Daily Archives: August 16, 2014

43 Years Ago: HOW FAKE MONEY BECAME LEGAL MONEY: THE AFFIRMATION OF THE NIXON SHOCK

Great piece by Liberty Road Media website:

Nixon, 9th Circuit and how fake money became “Lawful Money”

Here’s what happened in a nutshell: 1) Bank of America picked Dick Nixon, 2) Dick Nixon picked some federal judges, 3) Dick Nixon created the pure fiat/imaginary/out-of-thin-air/fictional money we now use and that is a banker’s wet dream, 4) and then Dick Nixon’s judges affirmed that the fake money is real money.  So let’s take these four points one at a time.

1. Obviously, we have the letter from H.L. Perry pictured above, which is on display at Nixon’s birthplace in Yorba Linda, CA.  We also have the following account from pioneering independent journalist Mae Brussell, from an August 1972 issue of The Realist magazine:

“In August, 1945, a Committee of One Hundred Men located in California placed an advertisement in 26 newspapers:

WANTED — Congressman candidate with no previous political experience to defeat a man who has represented the district in the House for ten years. Any young man, resident of district, preferably a veteran, fair education, no political strings or obligations and possessor of a few ideas for betterment of country at large may apply for the job. Applicants will be reviewed by 100 interested citizens who will guarantee support but will not obligate the candidate in any way. (26)

That ad was typical, a covert method of pretending this was an open contest for office. Richard Nixon, located in Maryland, still in the Navy, received a telephone call from Herman Perry. ‘Are you a republican and are you available?’ were the two questions asked of Nixon.(27)

Herman Perry was vice president of Bank of America (28) — which was soon on its way to becoming the largest private bank in the world. By 1960, one hundred top corporations were spending $21-billion for military goods. In California alone, fully half of all jobs related directly or indirectly on the continuance of the arms race.(29)

Richard Nixon, poor, from an unknown family, absent from the California scene for many formative years during law school and military service, was selected to represent old guard California republicans who picked him to run for Congress.(30) He was called upon to serve the strategists.

Nixon was ‘recognized.’”

2. Indeed, Nixon was recognized, and elected to two terms as President, which of course enabled him to appoint federal judges, including those in the influential Ninth Circuit.  Here are some of Nixon’s appointees to the Ninth Circuit: Eugene Allen Wright, Herbert Choy, John Francis Kilkenny, Ozell Miller Trask, Alfred Goodwin.  Remember those names—they’ll come up again shortly.

3. Nixon announces the end of the convertibility of the dollar into gold:

 

4. Noted attorney Larry Becraft has compiled a list of several cases which are cited as having “destroyed” the argument that money created out of thin air is not real money, all but one of which were decided after the Nixon Shock (as you obviously can see):

“Adverse Federal Decisions:

1. Koll v. Wayzata State Bank, 397 F.2d 124 (8th Cir. 1968)
2. United States v. Daly, 481 F.2d 28 (8th Cir. 1973)
3. Milam v. United States, 524 F.2d 629 (9th Cir. 1974)
4. United States v. Scott, 521 F.2d 1188 (9th Cir. 1975)
5. United States v. Gardiner, 531 F.2d 953 (9th Cir. 1976)
6. United States v. Wangrud, 533 F.2d 495 (9th Cir. 1976)
7. United States v. Kelley, 539 F.2d 1199 (9th Cir. 1976)
8. United States v. Schmitz, 542 F.2d 782 (9th Cir. 1976)
9. United States v. Whitesel, 543 F.2d 1176 (6th Cir. 1976)
10. United States v. Hurd, 549 F.2d 118 (9th Cir. 1977)
11. Mathes v. Commissioner, 576 F.2d 70 (5th Cir. 1978)
12. United States v. Rifen, 577 F.2d 1111 (8th Cir. 1978)
13. United States v. Anderson, 584 F.2d 369 (10th Cir. 1978)
14. United States v. Benson, 592 F.2d 257 (5th Cir. 1979)
15. Nyhus v. Commissioner, 594 F.2d 1213 (8th Cir. 1979)
16. United States v. Hori, 470 F.Supp. 1209 (C.D.Cal. 1979)
17. United States v. Tissi, 601 F.2d 372 (8th Cir. 1979)
18. United States v. Ware, 608 F.2d 400 (10th Cir. 1979)
19. United States v. Moon, 616 F.2d 1043 (8th Cir. 1980)
20. United States v. Rickman, 638 F.2d 182 (10th Cir. 1980)
21. Birkenstock v. Commissioner, 646 F.2d 1185 (7th Cir. 1981)
22. Lary v. Commissioner, 842 F.2d 296 (11th Cir. 1988)”

