is until he decided to think that America needed him so badly, that we would allow him to invade Kuwait. He was terribly wrong, but this now tells you why he began blowing up oil wells, as way to try and make America stop taking over his country.

Now you can imagine how Iran and China sat there smiling at that one another over this problem the United States was having with Iraq. They understood that the United States had set themselves up as the winning economic power in the end with Iraq, but it seemed that the United States was having problems now. This is when China reasoned with itself that they had an opportunity to stop America from winning the economic war, by putting stress on the oil market. They would do this by purchasing oil from Saudi Arabia. They were not building their military because they thought their military could beat the United States of America, but they were building their military because it would require oil.

Simultaneously, Iran would keep sending insurgencies into Iraq, while hoping that it made the new government too unstable to sign those oil contracts, while getting in the way of making America the dominant economic force in the world. If you remember, the Iranian President smiled, while he said that America should not worry about him building nuclear bombs, but maybe should worry more about how Iran could help them with our current economic crisis (smerk). It would add up to nothing more than extortion, but this really pissed off the Bush administration, because they could not allow Iran to have a nuclear bomb in the middle east. This is because Israel would never allow it, and possibly start world war three, which also gets in the way of America being the dominant economic force in the world. Iran knew that the American government was afraid of this scenario, so they began to say the holocaust never happened, which was equivalent to Saddam Hussein sending missals to Israel, during the Persian Gulf war.

All this was designed to get the United States out Iraq, but do you think China and Iran were friends during this time? You bet! An enemy of my enemy is our friend! Needless to say, President Bush was more stubborn than they realized, because he would not get out of Iraq. In fact, he would win the economic war with China, because the oil companies were able to finally sign those oil contracts. This is because new Iraq government was now stable enough to sign them. If you wondering when this happened, all you have to do is remember back to when your gas prices went down. For some reason, China also stopped building so much stuff in their military. Why? Well, this is because President Bush won the economic war on that front. However, President Bush had another trick up his sleeve.

China had been buying Americas debt at the time of the Iraq war. In fact, some say they even bought those Fannie and Freddie loans. Now, I have heard some of you worry about this fact, but the truth is that if you were to buy my debt right now, I am not sure you should consider yourself winning (lol). Anyway, it is my feeling that the Bush administration had timed the collapse of the American housing market, just in time for the Chinese to be holding the bag. So in the end, George Bush might be saying to China “Me not Chinese, me play joke, me go pee, pee in your coke! How?

Basically, China was the one left holding that exploding bomb in the end of the movie. It was nothing other than a game of musical chairs, but China was left standing when the music stopped playing.

China was so pissed off that they started testing rockets that would hit our satellites, which were part of the United States of America’s Star Wars program. There was only one problem. They missed! However, it was no mistake that soon after the American government announced that we have a satellite in orbit that was spinning out of control towards the earth, so we would need to knock it down with a rocket, in which we did. What was the message to China? The message is clear, and is that United States actually hits our target (wink). His name was President George Bush AND HE WAS FIGHTING BACK!

Now I theorized in the above that the Bush administration collapsed the American housing market on purpose, as a way to win the economic war with China. To achieve winning the economic war with China, the Bush administration would need a middle guy to create a bridge between the United States government and the bank. Who does choose to do this? Former Secretary Hank Paulson and former Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke. Considering that Paulson used to be the CEO of Goldman Sachs, which incidentally benefited from the subprime crisis and then got a bailout, this would make him a perfect candidate for this position. This would now explain to you why there is this funny business involving Paulson (the government) telling former Bank of Defrauding America (Private Bank) CEO Ken Lewis, that he would be fired, unless he used Bank of Betraying America to purchase Merrill Lynch:

Right about now, some of you are wondering if it was right for the American government to use you and your homes as ponds to win this economic war with China, but I assure you that your homes would mean nothing to you, if China was the leading economic power in the world. Not to worry though, because the Federal Government also had a plan to help Americans keep their homes. This plan was called HAMP. Where would the government get the money to help fund HAMP? Well, they would not only use the money that they made off of all those investors they sold those bad loans too, but they would use the very same banks that they used to cause the crisis, by giving them a bailout that they did not need. In return, the bank and the government could both make interest, but the bank would have to agree to help homeowners. Which incidentally, didn’t any of you wonder why Bank of Betraying America was given a 45 Billion dollar bailout, when they actually did not lose a dime? Remember, they made money on it, while they sold those loans to the Fannie and Freddie (The Govt.) Either way, the banks knew that bailing out the American homeowner was part of the deal. After all, Bank of Betraying America must have been grateful to the American government, as well as show their patriotism, right? Wrong! You see, Bank of Betraying America figured out that they could potentially betray the American government, while they made more money foreclosing on American homes. Apparently, the billions they made were not enough. It is never enough! Unfortunately, the American government might find out that China was not the only economic threat, but also a bank in America that bares its name.

