Wednesday, August 24, 2011

OBAMA PROMISES WALL ST THE SAME NO REAL REGULATION HE DID HIS CRIMINAL BANKSERS! White House unveils streamlined business rules

White House unveils streamlined business rules

OBAMA'S SELECTIVE DEPORTATION OF LA RAZA - BUILDING HIS LA RAZA PARTY BASE OF ILLEGALS

DAILY WE ARE WITNESS TO OBAMA’S MIDDLE FINGER AT AMERICAN LAWS, BORDERS OR WILL OF THE AMERICAN (LEGALS) PEOPLE PURSUANT TO LA RAZA SUPREMACY AND THE MEXICAN INVASION, CRIME TIDAL WAVE AND EVER EXPANDING WELFARE STATE IN OUR BORDERS.

THERE IS NOTHING OBAMA WILL NOT DO TO GET THE ILLEGALS’ VOTES!

THERE IS NO ADMINISTRATION IN HISTORY MORE INFESTED WITH THE LA RAZA SUPREMACY PARTY THAN OBAMA’S!


But with his plummeting popularity and a need to find voters—legal or illegal—Obama decided maybe he did possess that broad categorical authority after all

SELECTIVE DEPORTATION IS NOT LEGAL

By Jon Christian Ryter
August 24, 2011

NewsWithViews.com

White House resident Barack Obama, whose popularity with Hispanics is plummeting like the stock market, bowed to pressure from social progressive immigration groups and announced he would halt the deportation of some 300 thousand illegals and proceed, in the future, on a case-by-case basis. Because he needed the votes of centrist voters in 2012 before his popularity nose-dived with the economy, Obama rejected the pleas of Hispanic groups in the past by telling them that he lacked the "broad categorical authority" needed to halt the mass deportations of illegals and that he had "...to follow the laws as Congress had written them." Surprising he would say that since he has spent three years ignoring not only the laws as Congress wrote them, but the Constitution as the Founding Fathers wrote it.
But with his plummeting popularity and a need to find voters—legal or illegal—Obama decided maybe he did possess that broad categorical authority after all. In a letter to Congress on Thursdays, Aug. 18, 2011 Homeland Security Director Janet Napolitano advised Congress that Attorney General Eric Holder had advised her that she possessed the discretion to halt deportations and focus on priorities on a case-by-case basis. "This case-by-case approach,' she said, "will enhance public safety. Immigration judges will be able to more swiftly adjudicate high-priority, such as those involving convicted felons." These are the no-brainers, Janet.
You load them on a Hercules C-4 cargo plane and fly them to Puerto William in the Commune of Cabo de Hornos (Cape Horn) at the tip of Chile, the Drake Passage, where sailing masters used to go to circumvent the globe. Since most illegals return to the United States within days or weeks of being deported, we need to give them a longer walk back to the border. And, the knowledge of what happens to them when they get caught, Obama's lack of "broad categorical authority" notwithstanding, will slow the penchant of illegals to leapfrog the border at will. The average temperature at Cape Horn is 41°F. Drop a planeload of illegals off at Puerto William in the summer—January or February—and the temperature could be as high as 57°F. Drop off a planeload of illegals in the winter—July—and your average temperature will be around 29°F without the wind chill since gale force winds are prevalent 30% of the time.
Of course, that's not the solution Napolitano or Obama had in mind. Illegals shivering at Cape Horn, in Chile, don't vote unless of course the Immigration Control Enforcement agency has them fill out absentee ballots before they disembark from the plane. The Obama plan is not about solving the problem of illegal aliens who are consuming what few jobs are left in this country. For Obama, it 's about winning enough votes to remain in the White House on January 20, 2013.
Obama's decision was immediately praised by immigration activists—and Democrats facing tough reelection campaigns in 2012 who need the Hispanic vote. Both legal and illegal. Attorney General Eric Holder decided the Administration had the authority to do whatever he felt compelled to do as long as Congress was deadlocked on the issue.
Congress, however, is not deadlocked on the immigration issue. The party bosses are. Congress wasn't deadlocked in 1952 when the Democratically-controlled Congress enacted the toughest immigration law in US history. In fact, it was so tough they had to enact the Federal Immigration and Nationality Act [Public Law 82-414.66 Stat] over President Harry S. Truman's veto. The Senate in 1952 was evenly divided, 48 Democrats and 48 Republicans. The vote, and overriding Truman's veto, was bipartisan. With 235 Democrats in the House and 48 in the Senate, overriding Truman's veto in both Houses required strong bipartisan cooperation. Thus, it can honestly be said that representative America enacted the solution to the immigration dilemma in 1952, but the princes of industry and the barons of banking and business who are determined to create a seamless, faceless global society, had other plans. No president from Truman to Obama has ever enforced the Federal Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. Public Law 82-414.66 is a duly-enacted law which the Executive Branch has nullified by simply pretending it does not exist.
On May 26, 2011, in a 5 to 3 ruling, the US Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Arizona's immigration law, SB1070. What made it legal, the high court said, was that Arizona's law derived its authority from the Federal Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. The Supreme Court said that "...as long as the State relies upon federal definitions of immigration status, then that State is not in conflict with federal law. That is exactly what SB1070 does." In writing the majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts said that "...while federal law makes the checks voluntary, it does not specifically bar States from making them mandatory."

