.....................Total Pageviews

THANKS for HELPING to GROW SWARM The BANKS

THANKS for HELPING to GROW SWARM The BANKS

SUPPORT INSIDE JOB!

My photo
If you have a question about this blog or the 12 other anti financial terrorism blogs I have created, please email me at info at alexlogic.com. If you are having trouble leaving a comment, please let me know at the email address listed above.

Followers

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
CLICK ON IMAGE

CLICK IMAGE

CLICK IMAGE

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Adam Levitin, Barry Ritholtz, Karl Denninger, Calculated Risk, Matt Weidner, Neil Garfield, Meet Karen Gelernt and her take on Title Transfer Law 101.


I am not as well versed as any of you on possibly opposing Karen Gelernt's pro banking, pro securitization position, but I wanted to make you are all well aware that this position paper does exist, AND SHOULD BE REFUTED.

In my opinion, I find Gelnert's position refutable, but I would be using mere logic to refute Gelernt's position, whereas perhaps you six can cite law and all that legal stuff that matters to the court.

If you know any of the pick six I named up above, or frequent their blogs, maybe you can pollinate this article onto their forums or blogs so we can expose the banksters misguided position. I could leave the messages on their blogs and websites myself, but I'm NOT going to because it can be seen as spamming.

The internet needs more pollinators, BEE a Pollinator and pollinate this particular topic far and wide because I think it is ground zero for exposing just how out of touch the banksters really are and now we have a position paper to prove it, or in this case, disprove.


And if you want to learn more about "American Banker", click here.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Adam Levitin here. I don't think there's much worth responding to in Gelernt's piece. It's basically the 2-page version of the American Securitization Forum's white paper. I'll leave the MERS issue aside, which just makes things complicated, but as far as transferring the notes, like the ASF piece, it is correct to the extent it is describing transfers between Harry and Bob. It doesn't address how things change when there is a transfer from Harry to a trust and the trust documents call for a very specific form of transfer.

Alessandro Machi said...

Hi Adam, I don't want to misinterpret your statement. It sounds to me what you are saying is that when two parties are sitting in same room agreeing to terms in writing, a valid agreement can be created.

But it is a separate issue to have the homeowner subjected to a change in terms they did not agree to simply because the bank securitizes their note with an investor.

Share Gadget


FOR INFORMATION ONLY, NOT AN OFFICIAL ENDORSEMENT.