With all that being said, I think we are the United States of America, who won against Hitler, brought down communist Russia and won the economic war with China. Now who the hell do you think you are Bank of Betraying America? The American people will not rest until the ones responsible are prosecuted and LOCKED UP!

I am an American first and foremost, so I am willing to lose my home, if my government needed it to win the economic war with China, but I am not willing to lose my home to Bank of Betraying America’s potentially irregular, fraudulent and simply abusive greed, while they betray my country.

Ladies and Gentleman of the jury, I just presented to you my version of HAMPGATE, brought to you by BANK OF BETRAYING AMERICA! Does the committee find Bank of Betraying America guilty or not guilty of the charges outlined?

.

.

My name is John Wright! AND I AM FIGHTING BACK!

All Rise! .The Honorable Judge Wright has left The Court of Public Opinion!

.

Your donation makes a difference in my life.

….

.

.

Biggest Bait And Switch Scam In U.S. History!  What’s Really Going on?

.

Written by John Wright

“The bottom line is Freddie & Fannie are the Godfathers of the HAMP program and the mortgage industry.”

September 11, 2010-Think of Fannie & Freddie as the wicked witch from the Wizard of Oz. Bank of Abusing America is more like one of the evil monkeys the wicked witch dispatched to do her evil bidding. This is the story I would like to tell you about, but instead of following the yellow brick road, we are just going to follow the money. Oh how deep the rabbit hole goes!

For those of you who do not know who Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac is, they are the Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA) (OTCBB: FNMA), commonly known as Fannie Mae, was set up as a stockholder-owned corporation chartered by Congress in 1968 as agovernment-sponsored enterprise (GSE), but founded in 1938 during the Great Depression. In retrospect, they are the government, but here are some other facts who Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are about:

  1. GSE means Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae
  2. Hamp program was designed by Freddie, Fannie, and Treasury
  3. This info on this link is from Freddie, Fannie, to the banks.
  4. Freddie, Fannie was taken over by Gov. Sept. 2008 ( Freddie, Fannie means Government)
  5. It says repeatedly that Hamp is for Non-GSE loans or documents say it is not for full recourse loans, which is just about all of them.
  6. GSE loans, I think are 90-95% of mortgage loans.
  7. That means only 5-10% can be modified under HAMP. (Hence all the problems)
  8. In most cases, your bank that you think owns your loan, is actually a Servicer and they send the money on to GSE,s (gov.)who actually own the loan.
  9. HAMP program I believe was a scam, to help them foreclose on GSE loans while you were in a trial period for a Mod. that you were never eligible for in the first place, because it was a GSE loan or a full recourse loan. What an easy way to foreclose while you are in the house and paying them money. GSE’s have total control of the HAMP program, not the banks, the banks are getting their arms twisted by the GSE’s (Gov.) to do exactly what the are told.
  10. The few that do get modified are actually owned (very few) by the banks them-self.

Now that you have this info, Here is the link, you should find most of your answers here. Remember this link is for the SERVICIERS (Banks) not us.

https://www.hmpadmin.com/portal/prog…/servicer.html

So maybe President Ronald Reagan’s words ring true when he said: “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.” Basically, it was when the government decided to get involved that it all started to go wrong. The whole story sounds like nothing short of the government injecting itself into the private sector to influence the market. Who is ultimately responsible for the mortgage crisis? The government! The government created an environment with security back loans that would cause feeding frenzy among the piggy banks. The Real-estate business has always been like a game of musical chairs, but this time when the music stopped playing, the fat piggy banks were already sitting down.

The following information was based on facts that I received in an email:

From recent article: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac took over a foreclosed home roughly every 90 seconds during the first three months of the year. They owned 163,828 houses at the end of March, a virtual city with more houses than Seattle. The mortgage finance companies, created by Congress to help Americans buy homes, have become two of the nation’s largest landlords.

