Barack Obama administration will have to deny that homeowners were forced to fall behind 3 months on their mortgage before they could apply for HAMP.

I have spent a good deal amount of energy posting that Barack Obama has committed an impeachable act by forcing homeowners to fall behind on their mortgage payments before they can apply for HAMP (Home Affordable Mortgage Program).

The Federal Hobbs Act has an extortion clause that makes it illegal to use the "color of right" to evict a homeowner. This means that using falsified foreclosure paperwork, including running up unethical penalties and fees to make it impossible for the homeowner to catch up, would be a violation of the Federal Hobbs Act.

It would also be a violation of the Federal Hobbs Act to lure people into a taxpayer funded program by forcing them to first trigger parallel foreclosure before the homeowner can even apply for the HAMP program.

However, what if the Barack Obama administration simply denied that homeowners were forced to get behind in their mortgage payments before they could apply for HAMP? HAMP actually states that banks cannot continue with the foreclosure process while the HAMP evaluation is going on, yet we know banks violated this part of the HAMP program as well by practicing Parallel Foreclosure.

Parallel Foreclosure is another smoking gun that is still not being called parallel foreclosure. Although last night I read that in Arizona they are calling Parallel Foreclosure, "Simultaneous Foreclosure".

So what if the white house and the (do I even need that second the?) banking industry denied that mortgage payments had to be missed, triggering parallel foreclosure, before a homeowner could apply for HAMP? Could home foreclosure lawyers prove otherwise? If a homeowner is being told over the phone that they cannot apply for HAMP until they are three months behind on their mortgage, is phone conversation proof enough that homeowners were forced to miss payments before becoming HAMP eligible?

Barack Obama and his 2008 campaign were notorious for changing or removing items on their website if the issue became controversial. The HAMP, HARP and UP combined website page seems to tap dance around the issue of falling behind before becoming eligible.

Also, when Barack Obama promoted HAMP, I don't recall him ever mentioning HARP. HARP does not require homeowners to fall behind on their payments!

HARP simply tries to refinance a homeowners home loan to a lower interest rate and better terms for those who feel they are in danger of defaulting in the near future.

Why was HARP not mentioned more often? Worse still, those who fail HAMP cannot then apply for HARP. There seems to have been an agenda in place to prematurely encourage homeowners into HAMP when HARP may have been all that they needed.

So my question is, has Barack Obama, his administration, the banksters, note holders, mortgage servicers and investors pulled a fast one by not officially putting in writing that a home owner has to fall three months behind on their mortgage before being able to apply for a HAMP loan, even though this appears to be have been a requirement for a homeowner to eligible to apply for HAMP?

I suggest you lawyers collect as many of the three months behind demands that were put in writing that you can find. Otherwise one of the biggest violations involving HAMP, the three months behind on mortgage payments before being eligible to apply for HAMP that resulted in Parallel Foreclosure actions, (which could lead to a HUGE class action lawsuit), could go away.

Mortgage aid puts homeowners on shaky foundation

Mortgage aid puts homeowners on shaky foundation

Just another example of HAMP and Parallel Foreclosure working in unison to lure homeowners into the accelerated loss of their home.

Its not just that big banks held on to the bailout money, its that the government won't make it possible for americans to dig themselves out of debt.

The damage being done to main street by our own government and wall street, is two fold. Not only has the government given out money to the banks that never made it back to main street, but the government refuses to provide financial incentives for main street to get out of debt on its own.

This second point is very disconcerting to me. It's one thing if the government decides to prop up our banks so they don't fail, but its quite another, and even more unacceptable, for our own government to not offer any interest rate reduction incentives to main street to allow main street to help itself get out of debt that it already has accrued.

The government tries to focus the discussion on giving out NEW loans, giving out NEW loans, giving out NEW loans. However, the alternative approach, that would not cost the government anything, would be to reduce interest rate charges on EXISTING DEBT to people who can pay down their credit card, auto, and mortgage related obligations.

I've written a four point economic plan at Wall Street Change that gives four ways for the government to help main street recover and none of the four ways requires the government to provide loans, or money, or even forgive debt!