Obama was correct when he was chasing middle class white votes. He said he lacked the "broad categorical authority" to act on his own. Under Section 8 USC 1324[a](1)(A)[iv][b](iii) law enforcement officers who have reason to believe that suspects they stop for any reason may be illegal, and do not check their legal status, and detain them if they are here illegally, will be guilty of a federal felony. Under Section 274 of Public Law 82:414.66 it is a felony for anyone to assist an illegal. You are guilty of a crime if logic tells you it's reasonable to assume the person you are helping is, or could be, an illegal alien and you do nothing. Employing them, providing them with shelter, transporting them from place to place, feeding them, or assisting them in gaining employment—or even by encouraging an illegal to remain in this country, is a felony. In the case of social progressive cities, counties or States, that create sanctuaries where illegals can live without fear of arrest and deportation, those city, county or State officials who provide those safe havens can—under the 1952 law—be held financially liable for any crimes committed by illegals who has been provided safe haven by the sanctuary city edicts.
What all this means is that Barack Obama does not have the legislative authority to deal with illegals on a case-by-case basis regardless what Eric Holder's non-binding, unofficial view may be. Nor, by the way, does the White House have the power to implement the "Dream Act" by Executive Order since doing so would violate federal law. Any member of the Executive Branch who followed the dictates of the "boss of the Executive Branch" to his employees (i.e., interoffice memo from the President to his staff: a textbook definition of an Executive Order) means that federal employee is actually violating the Federal Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. While you might argue that the Executive Order could be construed as a waiver that exempts the federal employee from being prosecuted, it can also be argued that no where in the Constitution of the United States is the Chief Executive exempt from the law of the land.
When Obama made the decision to treat illegals on a "case-by-case" basis, pro-border security and anti-immigration policy advocates blasted the Administration for failing to uphold existing immigration law. Pro-amnesty, pro-Dream Act Congressman Luis V. Gutierrez [D-IL] said the "...announcement shows that this president is willing to put muscle behind his words and to use his power to intervene when the lives of good people are being ruined by bad laws." (Bad laws in the view of Gutierrez are laws that protect our borders and treat illegals as illegals.)
Immigration legislation has been stalled in Congress for years because Republicans favor strict enforcement of existing immigration law—particularly the Federal Immigration and Nationality Act, amended in 1987 to provide for temporary agricultural workers who were allowed into the country for planting and harvesting of crops, but whose employers who had to account for each temporary worker, and were required to return them to their native countries at the end of the planting or picking season.
Democrats, on the other hand, believe that anyone who is able to sneak into the country in the dead of night without breaking their legs climbing over a border fence, drowning in the waist deep Rio Grande, or being hit by a fast moving vehicle as they run the gauntlet of the four football field-wide Trans-Texas Corridor, I-35 in Laredo, Texas are entitled to live free on the expense of those who, by birth or legal process, live and work here legally.
As Gutierrez lauded Obama's ploy to ignore existing immigration law while pretending none exists, Congressman Lamar Smith [R-TX], Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee said what Obama is trying to do is grant backdoor amnesty to illegals. "The Obama Administration," he said, "should enforce immigration laws, not look for ways to ignore them. The Obama Administration should not pick and choose which laws to enforce. Administration officials should remember the oath of office they took to uphold the Constitution and the laws of the land."