This will show the Journey through HAMP HELL and that approx. 95% of the loans were not eligible in the first place due to tricky wording. Yes, this is the Big American Bait and Switch orchestrated by Fannie & Freddie and using or tax money to do it! All Americans, African Americans, Whites, and Hispanics are all being deceived and defrauded once they enter the HAMP program.

Just a few of the key points are: Edward Pinto pointed out in a recent hearing that Fannie, Freddie and Genie Mae own, guarantee or control 95% of loans in U.S. right now. That leaves only 5% for the private banks own or control. Is this a coincidence that approx. 95% of modifications are being turned down?

Key timeline:

  • Aug. 2008- Fannie & Freddie restructure its attorney foreclosure process
  • Sept. 2008- Fannie & Freddie taken over (receivership) by Gov.
  • Oct. 2008- TARP approved
  • Nov. 2008- TARP changed, found different way to recover Toxic assets (HAMP)
  • Dec. 2008- Streamline Mod. Program started, had been in the works for little while and would have worked to help homeowners and preserve home values.
  • Jan. 2009- Streamline Mod. program replaced with HAMP
  • Feb. 2009- HAMP announced- foreclosures have skyrocketed ever since. Key documents.

PSA agreements (Servicing Agreements)

Servicing Announcements (lots of these almost weekly)

Servicer Participation Agreements (For HAMP program)

Fannie Mae-August 6th 2008 New Foreclosure & Bankruptcy Attorney Network (this shows how Fannie are in total control of foreclosures, not the banks) excerpts from document below:

Diversification of Retained Attorneys: In order to limit risks arising from the concentration of the legal work relating to Fannie Mae’s delinquent loans in a single law firm in a jurisdiction, Fannie Mae urges servicers to diversify their referrals of Fannie Mae matters among two or more law firms in each jurisdiction. Fannie Mae will monitor the concentration of its legal work and reserves the right to suspend the referral of new cases to attorneys (or to reassign previously referred cases) in order to regulate concentration, capacity, performance, or for other reasons.

A little more from same document:In most cases, the retained attorney will also represent the servicer (and may have signed a separate engagement letter with the servicer). Fannie Mae’s engagement letter with the attorneywill provide that in the event a conflict of interest arises during the course of representing both the servicer and Fannie Mae, the attorney must notify both the servicer and Fannie Mae of the conflict, and Fannie Mae and the servicer will work together to resolve the conflict.

Provisions Applicable to All Fannie Mae Foreclosure and Bankruptcy Referrals

Key words in all documents: Read wording carefully, don’t assume:

  • Non-GSE loans
  • GSE loans
  • Eligible loans
  • Ineligible loans
  • MBS (Mortgage Backed security pools) this is the main reason for HAMP design.
  • Portfolio loans
  • Deference between HAMP & HARP
  • Full recourse loans are Ineligible
  • This agreement does not apply to GSE loans

HAMP Trial period paper work homeowners are signing also have a few tricks in there. Clause inserted that takes away the MERS defense (they were having problems with that before they designed HAMP to take care of it) Also wording that I believe turns a loan that was non-recourse into a full recourse loan. Pretty handy papers they are having homeowners sign. HAMP was NOT designed for very many permanent modifications.

Net present value they supposedly use to qualify homeowners is just a distraction, a smoke screen ask most accountants or bankers, it is complicated to understand on purpose to keep you distracted. The real question is the LOAN (not the person) eligible for HAMP. They know this on the first day you call them.

I have given you a small percentage of the information, there is much more.

The bottom line is Freddie & Fannie are the Godfathers of the HAMP program and the mortgage industry. Try this, Google Fannie Mae Lawsuit and see how many HOMEOWNER MORTGAGE lawsuits there are or class action lawsuits against Fannie. I found one discrimination lawsuit, yet they own the vast majority of home loans, some say now 95%. If you Google any other big bank you find many lawsuits and they only privately own a very, small amount of mortgage loans compared to Fannie & Freddie, how can that be? Because Fannie & Freddie have all their Servicers (banks) sign an indemnification like this:

Indemnification: Servicer shall indemnify, hold harmless, and pay for the defense of Fannie Mae, the Treasury and Freddie Mac, and their respective officers, directors, employees, agents and affiliates against all claims, liabilities, costs, damages, judgments, suits, actions, losses and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs of suit, arising out of or resulting from: (a) Servicer’s breach of Section 5 (Representations, Warranties and Covenants) of this Financial Instrument; (b) Servicer’snegligence, willful misconduct or failure to perform its obligations under the Agreement; or (c) any injuries to persons (including death) or damages to property caused by the negligent or willful acts or omissions of Servicer or its contractors. Servicer shall not settle any suit or claim regarding any of the foregoing without Fannie Mae’s prior written consent if such settlement would be adverse to Fannie Mae’s interest, or the interests of the Treasury or Freddie Mac. Servicer agrees to pay or reimburse all costs that may be incurred by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in enforcing this indemnity, including attorneys’ fees.

This one is from the SERVICER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT for HAMP and the banks have to follow this or be sued by Fannie and Freddie, so they have to protect them from lawsuits. 

The banks are the henchman and they take the heat, collect the money and send it in while Fannie and Freddie set back unabated by lawsuits regarding their fraudulent actions.

Last minute note, just out today, Whistleblower at Fannie Mae files lawsuit regarding HAMP Program. http://www.publicintegrity.org/articles/entry/2305/

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY, INJUNCTIVE, AND MONETARY RELIEF AND JURY DEMAND

Police investigating death of Freddie Mac official

Preliminary Statement

  1. Plaintiff, Caroline Herron, files this action against her former employer, Fannie Mae, Fannie Mae officials, for terminating her because she raised criticisms about how Fannie Mae was (1) implementing its role to assist the Department of the Treasury (“Treasury”) in modifications of home mortgage loans, (2) engaging in a gross waste of public funds, and (3) violating its contract with Treasury. If Fannie Mae is considered a private employer, Ms. Herronhas claims for wrongful termination in violation of public policy and tortuous interference with prospectivebusinessadvantage. If, in the alternative, Fannie Mae is considered to be a government employer, Ms. Herron has a claim regarding the violation of her constitutional rights under the First Amendment.

Article written Dec. 17, 2008 before HAMP showing that it would not work for Modifications before it was even announced and it was all about MBSs and PSAs. — (Mandatory Retained and http://foreclosuredefensenationwide.com/?p=82http://foreclosuredefensenationwide.com/?p=82 Servicer-Retained Referrals)

.

Jason Warner Commented on Article:“Great article. In nearly all cases, banks try to play themselves out to be lenders or servicers. In actuality, the real lender is – you mentioned their names in your article – Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. Pursuant to UCC, they are also the enforcers of the notes in due course, but they try to use “servicers” as an excuse to make them the enforcers, but the reality is that this game and all the real decision-making is coming from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Fannie and Freddie must be brought into foreclosure lawsuits. You need to compel the Court to compel Fannie or Freddie (whoever owns the note) to be in the lawsuit as well per discovery in their production of the note. The back of the note will have their name in bold letters and an endorsement by one of their agents. Then, a Pooling and Servicing Agreement, upon production in discovery, will show that lender’s real relationship with the alleged servicer, which of course would result in significant damages for the homeowner.”

.

My name is John Wright! AND I AM FIGHTING BACK!

All Rise! .The Honorable Judge Wright has left The Court of Public Opinion!

.

Your donation makes a difference in my life.

….

.

.

Who Do We Blame? Bank of America?  Or - America The Bank?

.

Written by John Wright

“As the sand runs through the hour glass, so do the days of our HAMGATE lives.”

Tuesday, September 21st, 2010- I wrote in a previous article that: “HAMPGATE is like a puzzle, but they have hidden the pieces all over, in hopes that we would never find them all and put them together.” Considering this fact, one of the pieces of HAMPGATE might exist within the timeline itself.

The Federal Reserve-January 2009: According to a Mortgage News Daily Article,the Federal Reserve (a private company) would start buying Fannie & Freddie and Ginnie MBSs, in January 2009. According to another press release in the Mortgage News Daily, it would cost 1.25 Trillion dollars. In another press release, it stated that right after Fannie & Freddie were taken over, the United States Treasury announced the same day that it would start buying MBS (our homeloans) from the Federal Reserve. Did you hear that? ON THE SAME DAY!

There are two things that everyone must remember and understand:

  1. MBS means: Mortgage-Backed-Securities. The security part is the investment that is backed up by our mortgages.
  2. Freddie/ Fannie: Owns 90-95% of all mortgages, while being under the name of MBS.