Notice that none of these decisions are U.S. Supreme Court decisions, and that the court that shows up the most in this list is the Ninth Circuit.  And again, all but one were decidedafter the Nixon Shock, as a direct challenge to the Nixon Shock, whether intentional or not. And that’s what the bank-owned courts can’t abide–challenges to their system of total enrichment for them and total enslavement for us.  So the challenges were of course slapped down.

One of these cases, number three on this list, is currently cited by the Federal Reserve on its website as being one of the cases which firmly established that Federal Reserve Notes are “lawful money”:

“In 1933, Congress changed the law so that all U.S. coins and currency (including Federal Reserve notes), regardless of when issued, constitutes ‘legal tender’ for all purposes. Federal and state courts since then have repeatedly held that Federal Reserve notes are also ‘lawful money.’ Milam v. U.S., 524 F.2d 629 (9th Cir. 1974), is typical of the federal and state court cases holding that Federal Reserve notes are ‘lawful money.’ In Milam, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reviewed a judgment denying relief to an individual who sought to redeem a $50 Federal Reserve Bank Note in ‘lawful money.’ The United States tendered Milam $50 in Federal Reserve notes, but Milam refused the notes, asserting that “lawful money” must be gold or silver. The Ninth Circuit, noting that this matter had been put to rest by the U.S. Supreme Court nearly a century before in the Legal Tender Cases (Juilliard v. Greenman), 110 U.S. 421 (1884), rejected this assertion as frivolous and affirmed the judgment.

Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew Hasn’t a Clue

Secretary of the Treasury, Jacob Lew, weighed in on the foreclosure crisis at aconference in late June celebrating the fifth anniversary of the Making Homes Affordable Program (HAMP) and waxed poetic about the program’s alleged success. The problem for Lew, however, was explaining why only a quarter or so of the 46 billion originally promised as TARP relief to homeowner’s has actually been paid out in the six years since the money was allocated. Treasury’s head honcho tried to spin his way out of the quicksand by claiming that “HAMP and our other programs cannot be judged only on what they have done directly for homeowners. Treasury’s housing assistance programs have become a model for the broader housing sector.”

It was a “run-that-by-me-again” moment, a bit of clever obfuscation designed to divert attention from the administration’s lack of concern regarding those directly impacted by the on-going foreclosure crisis. While HAMP was supposed to throw a life preserver to those drowning in default the program has turned out to be a life preserver in name only, more like its candy counterpart: looking good and tasting sweet but not providing any long term satisfaction.

At the conference Lew cast some bread upon the water — announcing an extension of HAMP and related programs through 2016 — and these crumbs were eagerly consumed by so-called housing advocates who, according to the New York Times,“applauded the extension, mainly because there is nothing yet to replace it” which speaks volumes about the sorry and short-sighted state of affairs considering that there’s lots of meaningful stuff — try mortgage principal reductions and foreclosure moratoriums — that could provide real cement to shore up foreclosure defenses for at risk homeowners.

The largely nameless victims in this crisis brings to mind Jules Dassin’s fabled 1948 film noir classic, Naked City, that explored the lives of New York’s underclass. At the movies finale a disembodied narrator’s voice proclaims, “There are 8 million stories in the Naked City, this has been one of them.”