In 2009, shortly after he took office, the US Citizenship & Immigration Service prepared a draft memo arguing that Obama had the broad powers with the use of an Executive Order to create a non-legislative version of amnesty. In June of this year, ICE issued new guidelines which, effectively, did just that by expanding its own authority to decline to prosecute illegal aliens who have not committed other crimes, or are gang members, completely contradicting Janet Napolitano's statement that by using the "case-by-case" approach, her department and the DOJ will be able to move more swiftly to adjudicate those cases which involve convicted felons or those who are gang members.
In point of fact, since the Federal Immigration and Nationality Act exists, Obama cannot constitutionally issue an Executive Order that would repeal any provisions of that law since he has no legislative authority to overrule Congress other than to veto current legislation passed by that body. He can't repeal existing law. Since the problems this nation faces with illegal aliens were solved in 1952, its time the people of the United States demand that the White House, together with all federal, State and local police angencies enforce that law to its fullest extent. If they don't, its times to start recalling a whole big bunch of politicians.
*
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/08/02/20110802consular-id-card-law-changes-heightens-migrants-fears.html


MEXICO OPERATES NEARLY 50 CONSULATES, a/k/a LA RAZA OCCUPATION HEADQUARTERS AROUND THE U.S. IN COMPARISON TO THE UNITED KINGDOM'S 8 CONSULATES.

THE MISSION OF THESE CONSULATES IS TO EXPAND THE POWER OF LA RAZA, BUY POLITICIANS BY OFFERING THE ILLEGALS' VOTES, EXPANDING THE MEX WELFARE STATE, AND LA RAZA SUPREMACY IN OUR BORDERS.

THE MEXICAN CONSULATES HAVE LONG HANDED OUT PHONY I.D.s LIKE GROCERY STORE COUPONS! LA RAZA DONORS, AND BANKSTERS TO THE MEX DRUG CARTELS, WELLS FARGO and BANK of AMERICA BOTH PERMIT LA RAZA TO OPEN ACCOUNTS WITH THESE PHONY I.D.s.

NEARLY 20% OF ALL MONEY OPENED BY ILLEGALS USING FRAUDULENT I.D.s IS MONEY LAUNDERING FOR THE MEX DRUG CARTELS.

WELLS FARGO MADE A HUGE FORTUNE SELLING HIGHLY PROFITABLE MORTGAGES THE BANK KNEW TAX PAYERS WOULD HAVE TO EAT, TO LA RAZA ILLEGALS USING STOLEN OR FRAUDULENT I.D.s

THE LA RAZA DEMS, INCLUDING OBAMA FIGHT HARD TO DEFEAT E-VERIFY WHICH WOULD PUT A STOP TO THIS.

IDENTITY THEFT IS ONE OF LA RAZA'S GREATEST CRIME TIDAL WAVES... AND YET THIS ARTICLE ONLY TALKS ABOUT THE POOR, POOR, POOR (CRIMINAL) ILLEGAL WORRIED ABOUT BEING ARRESTED.

8 OUT 10 ILLEGALS ARRESTED UNDER OBAMA, EVEN ARE RELEASED TO GO BACK AND VOTE FOR HIM!

VIVA LA RAZA? YOU'RE PAYING FOR IT! AND THE COST IS STAGGERING!
*

SHOCKING FACTS ON OBAMA’S FUNDING OF THE MEXICAN SUPREMACIST MOVEMENT OF LA RAZA
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/08/obamas-la-raza-infested-administration.html
*
*

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/06/obama-operates-la-raza-supremacy-out-of.html
*
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/06/obama-mexican-supremacist-party-of-la.html
*
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/04/history-of-mexican-fascist-party-of-la.html
*
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/05/wikileaks-exposed-obamas-la-raza-open.html

*
Change in ID-card law
heightens migrants' fears

by Daniel Gonzalez - Aug. 2, 2011 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic


It is known as the "matricula consular" in
Spanish. For years, hundreds of thousands
of Latino immigrants in Arizona have relied
on the photo ID cards issued by Mexico and
other foreign governments to open bank
accounts, enroll children in school, register
cars, rent apartments and prove their
identity during traffic stops by police.

But the use of the card, most popular with
illegal immigrants ineligible to obtain state
driver's licenses or other forms of
government-issued ID, was thrown into
turmoil last month when a new state
immigration-enforcement law took effect.
The law bans state and local government
entities from accepting consular ID cards
issued by foreign governments.

The law has led to widespread fear and
confusion among immigrants, many of
whom are now under the mistaken
impression that the cards themselves have
been outlawed and simply carrying one
could lead to a person's arrest and
deportation. That has raised concerns that
the law will make immigrants even less likely
to report crimes to police.

"It just creates more distrust among
immigrants from the police department,"
said Luis Avila, president of Somos America,
a Phoenix-based coalition of immigrant-
rights groups.

He said his organization has received many
calls from immigrants asking, "Is it going to

get me arrested?" or "What am I going to do
when I register the kids for school?"

Luis Samudio, a Phoenix Police Department
spokesman, said police are concerned the
law will make immigrants even more
reluctant to report crimes.