So the Banks do not own our loans, but are just the Servicer of the loans. You can look at it as if Freddie & Fannie (The Govt.) contracted a servicing company (Bank of America) to service all the loans they bought from them. Out of 100 loans, the bank might actually only own 5-10 of the loans. Since Bank of America no longer owns the majority of the loans, they also have no authority over them. The only authority they have is what the owner Fannie & Freddie (The Govt.) gives them. Now that we understand who the boss is, the Servicer (The Banks) is told by Fannie & Freddie (The Govt.) to send out a HAMP offer to all the people who might qualify. Even though the Servicer (The Banks) know that they have not received the guidelines from Fannie & Freddie (The Govt.), they do what their boss told them to do. After all, they do not own the loans anymore, but just service them. Therefore, the servicer must do what the owner Fannie & Freddie (The Govt.) tells them to do, or the servicer is in breach of contract. This is when a problem starts for the servicer(The Banks), because they started to receive responses from all those HAMP offers they sent out, but they havenot received the guidelines from Fannie& Freddie (The Govt.) What might they decided to do? They will just tell everyone that they never received the paperwork, while hoping they would receive from Fannie & Freddie (The Govt.) what they need to process the people through HAMP. At first the servicer (The Banks) might have thought that it was not their problem because they are just the servicer of the loans. No pun intended, but they must have been laughing all the way to the bank when they got those bailouts. This is because they did not lose any money, but actually made money by selling those bad loans, which their greed played a part in starting the mortgage crisis. The piggy banks did not care about the fact that they were sticking the American people with the bill. That was until they read in their contract with Fannie & Freddie (The Govt.)that the servicer (The Banks) were responsible for any legal action brought against Fannie & Freddie (The Govt.). Checkmate!

The banks should not worry though, because I am sure that Fannie & Freddie (The Govt.) will give them a solution around election time, but what about all those people who lost their homes during the “black hole” time? That would be just as bad as waiting until an election to bring the troops home from Iraq. Incidentally, I heard the other week that we are bringing the troops home from Iraq. It might just be a coincidence that it is during an election time, but you might have thought I was a psychic for telling everyone in January that they would do it during the elections. Either way, you will not think it is a coincidence if they all the sudden have a solution in October for HAMPGATE.

UPDATE ON OCTOBER 7th, 2010

Headlines read:

BofA Halts ALL U.S Foreclosures

President Obama today blocked legislation that critics say could have made it more difficult for homeowners to challenge foreclosure proceedings against them.

I told you that I was a psychic!

Considering the above, you should be asking why was the Federal Reserve was buying our homeloans? A better question than that is why did our government (The Treasury) would buy our homesloansfrom the Federal Reserve? Who owned our homeloansduring the fake modification process? Either way, we can be pretty confident that it was not the banks, while being totally confident that the Federal Reserve, Treasury and Fannie/Freddie know the answer. Even if you do know who owns your loan today, you might not know tomorrow. This is because they are now trying to get all those loans out from out underneath Fannie & Freddie (The Govt.), so now the question becomes who owns it tomorrow? God please bless America, please tell me that it is not some company in China that owns 95% of the home in America. Regardless of what we do not know, we do know that this whole thing revolves around MBS, Fannie/Freddie and the U.S. Treasury.

TREASURY SENIOR PREFERRED STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac debt and mortgage backed securities outstanding today amount to about $5 trillion, and are held by central banks and investors around the world. Investors have purchasedsecurities of these government sponsored enterprises in part because the ambiguities in their Congressional charters created a perception of government backing. These ambiguities fostered enormous growthin GSE debt outstanding, and the breadth of these holdings pose a systemic risk to our financial system, because the U.S. government created these ambiguities. – read press release