Exploring how Barack Obama has Violated the Federal Hobbs Act and why this is an impeachable offense.

Has Barack Obama and his White House staff used "extortion" to have his way with homeowners who are being foreclosed upon?

According to 18 USCA 1951 - The (Federal) Hobbs Act

(2) The term ''extortion'' means the obtaining of PROPERTY from another, WITH HIS CONSENT, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or FEAR, or under color of official right.

When Barack Obama required that homeowners fall behind 3 to 4 months on their home mortgage payments BEFORE THEY COULD EVEN APPLY FOR HAMP (Home Affordable Mortgage Protection), a process called parallel foreclosure would kick in that accelerates the foreclosing proceedings upon that HAMP applicant.

It is a loose technicality to say that Barack Obama did not mandate parallel foreclosure personally, so therefore he is free and clear of Federal Hobbs Act violations. Barack Obama LURED homeowners into HAMP, and to apply for HAMP required applicants to be subjected to Parallel Foreclosure.

For Barack Obama to be extricated from Federal Hobbs Act liability, he and his staff would need to first claim under oath that parallel foreclosure was never discussed in all of those meetings at the white house with bankers.

But besides denying the discussion of parallel foreclosure, Barack Obama and his staff would have to prove that they were COMPLETELY UNAWARE of parallel foreclosure FOR THE PAST YEAR AND HALF, and once again, do this under oath as well.

I have known about parallel foreclosure for approximately a year now.

Is it feasible that Barack Obama and his staff are STILL unaware of parallel foreclosure?

If Barack Obama and his White House staff knew about parallel foreclosure, knew that banks were imposing parallel foreclosure as a precursor to HAMP eligibility, yet continued to promote HAMP; are they not in violation of the Federal Hobbs Act?

Once Barack Obama took the microphone and publicly took credit for HAMP, he became subject to Federal Hobbs violations.

According to 18 USCA 1951 - The (Federal) Hobbs Act

(2) The term ''extortion'' means the obtaining of PROPERTY from another, WITH HIS CONSENT, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or FEAR, or under color of official right.

You can read the entire article explaining the Federal Hobbs Act here.

Why Banks appear to be so eager to foreclose on as many homes as fast as possible, perhaps its the Fifteen revenue streams that are created.

Why do Banks want to foreclose on so many homes so quickly?

I have come up with a list of possible foreclosure income streams that get generated when a bank forecloses on a homeowner. This list could explain why the banks are in such a rush to foreclose on a homeowner and not so interested in helping the homeowner.

1. The banks keep the original down payment once a home is foreclosed, which can be anywhere from 5% to 20% of the possibly over inflated value of the home when the foreclosure victim first purchased the home.

2. Home Equity lines, yes, there still are PLENTY of homes that have home equity value in them, which gets forfeited back to the banks as well. Think of it as filling up a piggy bank, and once full, it's all yours, but instead, its broken into and all of the contents go back to the big pig. In many instances, the piggy bank, (the home), is not broken and can be resold again.

3. Fees - lol, I know they exist because they are mentioned in practically every article I read about home foreclosures. The mortgage servicer may try and tack on an additional home insurance policy or pay for legally suspended property taxes then demand payment, which may include additional fees for creating the unnecessary charges.

4. Penalties - such as losing a home because a monthly payment was fourteen cents short and the resulting penalties equaled over 2,000 dollars, when this penalty cannot be paid, future mortgage payments are refused and foreclosure actions are initiated.

5. Accruing Interest charges on fees and penalties. If a fee or penalty is too much to pay, the fee/penalty debt begins accruing interest rate charges and possibly additional penalties as well.

6. Assessing charges for reselling the foreclosed home, such as the ads that are required to resell the foreclosed home and all ensuing paperwork.

7. Professional service fees that can range from attorneys & accountants, to appraisers and home improvement services.

8. MORTGAGE INSURANCE claims on the foreclosed home by the bank, called PMI's, can pay out 20% of the value of the home when originally purchased.