"That's what we are afraid of, certainly," he
said. "We are finding that people are already
afraid of making reports to the police
because of the new immigration laws. I think
this ID will be another obstacle."

The law took effect on July 20. It is the latest
in a string of measures passed by Arizona
lawmakers in recent years aimed at turning
up the heat on illegal immigrants in hopes
that they will leave the state.

"We don't want illegal aliens to be able to do
business in Arizona. We want to make it as
difficult as possible for them so they will go
back to their countries and immigrate
legally, if they so choose," said state Sen.
Ron Gould, R-Lake Havasu City, sponsor of
the law banning the IDs at government
agencies. He also has sponsored many other
measures aimed at illegal immigrants.


Jon Christian Ryter -- Selective deportation is not legal

Jon Christian Ryter -- Selective deportation is not legal

FIGHTING BACK LA RAZA SUPREMACY - NEW MEXICO FIGHTS DRIVER'S LICENSES FOR ILLEGALS

ALL ACROSS THIS COUNTRY, MEXICO, THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA, AND THE LA RAZA DEMS, SUCH AS CLINTON, FEINSTEIN, BOXER, PELOSI, REID AND OBAMA WANT TO HAND ILLEGALS DRIVER’S LICENSES. IT’S SIMPLY A WAY OF HANDING LA RAZA de facto CITIZENSHIP.

BELOW IS WHAT’S HAPPENING IN NEW MEXICO, A LA RAZA OCCUPIED STATE.
IN THE LA RAZA WELFARE CAPITAL OF LOS ANGELES, NEARLY HALF THE JOBS ARE HELD BY ILLEGALS USING STOLEN SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS.
AND FOR SOME REASON YOU THOUGHT LA RAZA WAS NOT OUT THERE VOTING?!?... WAKE UP AND SMELL THE TACO TRUCK!

*
THIS ARTICLE COULD HAVE BEEN TITLED “WHERE THERE’S A MEXICAN, THERE’S A CRIME!”
LA RAZA IS A CRIME WAVE. ACROSS THE COUNTRY, HISPANDERING BARACK OBAMA HAS UNLEASHED HIS DEPT. OF JUSTICE ON BEHALF OF THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY OF LA RAZA, OBAMA’S MEXICAN SUPREMACIST PARTY BASE, TO MAKE SURE LA RAZA IS ABOVE THE LAW.
WATCH OBAMA SUE NEW MEXICO LIKE HE DID ARIZONA AND ALABAMA ON BEHALF OF HIS LA RAZA PARTY BASE.

But critics, led by the newly elected governor, Susana Martinez, say that the lenient licensing law attracts illegal immigrants from far and wide who fraudulently claim they live in New Mexico in order to get identification cards that allow them to settle into American life.