Now some of you might be confused about who you should bring a lawsuit against. Especially since you do not know who owns your loan. The funny thing is that Bank of America keeps telling you that your loan depends on what the “investors” say, but the reality is that they might not even know who owns your loan. I think there should be a law that stipulates that they have to tell us who the “investors” are, before they can threaten us with foreclosure. At any rate, this is why it is questionable if they have the right to even foreclose on you in the first place. I for my part, will sue the servicer, Bank of America. This is because their names were on the offer that was sent to me. They can sue Fannie & Freddie (The Govt.), if they want to. Oh that’s right, their contract with Fannie & Freddie (The Govt.) said they can’t sue them. Sucks to be them, but I have this question for them: “How does it feel Bank of Abusing America? I mean, how does it feel to be potentially tricked by the small print in the contract?” Bank of America will then point out to me that I signed in the original loan documents that I understood and agreed that Bank of America did not have to modify my loan during the any consideration of a modification. It is true though, you have all signed the original loan documents that stated that you agreed that Bank of America can refuse you a loan modification for any reason. The other thing they will tell the judge is that there is simply no contract in place, therefore you can not sue them for breach of contract. In my situation, the Judge agreed with the bank that they did not have modify my loan. However, he agreed with that there might be basis for my lawsuit in regards to the damages. What does that mean? Well, they may have the right to own the car, but they do not have the right to run me over with it, while causing damages.

In the end, you will have to ask yourselves who you blame. Considering that Fannie & Freddie (The Govt.) owns 95% of the home loans in America, you might have to explain to your grandchildren someday that the United States Of America foreclosed on your home.

.

My name is John Wright! AND I AM FIGHTING BACK!

All Rise! .The Honorable Judge Wright has left The Court of Public Opinion!

.

Your donation makes a difference in my life.

….

.

.

On 12/19/10 a blogger wrote: “In addition to the two states suing BofA for fraud, BofA has a serious issue with the legitimacy of their foreclosur­es on most all Countrywid­e originated mortgages. 96% of the mortgages Countrywid­e closed were sold as mortgage backed securities on Wall Street. However, Countrywid­e never delivered the notes to the Trust which means that the securities issued were not technicall­y or legally mortgage backed. Investors in those securities have potential legal claims. When BofA purchased Countrywid­e the notes that were supposed to have been used to back the securities sold by Wall Street once again remained in Countrywid­e’s possession­. Therefore, BofA is still foreclosin­g on properties that they do not technicall­y and legally own. This is going to come back to haunt hedge funds and individual investors who think that they are getting a great deal.”

On 09/21/10 Barbara Rose commented: “Thanks, John. Now I know why they keep saying the investor hasn’t approved the short sale yet. Heck, that’s all of us ………we are the owners of the debt so when do you think they will let us begin approving loan modifications and short sales? Quit laughing.- Barbara Rose”

 

.

On 09/21/10 Barbara Rose commented: “Thanks, John. Now I know why they keep saying the investor hasn’t approved the short sale yet. Heck, that’s all of us ………we are the owners of the debt so when do you think they will let us begin approving loan modifications and short sales? Quit laughing.- Barbara Rose”

  1. Treasury Admits HAMP Was a Banker ‘Bust Out’

  2. Man wins small claims HAMP Case

.

Neil Barofsky Might Be The Last Honest Man in Washington! He We Tell You What’s Really Going On!

.

Piggybankblog Posted on 09/15/12

Cross linked with Mandelman Matters

He could very well be the last honest man in Washington, but he’s certainly one of the last. Former Special Inspector General for TARP, Neil Barofsky, is flat out my hero. In his role at Treasury he was known as SIGTARP and he stood out in the crowd because at every turn he told the truth about how our government has CHOSEN to handle the worst financial and economic catastrophe in our history… or as it says on the cover of his new book, “Bailout,” how both the Bush and Obama Administrations “abandoned Main Street while rescuing Wall Street.”

I followed Neil in his career as SIGTARP and reading his book was an awesome experience for me. He was a Bush appointee who worked in the Obama Administration, so he’s not coming from one side of the aisle or the other. And he confirmed what I’ve been writing about for almost four years.

He’s a former prosecutor who has gone after drug lords and financial fraudsters. His life’s been threatened by those with the means to follow through on their threats. He saw what’s wrong with Washington D.C. and he had the courage to write about it in detail.

Now on this Mandelman Matters podcast you’ll hear Neil and I talk about what he saw and how he tried to be a voice of truth in an effort to make things better for America’s middle class… at a time when that wasn’t going with the flow. Neil doesn’t “flow.”

And because it’s a Mandelman Matters Podcast, it’s not about soundbites. In two parts and over a little more than an hour, we dig in to uncover why HAMP went so wrong, why our government did the unthinkable… and why it wasn’t necessary nor an accident.

I’m not saying any more about this because it speaks for itself. Settle in and get ready to hear the real inside scoop on how Washington works and too often doesn’t. It may cause vomiting and probably shouldn’t be listened to if you have a heart condition…

Be advised that it takes a minute to load after you click below.