9. Banks can claim Income tax deductions from alleged losses from a foreclosed home.

10. Possibly an infusion of money from the government to the banks that we don't know about that replaces the "lost income" from the foreclosed upon home,

11. A new homeowner's down payment,

12. Monthly payments from the new homeowner,

13. Collecting money from the foreclosed upon homeowner and soon to be indentured debtor since they still owe the difference from the sale price of the house (many times less than 50% of what the foreclosed upon homeowner purchased the home for), plus accruing penalties and fees, and the original mortgage,

14. The foreclosed upon homeowner now has to rent, creating an income stream for some other bank owned property.

15. The foreclosed upon homeowner's credit is ruined and any future credit they do get will be with the worst possible terms, meaning the highest possible interest rates.

By foreclosing on the homeowner, the mortgage servicing company, the holder of the note, and the banks appear to be able to generate 15 income streams!

When Barack Obama helped pioneer HAMP (home affordable mortgage protection) the banks were offered 1,000 dollars to help homeowners reduce their home loans.

If you were either a note holder, investor, or bank, which would you prefer, fifteen income streams for foreclosing on a home, or a shiny 1,000 dollar bill from our government?

If anybody out there has additional forms of income from foreclosure actions that I am unaware of, please contribute them in the comments section.

Foreclosures: Homeowners who get loan modifications still losing to (parallel) foreclosure - South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com

Foreclosures: Homeowners who get loan modifications still losing to (Parallel) foreclosure - South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com

Sigh, I have actually had to resort to inserting the word "parallel"(in parenthesis) in front of foreclosure in the above title link because I just don't know how to get the word out, or phrase out, about the destructive power of parallel foreclosure and how I believe it could and should lead to Barack Obama's impeachment.

A president just can't use taxpayer money to create a taxpayer funded program supposedly for that same taxpayer, such as HAMP, but then expose that taxpayer to the actual risk of LOSING THEIR HOME just so they can take advantage of this federal program.

And even if one were to say, "oh, parallel foreclosure was a mistake and Barack Obama fixed it", the answer would be, "No, Barack Obama has not fixed the mistake and he has had 18 months to find the parallel foreclosure "mistake" and fix it".

"Parallel Foreclosure exists" and there may be anywhere from 250,000 to a million victims of this process, and that surely has caused enough devastation to warrant an impeachment.

Aussies Get the American Deal of the Century, American foreclosure victims pick up the tab, Barack Obama and the Republicans pretend everything is ok.

CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE.

The Aussie couple pictured above is very very happy.

The Australian dollar is at an all time high and they've just gone shopping for American Homes for 15-20 cents on the dollar! And the news gets even gooder!

The foreclosure victims will be hit with the loss of their original down payment and any built up equity, additional foreclosure debts such as paying for the ads to sell their foreclosed upon home, additional filings and paperwork and late fees piled on top of all kinds of penalties as well.

Rumor has it the american foreclosure victims may even get to serve as butlers and maids for the Aussies so they can pay down their foreclosure debt in 19 years, rather than 20.

Cashed up Aussies buy up big in the States!

When Barack Obama was asked what he thought of the foreclosed upon, displaced americans who may need decades to pay off their own foreclosure debt while the Aussies get such a great deal. Mr. Obama was rumored to have replied, "Shucks, we offered the banks A THOUSAND DOLLARS for every HAMP deal they could complete, who would have thunk that investors holding the note would not want to cooperate over such a generous offering to the bank!" (the bank and the note holder are not necessarily the same entity)

When Mr. Obama was then asked if perhaps the note holders would rather foreclose on the homeowner so they can keep the initial down payment, any accrued equity, charge fees and penalties including all the real estate ads needed to resell the home, plus resell the home so they can collect another down payment, Mr. Obama paused for a long moment and allegedly said "hmmph, maybe we should have offered the banks 1,500 dollars for every HAMPSTER, er, for every HAMP deal they made."

Thanks to ABC Australia for the report and Matt Weidner for getting the word out.