NEW YORK TIMES
August 23, 2011
License Access in New Mexico Is Heated Issue
By MARC LACEY
SANTA FE, N.M. — New Mexico is one of just two states, the other being Washington, that allow in-state residents who are illegal immigrants to get the same driver’s licenses given to citizens, as long as they pass a written test and successfully show they can turn and stop and park.
But critics, led by the newly elected governor, Susana Martinez, say that the lenient licensing law attracts illegal immigrants from far and wide who fraudulently claim they live in New Mexico in order to get identification cards that allow them to settle into American life.
“We don’t have any idea what kind of individuals we are giving these licenses to,” Ms. Martinez said in an interview, suggesting that other states may also be adversely affected by New Mexico’s approach.
No issue is more heated in New Mexico these days than that of driver’s licenses. There are street protests and angry debates over the airwaves. Lawyers will soon be clashing over the question in court.
Meanwhile, to prove her point, Ms. Martinez has been drawing attention to each new case of fraud.
In May, charges were filed against a man who advertised his services securing licenses for illegal immigrants in Spanish-language newspapers in New York. The Border Patrol arrested him in Albuquerque in the company of illegal immigrants from Ecuador and Colombia, whom he was helping to become licensed drivers in New Mexico.
In March, another license scam aimed at immigrants from South Asia resulted in four arrests. That was the sixth fraudulent-license arrest in seven months, state officials said, with others involving illegal immigrants from China, Poland, Costa Rica and Brazil.
By issuing licenses to foreigners, a policy adopted in 2003, state officials had sought to reduce the problem of unlicensed and uninsured drivers on the road and increase cooperation between immigrants and law enforcement personnel. The extent to which the policy has worked is in dispute as data show that New Mexico continues to have one of the largest percentages of uninsured motorists in the country.
Ms. Martinez, a Republican who campaigned on the licensing issue, tried but failed in her initial months in office to push an end to the licensing of illegal immigrants through the Legislature, which is controlled by Democrats. She says she will try again in September at a special session she has called.
In the meantime, her administration has sent letters to 10,000 citizens of foreign countries across New Mexico in an effort to gauge the extent of the fraud problem.
Those who received the letters were told that they must appear at a motor vehicles office in Albuquerque within 30 days to prove to an auditor that they actually reside in the state or face cancellation of their licenses.
About a third of the 10,000 letters were returned to the state, which the governor’s office says shows a serious fraud problem. Of the 2,000 or so face-to-face meetings that have been held, about half the people have been able to prove they are in-state residents, state officials say.
The governor’s office has insisted that the audit was not intended to facilitate deporting illegal immigrants, but fear still remains high.
“I’m afraid to go,” said Luz, a mother of three from Mexico who received one of the letters but has not yet responded. “Will they deport me once I get there? Or will I get stopped on the way?”
Even with licenses, illegal immigrants say they must tread carefully in the state. They are aware of the location of the various federal immigration checkpoints set up on New Mexican roads and steer well away from them.
After hearing that many who received the letters were afraid to travel to Albuquerque, the governor’s office agreed to schedule meetings as well in Las Cruces, in the southern part of the state.
Still, the letters have been criticized by immigrant rights groups. “This program doesn’t prove anything,” said Marcela Diaz, an activist with Somos Un Pueblo Unido. “People move around and change their addresses. We knew that already. This is just blatantly inconveniencing those who followed the rules.”
On Wednesday, four Democratic legislators and Marisela Morales, a legal permanent resident who received one of the letters, intend to file suit in state court accusing the governor’s office of acting without legislative authority in issuing the letters and also of discriminating against people on the basis of their legal status.
The suit will ask a judge to order Demesia Padilla, who as the governor’s secretary of taxation and revenue oversees the motor vehicles division, to end the verification program immediately. The legal team behind the suit includes Vincent Ward, who was chief legal counsel to former Gov. Bill Richardson, who approved the current licensing policy. David H. Urias, a civil rights lawyer, and Martha Gomez of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, are also involved.
New Mexico has traditionally had a welcoming approach toward illegal immigrants, especially compared with Arizona, its neighbor to the west. But calls for a tougher approach have been growing, which is reflected by Ms. Martinez’s victory in November as well as the heated nature of the driver’s license debate.
Gerald Ortiz y Pino, a Democratic state senator and a plaintiff in the suit, said there might be a need for tighter controls in licensing, although he dismissed as exaggerated the talk of terrorists and drug bosses getting licenses. Mr. Ortiz y Pino said revoking licenses for illegal immigrants would end up prompting more people to live in the shadows.
“One of the tactics the governor has used is to encourage people to send us angry, vituperative letters questioning our patriotism and fealty to the U.S.,” he said. “That leaves every one very raw.”
Ms. Martinez said that the vast majority of residents were in her corner on ending the policy and that legislators needed to get that message. “It’s important to me because it’s important to New Mexico,” she said.
The issue has far less urgency in Washington State, where officials have tightened residency requirements to cut down on fraud while still allowing illegal immigrants to receive licenses. Gov. Chris Gregoire, a Democrat, said she would sign a bill restricting licenses to legal residents if the Legislature were to pass one.
Utah issues special licenses to people who cannot prove their citizenship. These licenses are good only for driving but not for other uses, like boarding airplanes. That dual-license approach has not won support in New Mexico.
As the standoff continues, some of those who can legally drive now but may be in danger of losing their licenses are contemplating how their lives might change.
“How will I take my children to school?” asked Luz, who did not want her full name used given the continuing debate. “How can I go to Wal-Mart to get medicine? If you take away our licenses, you take away our lives.”
A WARNING TO AMERICA! OPERATING FROM THE MORE THAN 50 MEXICAN CONSULATES, LA RAZA IS ACTIVELY REGISTERING ILLEGALS TO VOTE FOR OBAMA AND OTHER LA RAZA DEMS TO EXPAND THE MEXICAN INVASION, OCCUPATION, AND WELFARE STATE.
*
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/08/02/20110802consular-id-card-law-changes-heightens-migrants-fears.html



LA RAZA’S SLOGAN IS:
“For the race (LA RAZA) everything! For others nothing!”
WE ARE MEXICO’S JOBS, WELFARE, FREE ANCHOR BABY BIRTHING AND JAILS PROGRAM!
NO LEGAL NEED APPLY!
*
THE DEMOCRAT PARTY – Now Party For the LA RAZA SUPREMACIST MOVEMENT to put a “cheap” labor illegal in every American job!

