Smell that aroma?
It’s kinda foul, but some people–mostly judges and politicians–find it absolutely intoxicating. It’s another fraud pie from the Fakery Bakery, where all the lies that keep us in servitude are cooked up. It’s been brought out and set on the window for us all to smell and see it for what it is, and in this case, it’s Bank of New York Mellon (BONY) saying in an email that it doesn’t own a loan it wants to foreclose, even though BONY’s lawyers had previously told the homeowner that BONY did own the loan.
It’s all explained very concisely at the website of one Bill Paatalo, and the redacted email from BONY is there for all to see (hat tip to Living Lies). Paatalo shows the QWR response in which this homeowner was told, in plain language, that the owner of her loan was “Bank of New York Mellon.” The homeowner then contacted BONY about this matter, and BONY eventually sent her an email saying the exact opposite of what the QWR response said:
“She said that many people from Bank of America has [sic] informed her that she will have to contact Bank of New York Mellon because it is showing us [i.e., BONY] as the owner. We [BONY] are only the trustee for this loan and we cannot authorize any remodifications, foreclosures, or short sales.”
Now, I don’t know whether or not this case is in litigation. It sure seems like it should be if it isn’t. But rest assured, this startling and damning admission will not bring any harm to BONY, Bank of America, or any of the lawyers involved if and when this case is brought to trial. They will simply be allowed to explain their way out of this glaring (and again, damning) contradiction, because judges LOVE fraud pie from the Fakery Bakery.
Question is, why do judges love that damn pie so much when everybody else knows it’s nasty, it’s rotten, and very bad for you?
In a very eye-opening, recent article, Janet Tavakoli explains why the banks and the financial system were bailed out but nobody was indicted or sent to jail (hat tip: Zero Hedge). Tavakoli states that on separate occasions, two Democrat sources close to the Obama regime told her the reason why no one has gone to jail:
“The administration made a bargain…it was better to let a lot of people get away scot free…“
Oh, that’s why the judges love the smell and taste of fraud pie! They’re in on the “bargain!” You know who isn’t in on the bargain? You. Me. Everyone we know personally. Everyone we hang out with. Everyone that works where we work. In short, no one but the Obama regime is in on this “bargain.”
What is insane is that Tavakoli’s sources tell us only one part of the bargain, i.e., the banks get bailed out and let off the hook for any wrong-doing. What’s the other part of the bargain? What do we, the American people, get out of this bargain? All we’ve gotten out of it so far is wealth confiscation, foreclosures, shit jobs, police state, more wars, more debt. I’m thinking this ain’t such a good bargain.
The REAL Terms of The Bargain
Oh, but then one realizes–the “bargain” was never made between we, the people and the banks–the “bargain” was between the Obama/Bush regime and the banks. The “bargain” is this: “Obama/Bush will bail out the banks and look the other way on all wrongdoing, and in exchange for doing so, you will take care of Obama/Bush and all their cronies for the rest of their natural lives.” That’s the REAL bargain.
Tavakoli’s sources told her that a collapse in or crisis of confidence was the worst possible thing that could have ever happened, so they let the banks get away with defrauding the entire country and stealing people’s houses and putting an end to every aspect of the “American dream.” Well, guess what? The crisis of confidence is happening ANYWAY. Nobody buys the banks’ bullshit anymore. All the bargain did was put off the collapse for just a little longer, because collapse is mathematically inevitable and it is going to happen. So the bargain was for nothing, from the perspective of everyone in the country except the banks and the government.
The One Consolation
I do take one consolation from knowing about the bargain, though, and that is this: I’m not crazy. I always suspected there was a bargain, but still didn’t want to believe it–and that made me feel crazy. Like when I and hundreds of thousands (millions?) of others sued the banks trying to take their houses and lost, despite the overwhelming evidence that the foreclosures shouldn’t take place–that made me feel crazy. Now I at least know that yes, I did have an excellent case, it’s just that there’s this bargain, see, and if any one of us was able to win, well, that would kinda tend to undermine the bargain. The biggest part of the bargain is that the banks don’t get held accountable for anything. Oh, you and I sure as hell will have our property and livelihoods taken and be held “accountable” for “defaulting”–but there was no bargain struck over that.
In fact, the bank bargain more or less explicitly says that the people must lose and the banks must win. Just like when Elizabeth Warren found out in questioning over the “Independent Foreclosure Review” that the government possessed concrete knowledge of bank criminality in regards to foreclosures and she asked if that knowledge would be passed on to homeowners so they could sue the banks. She was of course told that there hadn’t been a decision about that at that time, and yada yada…But of course no one’s going to give the homeowners a weapon to fight the banks, that would violate the bargain!
So we were sold out. No two ways about it. What, my friends, do we do now?