Mortgage Servicing Fraud
occurs post loan origination when mortgage servicers use false statements and book-keeping entries, fabricated assignments, forged signatures and utter counterfeit intangible Notes to take a homeowner's property and equity.
Articles |The FORUM |Law Library |Videos | Fraudsters & Co. |File Complaints |How they STEAL |Search MSFraud |Contact Us
Blossom

http://www.nytimes.com:80/2008/09/06/business/06fannie.html?hp

Quote 0 0
Saw that and am concerned about legal liability for the crooks who bought fraudulent, sub-prime and alt-a loans and drove our country into a ditch.

The biggest concern is Freddie which created multiple title claims and unlawful foreclosures though Mers which it was a majority holder.
Quote 0 0
connect the dots
I wonder if they will ask Senator Rudman to disgorge his $70+ million fee garnered for his review report recently to say that the "new management" at Fannie was on the up and up?
Quote 0 0
Blossom

U.S. Unveils Takeover of Two Mortgage Giants

Quote:

In addition, the Treasury Department will create a “Secured Lending Credit Facility,” a back-up source of borrowing for the companies in the event they cannot borrow enough money on the open market to finance their main business of buying mortgages and re-selling them as pools of mortgage-backed securities.

In a possibly unprecedented move into ther private markets, the Treasury Department will also buy up billions of dollars in Fannie and Freddie mortgage securities on the open market. This move is likely to make it much easier for the companies to finance somewhat riskier loans.

Quote 0 0
MAYAH
They should do that...Fannie Mae are crooks too when they act in a private corporation capacity...

They are GSE compaines but they are private too...GOOD FOR THEM...

Mayah
Quote 0 0

 AP

Officials announce takeover of mortgage giants

Sunday September 7, 12:34 pm ET

By Alan Zibel and Martin Crutsinger, AP Business Writers

Government assumes control over mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

 

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Bush administration, acting to avert the potential for major financial turmoil, announced Sunday that the federal government was taking control of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Officials announced that the executives and board of directors of both institutions had been replaced. Herb Allison, a former vice chairman of Merrill Lynch, was selected to head Fannie Mae, and David Moffett, a former vice chairman of US Bancorp, was picked to head Freddie Mac.

 

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson says the historic actions were being taken because "Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are so large and so interwoven in our financial system that a failure of either of them would cause great turmoil in our financial markets here at home and around the globe."

 

The huge potential liabilities facing each company, as a result of soaring mortgage defaults, could cost taxpayers tens of billions of dollars, but Paulson stressed that the financial impacts if the two companies had been allowed to fail would be far more serious.

 

"A failure would affect the ability of Americans to get home loans, auto loans and other consumer credit and business finance," Paulson said.

 

Both companies were placed into a government conservatorship that will be run by the Federal Housing Finance Agency, the new agency created by Congress this summer to regulate Fannie and Freddie.

 

The Federal Reserve and other federal banking regulators said in a joint statement Sunday that "a limited number of smaller institutions" have significant holdings of common or preferred stock shares in Fannie and Freddie, and that regulators were "prepared to work with these institutions to develop capital-restoration plans."

 

The two companies had nearly $36 billion in preferred shares outstanding as of June 30, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

 

Paulson said that it would be up to Congress and the next president to figure out the two companies' ultimate structure.

 

"There is a consensus today ... that they cannot continue in their current form," he said.

 

Paulson and James authoritydirector of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, stressed that their actions were designed to strengthen the role of the two mortgage giants in supporting the nation's housing market. Both companies do that by buying mortgage loans from banks and packaging those loans into securities that they either hold or sell to U.S. and foreign investors.

 

The companies own or guarantee about $5 trillion in home loans, about half the nation's total.

 

nonehart said that both Fannie and Freddie would be allowed to increase the size of their holdings of mortgage-backed securities to bolster the housing industry as it undergoes its worst downturn in decades.