The movie inspired an idea. I’d like to host a party over at my place and invite a few foreclosure victims. Perhaps Secretary Lew might attend. He lives just a stone’s throw from my digs in Westchester (he calls the Riverdale section of the Bronx home). Tim Geithner would be welcome as well. He hails from the nearby Westchester village of Mamaroneck. A meet and greet would give them a chance to chat with real flesh and blood individuals who’ve weathered the outrageous slings and arrows of an industry bent on driving them from their homes.

Here’s are some names:

Bob and Stacy Schmidt, a Tennessee couple and victims of a 2007 Litton Loan Servicing/Deutsche Bank foreclosure. Their brutal eviction was documented for a Pacific Street Films documentary, Foreclosure’s Harvest of Shame, (still in production). Not only did the Schmidt’s lose their house but Bob’s health took a nose dive. Despite being hospitalized numerous times he’s made it abundantly clear that he’s not throwing in the towel.

Steven Verdekel, a homeowner in Hawaii has been on the HAMP hamster wheel for quite some time care of Ocwen Financial, the non-bank servicer that’s been in the regulatory cross hairs for the past few years (I investigated the company in articles for In These Times). Verdekel has submitting endless reams of requested documentation seeking to turn a temporary modification into a permanent one and has yet to receive an answer. His house and his life remain in limbo.

This next set of invitees have shouted to the high judicial heavens asking that their allegations of servicing fraud be taken seriously and despite the 2010 hoopla surrounding revelations of “robo-signing” still find law enforcement doors slammed shut in their faces.

Playing fast and loose with mortgage notes is what Pennsylvania resident JoAnne Kennedy claims Wells Fargo engaged in while prepping for a 2011 foreclosure. She’s alleged that Wells fabricated a bogus note bearing her deceased husband’s signature (her husband died in 1998) which they submitted to Fannie Mae in 2005. And for those who can’t bring themselves to believe that a major bank would do such a thing: let me direct their attention to recent revelations of a secret foreclosure playbook that Wells used to help grease the eviction machinery.

In similar fashion Michigan resident KathyJo Enders Torrenga has tried to make sense out of the disparate links that don’t seem to fit together in her mortgage’s chain of title. Hunkered down in her house, fighting eviction, she finds it especially galling that the documentation to support the foreclosure was prepared by Trott & Trott, a foreclosure law firm whose deep pocketed CEO, David Trott — also known as Michigan’s “Foreclosure King,” recently won the Republican nod for the upcoming11th District Congressional race.

Montana resident, Mary McCulley, may find it difficult to attend. Currently she’s a guest of the Federal government, serving time in the slammer for allegedly “impersonating” a government agent while investigating why her bank — U.S. Bank — decided to change a 300,000 30-year loan to a 200,000 loan due in eighteen months. A Montana Jury in February, 2014, found her accusations credible to the tune of six million dollars (a verdict reached several months before her incarceration). The case, first mentioned in a Salon.com article is a jaw dropper, and enough to make you wonder why Hollywood hasn’t yet come knocking on her jail cell door.

Read on.

 

SEATTLE: SHERIFF ARRESTS DISABLED HOMEOWNER FOR TRESPASSING IN HIS OWN HOME

LIBERTY ROAD MEDIA

Jean-and-Byron-Barton

Remember the Bartons?  And their eviction that was called off by Seattle’s mayor?

“‘A group of activists from Standing Against Foreclosure and Eviction (SAFE) sat outside Mayor Ed Murray’s office for four hours today, asking that he intervene to prevent the eviction of veteran and his wife from their West Seattle home, until the mayor and his chief of staff came out and met with them this afternoon.

According to SAFE organizer Josh Farris, Murray told them ‘the SPD is not coming’ to evict Byron and Jean Barton, and that he’d let the activists know if anything changes.'”

And then a lawsuit by the party that bought the Barton’s home at a foreclosure auction tried to get a writ of mandamus to make the mayor and the city police arrest the Bartons for trespassing–but the judge ruled against it?

ORIGINAL REPORT, 11:36 AM: Just in: King County…

View original post 571 more words

KNECHT vs FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al., | Big Time Loss for MERS and Deutsche Bank National Trust Company as Trustee in Washington State Federal District Court

From its inception, Mr. Knecht’s deed of trust ran afoul of the Deed of Trust Act by designating MERS as its . . .

