This is good time to clear up some confusion about the relationship between the government and bank fraud. Even upper level economists have been duped by the OCC scam. I have had to explain this to high level respected economists preparing Congressional and Senate reports on the sub-prime meltdown so financial experts were deceived as to the OCC's purpose just as many are confused as to the Federal reserves role.
Most of here remember all the effort the OCC put into preemption years ago in order to derail investigation and dismantling of the msf money laundering mechanism so it's no new news to many long time forum members. My own case on the Illinois interst rate act was derailed by Federal pre-emption. The whole point behind preemption in the case of mortgage fraud is to prevent state and local courts from prosecution and civil resitution for mortgage note fraud where the mortgage notes have been converted into fraudulent securitizations, fraudulently foreclosed in order to collect the CDS payouts, tax evasion or other illicit purpose. The OCC is not a Federal watchdog agency it's Trojan horse filled with baking Mafia shills, set up with Government approval and in fact is a Government agency funded by the banks created to represent the banks interest and deceive the public. It's really no different than Mexican police or military units assigned to protect drug cartels, except it is a U.S. Federal agency set up to protect banking cartels.
NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving the included information for research and
Dependent on Lenders' Fees, the OCC
Takes Banks' Side Against Local Laws
By Jess Bravin and Paul Beckett, Wall Street Journal
January 28th, 2001
When a federal appeals court in San Francisco took up the issue of automated-teller-machine fees earlier this month, it sparked the latest round in the battle between big banks and customers.
Sticking up for consumers were the cities of San Francisco and Santa Monica. They had banned certain ATM fees, after customers complained about being gouged when they use ATMs belonging to banks other than their own. Defending the fees were California's two largest banks -- Bank of America Corp. and Wells Fargo & Co. -- which had won at trial.
Also in the courtroom: the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the federal banking regulator. But in this case -- as in more than a dozen others in recent years -- the OCC wasn't there to check the economic power of banking titans. Instead, the regulator was helping the nationally chartered banks defend their fees. The appeals court is expected to rule in coming months
…..The OCC's solicitousness toward the businesses it oversees stems in part from its need to compete for their loyalty. In an uncommon arrangement, banks can choose either a state or federal regulator, and the selection has financial consequences: The OCC and state banking departments subsist entirely on fees paid by the institutions they regulate….