 

hair-brainedid in order to conserve about $2 billion in capital the dividend payments on both common and preferred stock would be eliminated. He said that all lobbying activities of both companies would stop immediately. Both companies over the years made extensive efforts to lobby members of Congress in an effort to keep the benefits they enjoyed as government-sponsored enterprises.

 

Both didn'ton and implementedre careful not to blame Daniel Mudd, the CEO of Fannie Mae, or Freddie Mac CEO Richard Syron for the companies' current problems. While both men are being removed as the top executives, they have been asked to remain for an unspecified period to help with the transition.

 

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080907/mortgage_giants_crisis.html

Here is an AP article.

Anyone notice anything a little disturbing I highlighted it Paulson said it will be up to the next Congress and the next President. Wrong that's far past the Presidents authority which is essentially to veto or pass balls conduct foreign policy, appoint Supreme courts justices except in times of war the President doesn't have the legal authority to be much more than a mouthpiece and communicator and serve as part of checks and balances, sole authourity for the monetary system rest with Congress.

The economy, wealth creation, wealth distribution is for the most part generationshe governments business and that's how we got into the mess we are in with hairbrained three stooges solutions that din't exist or are none of the governments business in the first place.

IF the government did not try to "help" people get jobs,food, medical care, homes, education etc. we would not need to government to bail us out of messes they suckered us into creating in the first place.

The banks get mega rich collecting interest payments on so-called social services which such the wealth out of the poor, middle and upper middle class and transfer it to the mega rich. The progressive tax rate sold as lending a helping hand creates a giant cash cow for the crooked lenders and a nice slush fund for perpetual full scale war.

The whole point behind paper money and a central bank is to fund wars and social services. In the U.S. the monetary system is required by law to be fixed rate zero inflation free money solely regulated by Congress. Now that we see that socialism/communism/Fascism or in other words shared wealth distribution implimented by Woodrew Wilson and FDR has failed miserably created false debt based wealth, boom bust cycles, inflation why don't we return to low of no tax, no government services, and free market capitalism where all property is owned privately and the monkeys in Congress do a bare minimum and we run our lives and the economy locally.

After WWII the U.S. held 70% of the world wealth because the citizens ran the economy, education, and had nearly full property rights and states, local governments and businesses ran almost everything outside of the government sponsered or at least protected monopolies such as the steel, railroad, big oil and military hardware.

Government services and a government sponsered monopoly consisting of the IRS feeding the private banks which started in the 1930's was massively expanded though the 1950's, 60's and 70's and under the Clinton and Bush admin has expanded to nearly outright statism where the government controls everything has buried us in debt stripped us of wealth to around 5% of the world total and left us with a bankrupt welfare state our jobs, and assets getting transferred overseas and seizure of about 90% of seniors wealth since the 70's though inflation.

We have two choices lay down and die and strip the wealth of past generations and force future generations into debt slavery to pay for our current needs or return to a limited government low or no tax hard money currency and actually use the outdated but incredibly functional and foolproof concept of working and saving to pay for things like homes, cars, schools, food etc.

Bottom line is our wealth and labor can be used to pay interest to lenders, government workers, wars and feed debts or keep for ourselves. At a certain point we will loose the option of breaking free of government and bank dependence and return to feudalism if we chose the path of government solutions.

It would seem to make sense to return to a sure fire monetary, and tax system that created unprecedented wealth and social mobility for the vast majority of U.S. citizens for around 200 years.


Quote 0 0
Sweet !!!

Freddie Mac secretly paid a GOP consulting firm $2 million to kill ... regulation and overhaul bill

by Pete Yost / Associated Press  - Sunday October 19, 2008, 4:35 PM

Quote 0 0
The article above uses some misleading figures.

