I don’t know.
Multiple people have told me this before.
Catherine Austin Fitts has talked about this for a long time. I get “whispers” all the time from people who I know actually are involved in securitization work related to this on occasion – and have for the last three years. We have the story from this morning from FDN talking about their software that has uncovered multiple sales of the same instruments.
But this….. if this is true it’s not just systemic, it’s not just common, it was the premise and basis of the entire securitization game – and “game” is the correct word for it, as the allegation made here is that the entire thing was a gigantic scam.
The game was to move money under a scheme of deceit and fraud. First sell the bonds and collect the money into a pool. Second take your fees, third take what’s left and get it committed into “loans” (which were in actuality securities) sold to homeowners under the same false pretenses as the bonds were sold to investors. By controlling the flow of funds and documentation, the middlemen were able to sell, pledge and otherwise trade off the flow of receivables several times over — a necessary complexity not only for the profit it generated, but to make it far more difficult for anyone to track the footprints in the sand.
If the loans had actually been securitized, the issue would not arise. They were not securitized. This was a mass illusion or hallucination induced by Wall Street spiking the punch bowl. The gap (second tier yield spread premium) created between the amount of money funded by investors and the amount of money actually deployed into “loans” was so large that it could not be justified as fees. It was profit on sale from the aggregator to the “trust” (special purpose vehicle). It was undisclosed, deceitful and fraudulent.
I don’t know.
But it does fit with what we know.
True securitization has so many fingers in the pie that I find it difficult – or impossible – to make the argument that it “works” compared to portfolio lending for the investor who is providing the funds.
This sort of scenario also explains why everyone is resisting any attempt to provide the actual background documentation from origination forward to the assignment into the trusts, and all we see are “copies” and “lost note affidavits.” True, actual wet-signature notes with the endorsements they all claim they got – but which nobody has yet seen, leading one foreclosure defense attorney to quip that if someone ever does see such a note they should “bronze it” – much as one would bronze their baby’s first shoe pair.
So here’s my challenge:
If you’ve got an actual wet-signature note from a foreclosure with all the intervening assignments on the page, I’d like you to fax it to me.
Use the link at the bottom of the page here for my email address and contact me. I’ll send you my fax number in reply.
We should be able to quickly disabuse this claim, if in fact there are a sizable number of wet signature notes with endorsements – after all, there are hundreds of thousands of foreclosures, right? Since these are official court records, there’s no privacy right implicated here, nor any problem with disclosure.
So if you have ’em, those of you who claim this is all on the up-and-up, you know what to do.
In one week I’ll post the results…. if I get anything at all.
If there are no actual original, endorsed notes, well then we need to get that fact into the open – to force it into the open – because if true, this is the biggest fraud ever perpetrated in human history, and it permeates every single large financial institution in the Western World.
Watch this clip again, at 6:39 when Chris Whalen says Bear was selling the same note to multiple investors……
These are real lawyers and real analysts – folks with boots on the ground – that say there are no notes.
Damnit, it is time to stop the damn fraud! The PBS interview in particular claims that we have banks literally bribing people to avoid disclosure of the truth!