Down Payment Rebate Checks to foreclosed upon home owners could help both the banks and struggling homeowners solve the current home foreclosure mess.

Mortgage loans used to be boring. A down payment of anywhere from 5% to 25% was required, and then the homeowner simply paid their monthly mortgage bill. Since most mortgages are for either 15 or 30 years, unless the homeowner moves, once the home loan is approved, it's a LONG TIME before the bank will see another chunky down payment on that home.

But what if the homes could be "churned" at a faster rate than once every 15 or 30 years? Then the banks could get their hands on more "fast money" aka, down payments. Nowadays, when a bank forecloses on a home, they can financially benefit in a myriad of ways. The banks can charge all kinds of fees and penalties on late payments, the banks can file and collect a claim against the mortgage insurance that is attached to a foreclosed home, the banks get to keep the foreclosed upon home owner's down payment, and, once the home is resold, the banks can finance the next occupier of that home and once again, keep the down payment.

To summarize, four income streams are available to the banks when they foreclose upon a homeowner, the original down payment, fees and penalties, mortgage insurance, and then a new homeowner who comes along with their down payment. So, it appears that banks are more motivated to foreclose, than not to foreclose.

I would suggest that the original down payment made by the foreclosure victim should be fought for in a court of law. I think it can be argued that a predatory situation gets created when the banks rapidly suck up the homeowners original down payment and then reuse it in such a way that it no longer exists, (bankers bonuses, commissions, excessive salaries and the repackaging of the mortgage loan into different types of wall street offerings).

If foreclosure meant the homeowner would be rebated back a fair percentage of the original down payment, say 75%, it would level the playing field in terms of how the foreclosure process proceeded. If a homeowner put a 100,000 thousand down payment on a 500,000 dollar home, but then could no longer make the monthly 3,000 mortgage payment, the 75% mortgage rebate concept would actually buy the homeowner 25 months of living in the home without making a payment if they so choose, or, if they voluntarily left earlier than 25 months, a pro-rated amount based on the $75,000 "credit" that they had earned from their original down payment of $100,000.

There is an expanding polarization going on between homeowners and the banks. If the homeowner is expected to walk away from their home with very little to nothing, then they may try every maneuver they can to stay in their homes for as long as possible. If however, the homeowner was offered up to 75% back of their original down payment, they might be willing to run out the door, last one out closes the lights!

Suddenly, all the other valid foreclosure concerns that are in the news become less alarming. Lets say the homeowner thinks they signed a predatory loan, fine, move out and with the 75% down payment rebate, the homeowner may actually have enough money to both hire an attorney AND pay rent elsewhere. Meanwhile, the banks can, if they want, RENT the home out, NOT SELL IT, but RENT IT, until the litigation on that home is completed.

I really believe if homeowners could fight for a return of a significant portion of their original down payments, and get the courts to see that the banks lose the desire to work with a homeowner since they already possess the original down payment, then massive progress could be made in the entire home foreclosure issue on EVERY LEVEL.

The rush to foreclose would be reduced since banks would be cutting 75% down payment checks on every foreclosure. The banks might instead decide to let the homeowner live in the home until the homeowner has exhausted their 75% of their down payment rebate. That is fine as well since it means the banks DON'T HAVE TO RUSH every foreclosure. The passage of time is no longer considered a financial issue to the banks since the extended stay in the home by the homeowner will reduce any down payment rebate the homeowner is to receive.

The homeowner is now incentivized to move out of the home, (especially if they find a lower cost rental situation) with the knowledge that they will get a CHECK for up to 75% of their original down payment. As long as the IRS does not step in and consider the rebate as income, it seems like a "75% down payment rebate to the homeowners" concept could help grease the wheels for the entire foreclosure mess.

One more point, if the homeowner has actually built up a bunch of equity above and beyond the original down payment, than a percentage of that equity should be rebatable as well.

Couple loses home over a 14 cent payment mistake.

CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE.

I tried contacting Teresa Dixon Murray about possibly culling her three heart wrenching home foreclosure stories into three individual articles and am waiting to hear back. In the meantime, the two excerpts below are so amazing I wanted to help get this particular home foreclosure story out.

