7/30/2019 75% of Loans Based on LIES

1/2

75% of the Loans and Bonds Were Based on LIESLivingLies

Posted on February 12, 2013 by Neil Garfield

Heres the second thing that is, however, getting absolutely no press and is completely insane. So

remember there are only lawyers for the lender and lawyers for the insurance company arguing to the

judge. And so a bizarre version of reality emerged from all of this in which 75 percent of the time the

lender lies deliberately to the insurer, lies to the people who buy the bonds. All of these people are, youknow, supposedly among the most sophisticated financial players in the world. But as soon as they get to

fraud in the origination, in the making of the loan, with no discussion, everybody involved assumes that it

must have been the borrowers that did all the lying, not the lenders.Transcript, Bill Black interview

with Paul Jay, Senior Editor, TRNN

Editors Note: FINALLY someone (other than me) said it if the banks were lying at least 75% of the time to

the regulators, pension funds, insurance companies, credit default swap counterpartiesobviously the most

sophisticated people in the world of financewhy do we suddenly turn the table over and play blame thevictim when it comes to origination of the loan?

Nothing could be more obvious than that the loans were nearly all based upon layers of lies, each layer

seemingly supporting or corroborating the other, despite the fact that none of it was true.

The lender wasnt the lender. The loan came from a an undisclosed party in an table funded transactionbut

here the table funding strictly prohibited the originator from touching or affecting any financial transaction at

the loan closing. The wrong payee is named, the terms for repayment conflict with (1) the terms of repaymentof the mortgage bond and (2) the terms of repayment arising out of the fact that the real transaction in which

money exchanged hands, gave rise to borrowers obligation to yet another undisclosed party, a non-creditor

initiates the foreclosure, a non-creditor submits a credit bid, the credit bid is accepted and a complete stranger to

the transaction who neither funded the original loan nor the purchase of the loan gets to evict a homeowner whois not even in defaultbut does not know that.

The appraisal was a lie, the viability of the loan was a lie, the stated income was a lie generated by theoriginator and mortgage broker, the pick a payment was a lie because once you owe 125% of the original loan

amount through negative amortization, your loan resets to a higher interest rate based upon the amount you

originally borrowed PLUS 25%.

From one end to the other the securitization of residential mortgages was a lie having no merit or substance at

all. It was a PONZI scheme that was wholly dependent upon new investors buying more bogus mortgage bondsissued by REMIC trusts that had no trust documents, no trustor, no assets, no business, no money and no

loans. Why isnt this accepted at the origination level just as the media is perfectly willing to accept that in

order to generate those sales of bogus mortgage bonds, the banks lied?

Do you want proof? When did the system collapse? When defaults reached their high? NOPE. It was wheninvestors suddenly stopped buying the bogus mortgage bonds, the credit trading markets froze up and everyone

was a trapped in a lie except the banks of course who through their laddering as Goldman Sachs like to call it,siphoned off trillions of dollars through Bermuda and Cayman into thousands of depository accounts and

investments all over the world.

No legitimate business collapses when people stop buying their stock, yet in every PONZI scheme that is the

sole reason why the house of cards collapses. Hence, the securitization was an illusion where the money wasdiverted FROM the REMIC and the title tot he loan was diverted FROM the REMIC and the terms of the note

and bond were different, neither one being disclosed to lender or borrower.

http://livinglies.wordpress.com/2013/02/12/75-of-the-loans-and-bonds-were-based-on-lies-livinglies/http://livinglies.wordpress.com/2013/02/12/75-of-the-loans-and-bonds-were-based-on-lies-livinglies/http://livinglies.wordpress.com/2013/02/12/75-of-the-loans-and-bonds-were-based-on-lies-livinglies/http://livinglies.wordpress.com/2013/02/12/75-of-the-loans-and-bonds-were-based-on-lies-livinglies/

7/30/2019 75% of Loans Based on LIES

2/2

The very idea that the banks lost money and that they needed money to ease of the credit markets was a lie. To

ease up the credit markets, the banks would have had to start lending again. That was the deal with Paulson andGeithner. But they didnt start lending, they stopped the lending they were already doing sending the world into

a tailspin.

All this because of an undefined assumption and fear that if the big banks fail the whole world comes to an end.

That is Bullst. Just look at Iceland and other countries who are not giving the banks the benefit of the doubt.

They have positive GDP growth and they have easing credit, and their society is more stable than ours.

This is an interview worth reading and following:

http://truth-out.org/video/item/14484-judge-rules-against-bank-precedent-could-cost-bank-of-america-billions

http://truth-out.org/video/item/14484-judge-rules-against-bank-precedent-could-cost-bank-of-america-billionshttp://truth-out.org/video/item/14484-judge-rules-against-bank-precedent-could-cost-bank-of-america-billionshttp://truth-out.org/video/item/14484-judge-rules-against-bank-precedent-could-cost-bank-of-america-billions