.

Click here for Part One

Click here for Part Two

My name is John Wright AND I AM FIGHTING BACK!

All Rise! The Honorable Judge Wright has left The Courtroom of Public Opinion!

.

Your donation makes a difference in my life.

….

.

.

Majority and Minority Staff Report

.

Piggybankblog posted on 09/30/12

Cross linked with nytimes.com last April

.

A voluminous report on the financial crisis by the United States Senate — citing internal documents and private communications of bank executives, regulators, credit ratings agencies and investors — describes business practices that were rife with conflicts during the mortgage mania and reckless activities that were ignored inside the banks and among their federal regulators.

The 650-page report, “Wall Street and the Financial Crisis: Anatomy of a Financial Collapse,” was released Wednesday by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, whose co-chairmen are Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat, and Tom Coburn, a Republican of Oklahoma. The result of two years’ work, the report focuses on an array of institutions with central roles in the mortgage crisis: Washington Mutual, an aggressive mortgage lender that collapsed in 2008; the Office of Thrift Supervision, a regulator; the credit ratings agencies Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s Investors Service; and the investment banks Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank.

“The report pulls back the curtain on shoddy, risky, deceptive practices on the part of a lot of major financial institutions,” Mr. Levin said in an interview. “The overwhelming evidence is that those institutions deceived their clients and deceived the public, and they were aided and abetted by deferential regulators and credit ratings agencies who had conflicts of interest.”

The bipartisan report includes 19 recommendations for changes to regulatory and industry practices. These include creating strong conflict-of-interest policies at the nation’s banks and requiring that banks hold higher reserves against risky mortgages. The report also asks federal regulators to examine its findings for violations of laws.

The report adds significant new evidence to previously disclosed material showing that a wide swath of the financial industry chose profits over propriety during the mortgage lending spree. It also casts a harsh light on what the report calls regulatory failures, which helped deepen the crisis.

Singled out for criticism is the Office of Thrift Supervision, which oversaw some of the nation’s most aggressive lenders, including Countrywide Financial, IndyMac and Washington Mutual, whose chief executive was Kerry Killinger. Noting that the agency’s officials viewed the institutions it regulated as “constituents,” the report said that the office relied on bank executives to correct identified problems and was reluctant to interfere with “even unsound lending and securitization practices” at Washington Mutual.

The report describes how two risk managers at the bank were marginalized by its executives. One of them told the committee that executives began providing the regulator with outdated loss estimates as the mortgage crisis widened. After the risk manager told regulators that the estimates it had received were dated, Mr. Killinger fired him.

From 2004 to 2008, for example, the regulatory office identified more than 500 serious deficiencies at Washington Mutual, yet did not force the bank to improve its lending operations, according to the report. And when the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the bank’s backup regulator, moved to downgrade the bank’s safety and soundness rating in September 2008, John M. Reich, the director of the Office of Thrift Supervision, wrote an angry e-mail to a colleague. Referring to Sheila Bair, the F.D.I.C. chairwoman, he wrote: “I cannot believe the continuing audacity of this woman.” Washington Mutual failed two weeks later.

The office was abolished last year, and its operations were folded into the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. Mr. Reich declined to comment. A lawyer for Mr. Killinger did not respond to a request for comment.

The report was produced by the same Senate committee that conducted an 11-hour hearing last April with Goldman executives and employees of its mortgage unit, who testified about their trading and securities underwriting practices.

At the hearing, some lawmakers questioned Goldman’s assertion that it had not bet against the mortgage market as real estate prices collapsed. And on Wednesday, Senator Levin pointed out that his committee had found 3,400 places in Goldman documents where its officials used the phrase “net short,” a reference to negative bets.

“Why would Goldman deny what was so obvious, that they were engaged in a huge short in the year 2007?” Senator Levin asked in a press briefing Wednesday morning. “Because they gained at the expense of their clients and they used abusive practices to do it.”

The report uncovered a new aspect of Goldman’s mortgage activity during 2007. That year, as Goldman tried to build its bet against housing, the report says, it drove down the cost of shorting the mortgage market by squeezing those who had made negative bets. Goldman tried to put on the squeeze, the report noted, so that it could add to its negative bets more cheaply and protect itself against the housing collapse.

