In a great article headlined “Foreclosure Is Financial Terrorism, Is it also Treason? (Just Who Are We Giving Homes Of Americans to After All?)”, Matt Weidner weighs in on the fact that Fannie Mae admits it doesn’t own the notes it says in court it does:
“…in the vast majority of cases, Bank of America (and this goes for virtually all “The Banks”) do not own the mortgages that they are foreclosing on. I have repeatedly used the phrase,
THE WIZARD BEHIND THE CURTAIN TELLS BANKS TO FORECLOSE ON AMERICANS, THE WIZARD OWNS THE MORTGAGES
But here’s the thing….
There’s not just a Wizard Behind The Curtain, There’s an Overlord Behind The Wizard
Fannie and Freddie of course do not own the interests in the notes and mortgages unencumbered….parties that sit behind The Wizard own those interests….but don’t take my analysis standing alone….read what Fannie directly says:
The mortgages that back a Fannie Mae MBS are held in a trust on behalf of Fannie Mae MBS investors and are not Fannie Mae assets.“
That last red part is what we here at Liberty Road Media referred to in the following posts:
Weidner then fingers China as the “Wizard” and/or the “Overlord”:
“So what did China start doing….in record volume purchases? They tied their purchase of US financial instruments to secured interests….they took collateral. That collateral?
The mortgage on the homes that judges are foreclosing on all across this country.”
Pulse of foreclosure fraud, meet Weidner’s finger, as discussed in the WND story “China poised to play debt card – for U.S. land”:
“Could real estate on American soil owned by China be set up as “development zones” in which the communist nation could establish Chinese-owned businesses and bring in its citizens to the U.S. to work?
That’s part of an evolving proposal Beijing has been developing quietly since 2009 to convert more than $1 trillion of U.S debt it owns into equity.
Under the plan, China would own U.S. businesses, U.S. infrastructure and U.S. high-value land, all with a U.S. government guarantee against loss.”
As Weidner facetiously asks: “….what could possibly be wrong here?”