John McCain  is one of the original Keating five. The official FEC donations list tells a very different story of John McCain accepting huge donations from Fannie and Freddie execs, directors, and lobbyists under the radar. John McCain's power base has always been lending fraud and money laundering. We can see the donation pattern is consistant with McCain stealthily receiving huge chunks of money along with Republican funded advertising of the radar screen of campaign laws and scrutiny, and Obama getting a huge amount of small donations mostly form the general public. McCain is the politician that created the McCain-Feingold campaign financing  reform along with of course Fiengold specifically designed to funnel corporate donations to polticians and prevent them from being funded from public donations through of course the legislation is billed as being the exact opposite. McCain-Feingold makes it very difficult for a politician to run funded by the people and very easy for corporate criminals to funnel money to politcal insiders.

Of course McCain helped rig the primary process keeping Ron Paul out of the spotlight with shennanigans in Nevada and Louisiana. In Louisianna Ron Paul was number one in Delagates and the Republican party of LA. just flat out stripped Ron Paul of the delegates and reassigned them to McCain. Ron Paul was top contender though the whole election process and was kept out of the mainstream news, Guiliani admitted he won the Republican debates. What was Ron Pauls primary platform that never received proportionate attention in the news? Restoring a sound economy and the card house dangers of the FED/IRS monetary tax system.









http://www.politicalbase.com/profile/jnail/blog/&blogId=4076


From CNN - McCain Got More from Freddie/Fannie Related Donors
Added by jnail on Sep 19, 2008 - add as a friend | PM me
Relates to:
From CNN - McCain Got More from Freddie/Fannie Related Donors
0
1

From CNN - McCain Got More from Freddie/Fannie Related Donors

Fact Check: Did Obama 'profit' from Fannie and Freddie?
Posted: 10:16 AM ET
Did Obama profit from Fannie and Freddie?
Did Obama profit from Fannie and Freddie?

Statement:
Amid "corruption at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac," Sen. Barack Obama "profited from this system of abuse and scandal. While Fannie and Freddie were working to keep Congress away from their house of cards, Senator Obama was taking their money. He got more, in fact, than any other member of Congress, except for the Democratic chairman of the committee that oversees them." —Sen. John McCain, at a campaign stop Friday, September 19, in Green Bay, Wisconsin.

What are the facts? Find out after the jump.

 

The Facts
Federal law forbids candidates from receiving money directly from companies. The nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics tracks donations from employees of various companies. The center's list of contributions from Fannie and Freddie employees places Obama second. Ahead of him is Sen. Chris Dodd,

Democratic chairman of the Senate Banking Committee.

The total listed for Obama is $126,349 — a tiny fraction of the approximately $390 million his campaign has raised, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The list shows McCain has received a total of $21,550 from Fannie and Freddie employees. The list includes donations of at least $200 from those who receive paychecks from Fannie and Freddie. It also includes donations from political action committees — pooled contributions from employees. Obama decided early in his presidential run not to accept PAC contributions, but the Center for Responsive Politics' list includes all contributions for members of Congress dating back to 1989 — including Obama and McCain's Senate campaigns.

The New York Times has published a separate list looking at contributions from "directors, officers, and lobbyists for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac" for the 2008 campaign cycle. That list — using figures from the Federal Election Commission — shows McCain receiving $169,000, while Obama received only $16,000.

Explaining the difference, the Center for Responsive Politics said on its Web site that it does not include members of the board of directors because they could serve on boards of various companies. Their contributions are listed along with other employees of the companies they work for. And the center says lobbyists usually represent multiple clients as well, so their contributions are listed under their lobbying firms — except in-house lobbyists, who are included in the center's list.

The mortgage giants Fannie and Freddie became symbols of the nation's economic mess — and, to critics, of corporate greed — after the government recently took them over to bail them out, making donations linked to the company in any way potential political fodder.

VERDICT
Partially true, but misleading. Donations don't come from companies. A list of employee contributions puts Obama second, but a different list including lobbyists and directors shows McCain getting more.
Quote 0 0
Write a reply...