To read all three home foreclosure stories by Teresa Dixon Murray, please click here. The article also has a photo of the couple that lost their home over a 14 cent mistake.

Mortgage Foreclosure uproar sweeps up Northeast Ohioans:

by Teresa Dixon Murray of the Cleveland Plain Dealer

Martin and Kirsten Davis lost their home in Cleveland to foreclosure two years ago. The reason: a mess that started when they accidentally paid 14 cents too little on their monthly payment. Martin Davis wonders whether anyone truly read his case file before his foreclosure was approved.

He refinanced his home on the Cleveland-Garfield Heights border in 2003 with People's Choice Mortgage, and the loan soon was sold to Ocwen Financial. The second month, he accidentally paid $595 instead of $595.14. Ocwen imposed $2,200 worth of fees and penalties, which Davis couldn't afford to pay and couldn't get wiped out despite countless phone calls.

The home remodeler soon received a foreclosure notice and filed for bankruptcy to stall the action. He lost his home in February 2008 and is now renting a home in Parma. "I've wondered myself whether they actually went through the paperwork," said Davis, 44. "Why should I have lost my home over 14 cents?" "We went through so much," Davis said. "Every night we prayed that they wouldn't take our house. It was all we had." Ocwen, as well as other banks involved in these foreclosures, would not comment about the (3) cases (featured in the longer version of this article found at the link above).

Breaking News, Ohio, Eastlake couple foreclosed upon three times despite never missing a payment.

CLICK HERE TO ENLARGE HEADLINE.

Please read this incredible Plain Dealer story by Teresa Dixon Murray about a couple that has battled GMAC for the past 9 years even though they have never missed a payment. This couple was so honorable that when the mortgage company at one point did not accept their payment, they put their monthly payments into a bank account so they could pay the mortgage company when they finally got their act together!

GMAC has continually lost in court to this couple yet they continue to misapply payments and apparently are trying to bankrupt the couple into giving up.

WARNING, THIS IS HOW THE FORECLOSURE WAR WILL BE LOST!

Because it is probable that 75% to 90% of all home foreclosures may be "warranted" (although the paperwork still MUST BE DONE CORRECTLY), it will be very easy to turn sympathy against the other 500,000 to 1,000,000 million homeowners who either did not get a fair break by the banks or were mislead by a HAMP program that then actually accelerated their foreclosure via a process called parallel foreclosure!

It is video stories like the one below that will hurt foreclosure victims and also turn public opinion against the foreclosure controversy. Most people don't understand that the paperwork MUST be done CORRECTLY, but most people will NOT CARE about the PAPERWORK ISSUE when they hear that a homeowner has not paid their mortgage for the past two years but still wants to be viewed as a foreclosure victim anyways.

Videos like the one above are poorly made and actually make one wonder, is this family receiving assistance, trying to get a HAMP, and still not paying on their mortgage? It sounds like they were able to make the payments for the first five year, then when the home mortgage escalated, they just gave up but continued living in the home for two more years. The synopsis of the video, "In September the number of foreclosures in the U.S. hit an all-time high as many question the banking industry" is a poor match for the actual content of the video.

To make the plight of this family more sympathetic, issues revolving around what happens to the down payment they did make, or possible available equity that could have been applied towards the monthly mortgage could have been analyzed. Also, WHY WASN'T the family eligible for a HAMP? Get them in a HAMP right away and then if they still don't pay, then their case gets very weak.

Lets be real here, and LETS NOT BE WHORES and celebrate every time the news media reports about home foreclosures. There are too many REAL VICTIMS of home foreclosures who did the many many things that were required of them, and still were suddenly out on the street because of an ineffectual HAMP program and the parallel foreclosure tactics that were used the moment they applied for the HAMP program.