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/08/democrat-party-party-controlled-by-la.html

*
ANCHORING AN OCCUPATION WITH HEAVY LA RAZA BREEDING AT LEGALS’ EXPENSE – LOS ANGELES COUNTY, UNDER LA RAZA OCCUPATION, PUTS OUT $600 MILLION PER YEAR IN WELFARE TO PREGNANT MEXICANS THAT CROSS OUR BORDERS TO LOOT.


“Through love of having children, we are going to take over.” AUGUSTIN CEBADA, BROWN BERETS, THE LA RAZA FASCIST PARTY

*
THESE FIGURES ON WELFARE FOR ILLEGALS IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY ARE DATED. IT NOT EXCEEDS $600 MILLION PER YEAR!!! (source: Los Angeles County & JUDICIAL WATCH)
*
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1949085/posts
*

OBAMA KEEPS VOW TO PROTECT HIS CRIMINAL BANKSTER DONORS

OBVIOUSLY WE ALL KNOW WHAT OBAMA’S DONE ABOUT FORECLOSURES. AS IS ALWAYS THE CASE WITH THIS CLOWN, HE WENT LIMP ON THE TOPIC! AS SOON AS HE FOUND OUT HIS BANKSTERS WERE MAKING HUGE PROFITS OFF THE VERY FORECLOSURES THEY CAUSED, HE ASSURE THEM THE PILLAGING WOULD ONLY GET BETTER WITH HIM IN THE WHITE HOUSE!

WELLS FARGO, AS NOTED BELOW, HAD THEIR CALIFORNIA MORTGAGE LICENSE REVOKED IN 2003 FOR CORPORATE CORRUPTION AND MALFEASANCE. THE BANK SIMPLY DECLARED ITSELF ABOVE THE LAW AND WENT ON PILLAGING AN ENTIRE NATION WITH THE SAME EXPLOITIVE AND CROOKED DEVICES THAT HAD PROVEN SO PROFITABLE IN THE PAST!

BOTH WELLS FARGO AND BANK OF AMERICA ARE MAJOR CAUSES OF FORECLOSURE AND THIS NATION’S ECONOMIC MELTDOWN!

“I’M NOT HERE TO PUNISH BANKS!” BARACK OBAMA IN HIS STATE OF THE UNION IN THE FACES OF A NATION RAPED BY BANKSTERS!

OBAMA WILL RANK AS ONE OF THE MOST LIMP AND CORRUPT PRESIDENTS IN HISTORY!
*
Obama administration moves to quash state investigations of Wall Street banks

