It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Congress To Try To Override Obama Veto On Legalization Of All Foreclosure Fraud

page: 1
23

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 04:16 PM
link   
Sorry for the caps, but this is very very very important. This could be the biggest congress treason since the bank bailout.

Remember before the election when Obama ``pocket vetoed`` a bill that would have legalized ALL FORECLOSURE FRAUDS BY THE BANKS?

Well now they lost the election so they've got nothing to lose.

Tomorrow there's a vote to try to override the veto on that bill. If it succeeds, all foreclosure fraud will be retro-legalized which is OUTRAGEOUS AND PROBABLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Action Alert – It’s Back! H.R. 3808 Interstate Recognition of Notarization Act of 2010


A bill or joint resolution that has been vetoed by the President can become law if two-thirds of the Members voting in the House and the Senate each agree to pass it over the President’s objection. The chambers act sequentially on vetoed measures; the House acts first on House-originated measures (H.R. and H.J. Res.) and the Senate acts first on Senate-originated measures (S. and S.J. Res.). If the first-acting chamber fails to override the veto, the measure dies and the other chamber does not consider it. The House typically considers the question of overriding a presidential veto under the hour rule, with time customarily controlled and allocated by the chair and ranking member of the committee with jurisdiction over the bill. The Senate usually considers the question of overriding a veto under the terms of a unanimous consent agreement.

Voting in the House

To override a veto, two-thirds of the Members voting, a quorum being present, must agree to repass the bill over the President’s objections. The Constitution requires that the vote be by the “yeas and nays,” which in the modern House means that Members’ votes will be recorded through the electronic voting system. The vote on the veto override is final because, in contrast to votes on most other questions in the House, a motion to reconsider the vote on the question of overriding a veto is not in order.


From Mlshawaii on MarketTicker

This is about REQUIRING courts -- both federal and state -- to accept electronic documents that have electronic seals (not a raised, stamped, notary seal that is required when having a document notarized). They want courts to accept a "seal" that is "logically associated" with the electronic record. In plain words, they want to require courts to accept electronic records (MERS, perhaps) that HAVE NOT BEEN NOTARIZED.

Talking points, as I see things:

* This is a backdoor way to make the robo-signing legal.

* This bill would require courts -- both federal and state -- to accept evidence that would ordinarily be objectionable. Congress must amend the Federal Rules of Evidence in order to do this. They cannot, however, because (if I recall correctly) the Supreme Court prescribes new rules and/or rule changes, and then Congress implements them. Further, Federal Rules do not apply to state courts. Congress is attempting to dictate to the states in violation of state sovereignty.

He's right. It's about legalizing all the fraud the bank committed with the robo-signing.

The VOTE IS TOMORROW, NOVEMBER 17.

SO GO FULL BLAST, CALL EVERYONE YOU KNOW, YOUR CONGRESSMEN/SENATOR.
edit on 16-11-2010 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-11-2010 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)


Mod Note: All Caps – Please Review This Link.
edit on 11/17/2010 by semperfortis because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 04:37 PM
link   
Everyone should contact their elected representatives, and demand that they do not vote for this bill.

As I understand it, this bill would mean that judges would have to accept any foreclosure documents that are notarized out of state. This would not be good for property owners, if they are contesting a foreclosure action in court.


edit on 16-11-2010 by PacificBlue because: removed link, edited for content due to possible legal issues, can not prove content so removed



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 04:53 PM
link   
This thread is important, and despite the Obama hate that permeates within this site, it needs to be discussed. A bump for you, OP.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 11:56 PM
link   
I read that, too.

I think we may be visiting some of the same sights, you and I.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 12:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


I wonder what sort of consolation jobs they are getting from the banking industry to buy their votes on this.

A bump to a worthy thread.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 12:09 AM
link   
Retroactive immunity for telecommunications execs anyone?

How frustrating to legalize white collar crimes...



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 12:13 AM
link   
Obama hate?
Characterizing political discussion as hate is as anti democracy and freedom as it gets.

To anyone who has spent their whole lives on a desert island and haven't gotten any real news in their lives:
This whole mortgage debacle is a deliberate creation that is totally bipartisan and has been furthered through successive administrations, and it shows that the government on both sides of the Isle are traitors.

Without those properties to counter the derivative debacle, many banks like BofA, which is about to tank, will tank, which cascades the foreclosed property values up the ladder to the central banking families which own the American government.
(apparently the bipartisan effort to sell the American sheeple to the lowest bidder, continues right on schedule)

Classic Mafia business buyout tactics, and I am not refering to those Sicilian wannabees, I'm refering to thier bosses the real Zionist Mafia.

edit on 17-11-2010 by Danbones because: whats long and hard on a frenchman?.....grade three.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 12:16 AM
link   
I wish you the best of luck America.

But given the way things have been going recently. It's 2 years until the next major election, so I wouldn't expect any accountability from your newly elected officials.

This bill represents many dangers. And I fear the biggest one would be if these crimes were allowed to continue, or this bill paved the way for more. The US housing sector and even the US economy cannot take much more theft and corruption than it already has. The US people will inevitably be made to suffer more for these same crimes that have been plaguing the nation since 2007.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by TheOneElectric
 


He should get credit for vetoing it but knowing how this place works, people will find a way to use it against him.

It's definitely something that needs to be stopped.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 01:06 AM
link   
oh boy do tptb not see we are all at our boiling point ?

side note; we can change the meaning of the word law to crime may as well sorry im ranting...
rant averted

-jplays



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 01:28 AM
link   
I say let the banks go under. If 80% of the homeowners don't have to pay their mortgage, there will be a HUGE boost in the economy. Let the FDIC cover the deposits and let the banks go.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 01:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Daughter2
 

I agree with you that the banks should not be bailed out because the FDIC couldn't handle it
They are on borrowed time already.
The money is only going to go into record bonuses AGAIN.

I say charge the banks and the others who are involved criminally and get the money back from them that stole it.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 04:27 PM
link   
So it was just defeated minutes ago.

Republicans VOTED FOR IT at a 97% rate.
Democrats VOTED AGAINST IT at a 93% rate.

So republicans are bought and paid for by the banks... what a surprise.


But democrats are too, because... well it still passed the house/senate the first time didn't it?



EDIT : It might not be totally dead. It's back in the judiciary committee...
edit on 17-11-2010 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 11:01 PM
link   
Sent my R. congressman a message to vote no, guess he didn't listen. At least the R's weren't the majority yet.
Someone sent me a snippet from the hearing before the vote today,interesting tidbit.

www.youtube.com...
edit on 17-11-2010 by SunnyDee because: don't know how to embed video



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
EDIT : It might not be totally dead. It's back in the judiciary committee...


It'll come back when no one is looking.

What they need to do first is make an example of who ever leaked the info that this bill was being snuck through. A good ethics conviction or something. Make an example of them publicly to the others.

Then some big juicy story to absorb Americas' attention. Something like a famous wedding or something.
edit on 17-11-2010 by davidgrouchy because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
23

log in

join