NOT EVERY STORY ABOUT HOME FORECLOSURES WILL HELP THE TRUE VICTIMS OF HOME FORECLOSURES. The reporter who did this story is an IDIOT who is helping to kill the foreclosure issue before its time. As I stated above, not every home foreclosure that is reported on will generate sympathy from the fair minded television viewer and I am begging anybody with media contacts to START VETTING THE FORELCOSURE STORIES they participate in, and help shape the story if necessary.

"Inside Job" Opens in Theaters Across the Nation Today!

"Inside Job" Opens in Theaters Across the Nation Today! You can go directly to play times and play locations for Inside Job by clicking here.

I didn't know anything about this movie until I read about it at Bankster USA dot org (click on first link above). The first link above also contains a couple of links to where Inside Job is playing along with a movie review.

All Gov News Reports "Jobs Available" Foreclosure Expert, No Experience Needed.

Well, the Stinking Gun regarding foreclosure fraud has just been produced. What better way to prove the irresponsibility and possibly fraudulent actions of the home mortgage industry than looking back in time and discovering just who mortgage companies and mortgage service companies were hiring to help process their home foreclosure documents.

The answer, anybody they wanted. While I do take exception to the above article's use of the phrase "assembly line workers were hired", as if that was somehow more outrageous than hiring other types of people, the point still remains, the qualifications for becoming involved in the home foreclosure document processing industry appear to have been slim and none over the past few years.

Barry Ritholtz is a voice of reason in CNBC Kudlow Report (with Transcript) that features some questionable conclusions by CNBC reporter Diana Olick.

Below is a transcript of the last five minutes of the CNBC Kudlow Report with a "Swarm The banks" mini analysis. My preference is people link here if they want to refer to it as it took me longer than I care to admit to do the transcription.

If you need to reference a portion of the transcript below, Swarm the Banks would appreciate being credited as it is pretty much a thankless task.

-------------------------------------------

Diana Olick - ..."I have spoken to Obama administration officials today, who say they have been meeting all weekend and they are not calling for a national foreclosure moratorium.

Remember, yes, there was likely some kind of fraud in the document process but underneath all of it the bulk of the foreclosures that we were talking about here are valid foreclosures. Yes everyone has a right to a fair trial, and we need to have that fair trial in the paperwork, but the bulk of these borrowers were simply not paying their mortgages.

And once you get through the paperwork and figure out which dot, which I's need to be dotted and which t's need to be crossed your gonna come back to the same fact and that is, people aren't paying, they can't afford their home, they shouldn't be in them.

Larry Kudlow - hmmm.

Diana Olick - Now the question is, what do you do with the banks, well you know, there was rampant fraud you talk about that in the foreclosure process, well guess what, there was rampant fraud in the sub prime mortgage process and yet the government bailed out the big banks, so lets put that into perspective as well.....

(skip small portion of interview)

Barry Ritholtz - ..........But keep in mind, we're not talking about keeping people in houses who can't afford the mortgage who are delinquent, who are behind. The significance of this to the banks going forward is to make sure that the huge, huge build up of inventory of homes that they own, they want to able to actually sell those and make sure that the next buyer has a clear title, has the ability to buy that.

You know the clip that Diana did, showed the women saying, "Hey, is it really going to be my house, is this going to be a paperwork problem?" That's why the banks are stopping the foreclosures, voluntarily, to make sure their doing this right.

There is a massive set of problems, it's huge in Florida, its big in elsewhere, you can't have these document companies putting price lists for pick a fraud that you want, and that's actually now on the internet. You cannot have banks signing 300, 400 foreclosure documents in a day when they each require 45 minutes worth of paperwork. So it's not just dotting the I's and crossing the t's, it's making sure.

Hey Look, when you have people in Texas and Florida, being foreclosed on, and they paid cash, they don't have mortgages, something's wrong with that process, that has to be fixed"...

Olick - "yeah, those are, you're always going to see those stories"

Ritzholtz - (interrupting Olick) "No, no you NEVER see those stories, that has never happened before"

Olick - (attempting to talk over Ritzholtz "you're always going to see those stories, one story about a guy who loses his home, "No we did see it."