By Andre Damon and Barry Grey

24 August 2011

The Obama administration has intervened to support a settlement by banks charged with fraudulent practices in the processing of home foreclosures that would prevent state governments, New York in particular, from carrying out their own investigations of major Wall Street firms.
The New York Times reported Monday that Shaun Donovan, the US secretary of housing and urban development, together with high-ranking Justice Department personnel, has been “waging an intensifying campaign” to persuade Eric T. Schneiderman, the New York attorney general, to drop his opposition to a settlement of the home foreclosure charges.
Under the proposed settlement, major banks including JP Morgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citigroup and Bank of America, would pay a combined total of $20 billion, which would supposedly go toward home loan modifications and homeowner counseling. In return, bank executives would be shielded from possible civil suits or criminal prosecutions arising from state probes into their role in fueling the sub-prime mortgage bubble, whose collapse triggered the financial meltdown of September 2008.
Schneiderman’s office has opened several inquiries into banking practices during the mortgage boom of the mid-2000s.
Last year it emerged that banks and mortgage companies forged documents and paid employees with no knowledge of the homes in question to sign legal documents that were then used to process foreclosures.
The amount of the settlement of charges arising from these practices—$20 billion—represents a financial wrist-slap for banks that made multiples of this figure from the creation and sale of securities linked to toxic home loans. These banks have continued to reap huge profits from speculative bets in the midst of a global economic crisis of their own making that has destroyed the jobs and living standards of countless millions in the US and around the world. Nevertheless, the banks have resisted paying even this token sum.
$20 billion will barely make a dent in a foreclosure crisis that has already thrown millions of Americans out of their homes. US homeowners collectively owe the banks $753 billion more than the market value of their homes.
Schneiderman has based his opposition to the deal on provisions barring future litigation against the banks. The Times quoted Danny Kanner, a spokesman for Schneiderman, as saying, “The attorney general remains concerned by any attempt at a global settlement that would shut down ongoing investigations of wrongdoing related to the mortgage crisis.”
Schneiderman is only the most prominent of several state attorneys general, including Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada and Beau Biden of Delaware, who have refused to support the proposed settlement.
In pressuring Schneiderman to drop his opposition to the deal, the Obama administration claims to be motivated by a desire for a quick resolution that would funnel $20 billion in aid to hard-pressed homeowners. “Our view is we have the immediate opportunity to help a huge number of borrowers to stay in their homes, to help their neighborhoods and the housing market,” Donovan told the Times.
A spokeswoman for the Justice Department echoed this line, telling the newspaper, “The Justice Department, along with our federal agency partners and state attorneys general, are committed to... bring relief swiftly because homeowners continue to suffer more each day that these issues are not resolved.”
This pretense of humanitarian concern for the plight of distressed homeowners is utterly cynical and dishonest. Since the mortgage crisis began more than four years ago, the government, first under Bush and then under Obama, has done virtually nothing to help homeowners stay in their homes.
Under Obama, the major cause of mortgage delinquencies and defaults has shifted from predatory loan practices to the impact of prolonged unemployment. But the administration has refused to take any serious steps to halt foreclosures in deference to the banks, which fiercely oppose any measures that would negatively impact their balance sheets or profits.
The White House would have the public believe it a mere coincidence that its newfound urgency in regard to the foreclosure crisis coincides with a campaign by the banks to block legal action against them.
Executives of the major banks are meeting with law enforcement officials Thursday, the Financial Times reported, to continue negotiations over the settlement, which the newspaper said remains several weeks from completion. Representatives of Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase, Wells Fargo and Bank of America have remained in “frequent dialog” with state attorneys general and prosecutors, the newspaper said.
The Times article noted that Schneiderman has also come under criticism from the Obama administration for suing to block a separate deal reached earlier this year that would settle civil actions filed by 22 institutional investors against Bank of America. Investors, including the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the giant asset managing firm BlackRock, and Pimco, the world’s largest bond fund, sued Bank of American over 530 mortgage-backed securities which the claimants say were sold on the basis of false information.
The deal, brokered by Bank of New York Mellon, would require Bank of America to pay $8.5 billion to the investors holding these securities. Schneiderman intervened to block the settlement on the grounds that the $8.5 billion represents a mere fraction of investors’ losses and that the deal was worked out behind the backs of many holders of the securities.
The Times article reports a recent public altercation between Schneiderman and Kathryn S. Wylde, the chief executive of the Partnership for New York City and a member of the board of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, which supports the settlement. Speaking to the newspaper about her argument with the attorney general, Wylde gives voice to the attitude of subservience to Wall Street that characterizes the Obama administration and the political establishment as a whole.
“Wall Street is our Main Street—love ‘em or hate ‘em,” she tells the Times. “They are important and we have to make sure we are doing everything we can to support them unless they are doing something indefensible.”
Evidently, the threshold in official circles for what is “indefensible” is infinitely high when it comes to Wall Street. Under Obama, the federal government has failed to file a single criminal charge against a high-level banker or even bring a civil case to trial in connection with the fraud and lawlessness that pervaded the dealings of the banks during the sub-prime mortgage boom and its catastrophic aftermath.
This is not for lack of evidence. Last April, the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations released a 650-page report on the financial crisis that provided a detailed factual account of banking fraud as well as the collusion of federal regulatory agencies and the credit rating firms. The report concluded with a list of federal securities statutes that it suggested had been violated by major Wall Street firms.
The Obama administration has ignored this report as part of its efforts to shield the financial elite from being held to account for its actions.
Now, having blocked any federal prosecution of senior bank officials, the administration is intervening to quash investigations at the state level. Nothing could more clearly demonstrate its role as a tool of the US financial oligarchy.
*
OBAMA DEMANDS HIS BANKSTER DONORS BE ABOVE LAW
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/08/obama-criminal-banksters-best-servant.html

An initial term sheet outlining a possible settlement emerged in March, with institutions including Bank of America, Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo being asked to pay about $20 billion that would go toward loan modifications and possibly counseling for homeowners.
In exchange, the attorneys general participating in the deal would have agreed to sign broad releases preventing them from bringing further litigation on matters relating to the improper bank practices.
*
OBAMA AND HIS WALL ST CABINET
OBAMA’S CRONY CAPITALISM, A LOVE STORY BETWEEN THE ACTOR PRESIDENT, AND HIS BANKSTER DONORS!

