Wall St Playbook: Bill In Works To Make All Fraud Of Banks Legal Retroactively

[kpete]

ALERT: Casus Belli - Ex-Post-Facto Law!
WALL STREET PLAYBOOK:


After years of negative judicial decisions about the use of a straw-man on mortgages, MERS was about to lose its existence as well as its credibility. But now all of that is set to change as Wall Street money is pouring into the coffers of those who are receptive (i.e., almost everyone in Congress). The legislation is already being drafted under the interstate commerce clause to ratify MERS and everything it did retroactively. It appears that the Obama administration is ready to pardon all the securitization deviants by signing this bill into law. This information is corroborated by several people who are in sensitive positions — persons who would be the first to know such proposals.

Fortunately, there are some people in Washington who have a conscience and do not want to see this happen.

Besides the obvious seediness of this maneuver, it runs roughshod over state property laws, and the rights of investors, homeowners and borrowers. It amounts to a permanent installation of a Federal system that supersedes the county records for recording property rights. Off-record comments I’ve heard from people in power are outraged at this assault on states’ rights. But these people are not legislators, who are getting promises larger than anything in your imagination, if they will support such a bill. It might be couched as a uniform law to be adopted by the states to get around the states rights issues, but it will permanently remove some of the power over property that lies solely within the jurisdiction of the states and place it preemptively within federal jurisdiction.

All of this is scheduled to happen during the lame duck session of congress between now and the end of the this year, 2010. That means in a manner of days, some bill that may look like it has nothing to do with property, mortgages or foreclosures is going to have attached to it a provision whose effect will go even further than the notarization bill that went through Congress like S–t through a goose and almost got signed by the President. We caught that one AFTER it was passed by Congress unanimously but before Obama signed it.

..............................

more:
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=171940

[laughingliberal]

1. Words fail me. nt

[tridim]

2. At least we know in advance.

There will be a massive public outcry if and when the bill appears. No doubt about it. Too many people know what the banks did now.

[laughingliberal]

11. It was sheer luck the last one was brought to light in time.

Looks like they're trying to pass it quietly and under the radar.

[gratuitous]

3. Who keeps writing these pieces of legislation?

They seem to get introduced, voted on and on their way to passage without anyone knowing where they came from, who the sponsors are, or just how it even got on the legislative calendar. There's no entry for "Consideration of Self-Writing Legislation, 1-2 p.m." on any of the schedules. Yet, here come these bills, fully formed and realized, and nobody knows how they got through the House and the Senate.

When your congress critter tells you that some common sense piece of legislation can't possibly be passed because there isn't time in the session, or some such similar horseshit, remind him or her of how these little turds keep slipping through.

[fascisthunter]

4. "It appears that the Obama administration is ready to pardon all ..."Wall Street criminal activity

progressive my ass

[KansDem]

5. First it was ATT, now the banks...

"Retroactive immunity"

I still remember when we were a nation of principles and ethics...

[Waiting For Everyman]

6. Watch for it to be sneaked into a large and necessary bill, close to NY's eve

Just like Phil Gramm did the Commodity Futures Modernization Act.

[CBGLuthier]

7. Unconstitutional.

Sign it. Sue em and take it to the SC. Few things in the Constitution are as clear as the absolute prohibition against ex post facto laws. No wriggle room for interpretation like some of the amendments. Forbidden.

[DJ13]

8. [phone]

000000000!

[Qutzupalotl]

13. Interesting comments on this topic at the OP's link:

Calder vs Bull 3 U.S. 386 (1798) is still binding precedent in the area of ex-post facto laws. (See, Article I, Section 9-10 US Constitution) It forbids an act of Congress (and the states) which criminalizes or INCREASES a criminal penalty or in civil cases changes the relationship between contracting parties retroactively. It does not apply to decriminalizing a particular act -- such as amnesty acts.

If this law is a pardon to all "prior bad acts" then it probably passes muster. If it is attempt to retroactively change contractual and property law regarding mortgages and state recording laws to make MERS legal it ain't gonna fly.

--------------
also the comment below it:

As I understand it ex post facto is only considered within our constitution to mean making things illegal in the past which were legal at the time. Supposedly it is fine to make things legal in the past which were illegal at the time. I am not a lawyer. Just from my personal research into the law enabling warrantless wiretapping for the government by the telcos.

I very much support ex post facto meaning exactly what it says not as it is currently interpreted.

--------------

[Exilednight]

9. Another case of getting Democrats to do Republicans dirty deeds. n/t

[formercia]

10. Trojan Horse Legislation

A good reason to disallow amendments that have nothing to do with the Bill at hand.

[laughingliberal]

12. Start hounding the press!

I just emailed the story to Ed and TYT. Don't let them sneak this in!

[starroute]

14. Where's the Tea Party when you really need it?

All kidding aside, though, anything that combines "second bank bailout" with "threat to states' rights" ought to push their buttons. Is there any good way to get the word around in those circles? Maybe by way of the Ron Paul types?

[Swede]

15. Karl Denninger ? One of the founders of the tea party?

Really?

[kpete]

16. sorry about that

did not recognize the name

[Dr.Phool]

17. Denningers politics are stupid, but his info is usually accurate.

I read him occasionally, just for economic perspective.

[Octafish]

18. My Democratic colleagues are certain to oppose this, right?

Right. But if they can't, maybe it's because they're stuck between blackmail and the NSA and Switzerland.