Here is the court document. Click here.

Federal Home Loan Mortgage : Ackman files second lawsuit against U.S. government

(Reuters) – Activist Bill Ackman’s Pershing Square Capital Management LP filed its second lawsuit in two days against the U.S. government over bailout of Fannie Mae (>> Federal National Mortgage Assctn Fnni Me) and Freddie Mac (>> Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp), court documents show.

In Friday’s complaint with the U.S. District Court, Pershing Square alleged that the Department of the Treasury illegally seized tens of billions of dollars in Fannie and Freddie profits.

Pershing Square, the largest shareholder of both the mortgage companies, said in the complaint that it was told the Fannie and Freddie stockholders no longer have fundamental shareholders rights.

Fannie’s and Freddie’s conservator, Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), denied “written demands by Pershing Square to the companies’ boards of directors for a books and records inspection”, according to the complaint.

In the second lawsuit, Pershing suggests the mortgage companies’ dividends being paid to the Treasury should be shared among other common shareholders.

Read on.

Barclays faces second fine over clients’ money

Barclays faces paying tens of millions of pounds to the City watchdog for failing to keep its clients’ money safe, despite having already been hit with a fine over the issue.

The bank and the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) are understood to be in discussions over the penalty, likely to significantly outstrip the £1.1m the bank paid for failing to ringfence client assets from its own over an eight-year period.

Since the financial crisis, regulators have stepped up scrutiny of clients’ asset segregation. It is believed that any new fine would relate to new allegations, not the same issues as the previous fine.

It is believed that any penalty could number in the tens of millions, although it would be less than the £59.5m Barclays paid the FCA’s predecessor, the Financial Services Authority (FSA), to settle claims related to rigging the Libor interest rate benchmark in 2012.

Read on.

Texas Governor Rick Perry Indicted For Abuse Of Power

As AP reports,

A grand jury indicted Texas Gov. Rick Perry on Friday for allegedly abusing the powers of his office by carrying out a threat to veto funding for state prosecutors investigating public corruption — making the possible 2016 presidential hopeful his state’s first indicted governor in nearly a century.

A special prosecutor spent months calling witnesses and presenting evidence that Perry broke the law when he promised publicly to nix $7.5 million over two years for the public integrity unit run by the office of Travis County Democratic District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg. Lehmberg was convicted of drunken driving, but refused Perry’s calls to resign.

Perry was indicted on charges of abuse of official capacity, a first-degree felony with potential punishments of five to 99 years in prison, and coercion of a public servant, a third-degree felony that carries a punishment of two to 10 years.

No one disputes that Perry is allowed to veto measures approved by the Legislature, including part or all of the state budget. But the left-leaning Texans for Public Justice government watchdog group filed an ethics complaint accusing the governor of coercion because he threatened to use his veto before actually doing so in an attempt to pressure Lehmberg to quit.

“We’re pleased that the grand jury determined that the governor’s bullying crossed the line into illegal behavior,” said Craig McDonald, executive director of Texans for Public Justice. “The complaint had merit, serious laws were potentially broken.”

Perry said Lehmberg, who is based in Austin, should resign after she was arrested and pleaded guilty to drunken driving in April 2013. A video recording made at the jail showed Lehmberg shouting at staffers to call the sheriff, kicking the door of her cell and sticking her tongue out.

Lehmberg faced pressure from other high-profile Republicans in addition to Perry to give up her post. Her blood-alcohol level was nearly three times the legal limit for driving.

Lehmberg served about half of her 45-day jail sentence but stayed in office, despite Perry’s assertions that her behavior was inappropriate.

The indictment is the first of its kind since 1917, when James “Pa” Ferguson was indicted on charges stemming from his veto of state funding to the University of Texas in an effort to unseat faculty and staff members he objected to. Ferguson was eventually impeached, then resigned before being convicted, allowing his wife, Miriam “Ma” Ferguson, to take over the governorship.