Ritzholtz - "no, that's historicially an impossibility"

Olick - "the bulk of that-

Ritzholtz - "that is a LEGAL impossibility"

Olick - "It's an impossibility what I'm trying to tell ya is you'll always find that one story

Ritzholtz - "but this has never happened before, you have banks sending people to change the locks on houses that aren't in foreclosure, you have all sorts of craziness going on.

You cannot have service processors dump hundreds of services in the sewer and claim they filed with people, and that's how you end up with a guy who doesn't have a mortgage actually having his house foreclosed on, the whole system has been turned upside down.

Olick - "That's a very small minority

Ritholtz - it should never happen, there should be a 100% never ever ever happen. Diana, if you came home and your stuff is all over your front lawn and your locks changed, that's just unnacceptable.

Olick - "I'm not arguing that, I'm not arguing that Barry, what I'm saying is, is that is a very small percentage of the people we are talking about.

Ritholtz - It should be zero, for most of american history it has been zero.

Olick - It should be zero, but you know what,

Ritholtz - It was zero for a long time.

Olick - But you know what, cops often knock on the wrong door in other cases as well. How many times do we hear cases of cops knocking on the wrong door because they think that a criminal is living there, that is what point I'm trying to make.

Kudlow - Alright, Diana, if she's got the property and her stuff is strewn over her front lawn, Barry Ritholtz and I are going to come down there and help her pick it up, that's point number one,

Olick - "No thanks"

Kudlow - "Point number two, Barry's making some powerful argumetns about the private property and the legal system, we will have more to be revealed, Diana thank you for helping us tonight, Barry thanks very much for the all the work you've done on this story.

End of Transcription by Swarm the Banks.

-Below is the actual video.

Another uneducated enemy of Foreclosure Victims, reporter Diana Olick of CNBC, appears on the Larry Kudlow show.

Diana Olick quote, "The bulk of foreclosures are "valid"."

Diana Olick, please define "bulk". Is bulk 90%, 95% are valid foreclosures? If "bulk" means just 5% were done fraudulently, that would mean anywhere from 50,000 to 200,000 HOMES A YEAR were fraudulently foreclosed upon. The reason for the variance is 4 million homes receive foreclosure notices a year, but around 1 to 1.5 million homes are actually foreclosed upon every year.

In the video above, no one mentioned how many hundreds of thousands of homeowners wanted to be part of HAMP, and basically were given the run around. To simply lump these HAMP victims into those who were unwilling to keep up on their mortgage payments is UNREASONABLE because a homeowner only becomes eligible for HAMP if they fall behind on their mortgage payments.

I suggest you suffering homeowners contact Ms. Olick and educate her on the other side of the foreclosure issue.

Ms. Olick twice made a two wrongs make a right argument. Ms. Olick would say that because a homeowner could be the victim of mistaken identity by the police in which a police might break down the door of their home and mistakenly arrest them, it was therefore acceptable for that homeowern to also lose their home through a fraudulent foreclosure as long as the "bulk" of foreclosures were legally accomplished.

Ms. Olick then used this same logic, but in reverse, for the banks, claiming that since the government bailed out the banks once before over the sub prime mortgage issue, doing it now over foreclosure fraud would be a no brainer.

So according to Olick, it's ok to break down the home of an innocent homeowner via mistaken identity, and it's also ok to subject home owners to fraudulent home foreclosure as long the "bulk" of foreclosures are not fraudulently done, and it's also ok to bailout the banks again because the government already did it once before. gasp.

wow, just wow.

Thanks to Barry Ritzholtz for being the voice of reason and mentioning that taking mistakenly taking someone's home should NEVER happen for a myriad of logical reasons and the fact that it is happening means SOMETHING is broken and needs to fixed.

The Two headed Barack Obama, helping Wall Street and Main Street battle each other with the help of Elizabeth Warren.

I found an interesting article that explains the quagmire Barack Obama was in regarding how to select and actually install Elizabeth Warren to run the new consumer financial protection agency. The article also reinforces my belief that Republican politicians never met a banker they did not like.

"What Playing Gotcha can Getcha"