Because Goldman was a large dealer in the marketplace, it had the power to drive prices in a certain direction. The report quotes from the self-evaluation of Deeb Salem, a mortgage trader, who wrote: “We began to encourage this squeeze, with plans of getting very short again.” He added, “This strategy seemed do-able and brilliant.”

Michael Swenson, head of trading in the structured product group at Goldman and Mr. Salem’s superior, also referred to the short squeeze, according to Senate investigators. In an e-mail, Mr. Swenson said that Goldman should “start killing” investors who were betting against mortgages. In testimony before the committee, however, he said he was simply trying to add balance to the market.

Goldman abandoned its plan in June 2007 when two Bear Stearns hedge funds collapsed because of bad mortgage bets.

A Goldman spokesman said in a statement: “While we disagree with many of the conclusions of the report, we take seriously the issues explored by the subcommittee. We recently issued the results of a comprehensive examination of our business standards and practices and committed to making significant changes that will strengthen relationships with clients, improve transparency and disclosure and enhance standards for the review, approval and suitability of complex instruments.”

The report also sheds new light on the bundling and trading of mortgages at Deutsche Bank, which had also made negative bets in that market.

Unlike Goldman, Deutsche Bank has not been accused of wrongdoing by government investigators. But the Senate report focuses on a trader named Greg Lippmann, who has since left the bank to join a hedge fund.

Mr. Lippmann was vocally negative about housing as early as 2005 and brought his idea of shorting the market to professional investors on Wall Street. He described risky mortgage securities before the crisis as “pigs,” according to the report. When he was asked to buy one such mortgage security, he responded that he “would take it and try to dupe someone,” according to the report.

Mr. Lippmann persuaded Deutsche to let him build a large short position, reaching $5 billion by 2007, the report says. The bank still lost money on other positive mortgage bets, but Mr. Lippmann’s trade helped reduce the company’s overall loss.

The report focused on one Deutsche collateralized debt obligation from 2006, called Gemstone VII, and described how Deutsche and other banks made $5 million to $10 million for every deal like Gemstone they created. In 2006 and 2007, banks created about a trillion dollars of C.D.O. deals — the most complex type of mortgage security and the instruments that sent the lending craze to dizzying heights.

In e-mails provided to the committee, Mr. Lippmann called the bank’s operation a “C.D.O. machine” and characterized such securities as a “Ponzi scheme.” But when the committee interviewed Mr. Lippmann, he backtracked, saying that his colorful descriptions were used to defend his negative view of the market.

In the Senate interview, Mr. Lippmann also said that he thought he was the person who persuaded the American International Group to stop writing insurance on mortgage securities. He told the committee that the head of the Deutsche Bank group that put together C.D.O.’s was upset when Mr. Lippmann persuaded A.I.G. to exit the business in 2006. Without A.I.G. there to insure the instruments, it would be harder to keep these lucrative factories humming.

Mr. Lippmann declined to comment on Wednesday.

Michele Allison, a spokeswoman for Deutsche Bank, said that the e-mails and other documents cited in the report indicated the divergent views within the bank about the housing market. “Despite the bearish views held by some, Deutsche Bank was long the housing market and endured significant losses,” she said in a statement.

See report below

Anatomy of a Financial Collapse

.

My name is John Wright! AND I AM FIGHTING BACK!

All Rise! .The Honorable Judge Wright has left The Court of Public Opinion!

.

Your donation makes a difference in my life.

….

.

.

.

.

PRIVACY NOTICE: Warning – any person and/or institution and/or Agent and/or Agency of any governmental structure including but not limited to the United States Federal Government also using or monitoring/using this website or any of its associated websites, you do NOT have my permission to utilize any of my profile information nor any of the content contained herein including, but not limited to my photos, and/or the comments made about my photos or any other “picture” art posted on my profile.

You are hereby notified that you are strictly prohibited from disclosing, copying, distributing, disseminating, or taking any other action against me with regard to this profile and the contents herein. The foregoing prohibitions also apply to your employee , agent , student or any personnel under your direction or control.

The contents of this profile are private and legally privileged and confidential information, and the violation of my personal privacy is punishable by law. UCC 1-103 1-308 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED WITHOUT PREJUDICE

.

 

 

Tags:

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.


Warning: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, function 'w4sl_insert_visitor' not found or invalid function name in /home/piggybank/www/www/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 470