Records show that four out of Obama's top five contributors are employees of financial industry giants - Goldman Sachs ($571,330), UBS AG ($364,806), JPMorgan Chase ($362,207) and Citigroup ($358,054).

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/08/barack-obama-one-of-greatest-tragedies.html
*
Obama’s Economic Advisers: International Socialists, Union Thugs, NBC Execs, Soros Scholars, Subprime Lenders, Amnesty Shills, and Campaign Cronies


Posted on February 24, 2011 by Ben Johnson

http://floydreports.com/obama%E2%80%99s-economic-advisers-international-socialists-union-thugs-nbc-execs-soros-scholars-subprime-lenders-amnesty-shills-and-campaign-cronies/

*
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/06/assault-on-america-by-obama-his.html

*

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/08/barack-obama-one-of-greatest-tragedies.html

As part of the bank bailout, the Treasury Department was given $46 billion to spend on keeping homeowners in their houses; to date, the agency has spent about $1.85 billion.
*
They also say programs to curb foreclosure are voluntary, so they are limited in how far they can push mortgage servicers and investors, who often make more from foreclosures than from offering aid.
*
NEW YORK TIMES
June 4, 2011

For the Jobless, Little U.S. Help on Foreclosure

By ANDREW MARTIN
The Obama administration’s main program to keep distressed homeowners from falling into foreclosure has been aimed at those who took out subprime loans or other risky mortgages during the heady days of the housing boom. But these days, the primary cause of foreclosures is unemployment.
As a result, there is a mismatch between the homeowner program’s design and the country’s economic realities — and a new round of finger-pointing about how best to fix it.
The administration’s housing effort does include programs to help unemployed homeowners, but they have been plagued by delays, dubious benefits and abysmal participation. For example, a Treasury Department effort started in early 2010 allows the jobless to postpone mortgage payments for three months, but the average length of unemployment is now nine months. As of March 31, there were only 7,397 participants.
“So far, I think the public record will show that programs to help unemployed homeowners have not been very successful,” said Jeffrey C. Fuhrer, an executive vice president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.
Data released last week suggests that the administration’s task is only growing more difficult as the problems created by unemployment and housing persist. New job growth in May was anemic, and unemployment inched up to 9.1 percent, the Labor Department reported Friday.
Earlier in the week, a widely watched index found that housing prices had dropped to their lowest level in nearly a decade. And while the rate of homes falling into foreclosure has slowed, the reason is delays in processing foreclosures, not a housing recovery, according to RealtyTrac, a company that tracks foreclosures. There were 219,258 foreclosure filings in April, the latest month available.
Critics of the Obama administration’s approach to preventing foreclosures have pressed for two years to get officials to focus more of their attention on unemployed homeowners, with meager results. As part of the bank bailout, the Treasury Department was given $46 billion to spend on keeping homeowners in their houses; to date, the agency has spent about $1.85 billion.
Morris A. Davis, a former Federal Reserve economist, estimates that as many as a million homeowners slipped into foreclosure because of insufficient help for the unemployed.
“The money was there and they didn’t spend it,” said Mr. Davis, an associate real estate professor at the University of Wisconsin. “I don’t mean to sound outraged, but I am pretty outraged.”
Administration officials said their programs have had a positive impact, albeit not as large as they had hoped. But they say that the problems of unemployment and negative equity on homes are not easily solved. They also say programs to curb foreclosure are voluntary, so they are limited in how far they can push mortgage servicers and investors, who often make more from foreclosures than from offering aid.
“We are trying to be careful in designing programs that at the end of the day aren’t just about spending money but getting people back on their feet,” said James Parrott, a senior adviser at the White House’s National Economic Council.
President Obama has been scrambling to curb the number of foreclosures ever since he arrived at the White House.
At the start of 2009, the administration announced its primary foreclosure prevention initiative, the Home Affordable Modification Program. It provides incentives to banks to modify mortgages, reducing monthly payments for eligible homeowners.
The administration said the program would help three million to four million homeowners, but so far, only 670,000 homeowners have received permanent modifications. In addition, the program was primarily meant for homeowners with risky mortgages; jobless owners are often ineligible because some payment, albeit reduced, is required.
Administration officials said the program was helping homeowners whose income had been reduced. Sixty-one percent of homeowners who received permanent modifications listed “curtailment of income” as their reason for applying, though it is not known how many of them are unemployed or simply had their hours or pay reduced.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development received $1 billion as part of the financial regulatory reforms that passed last year to help unemployed homeowners. That money will be used to provide government loans to unemployed homeowners for up to 24 months.
Though the program was announced last fall, so far applications are being accepted in only five states; the others are delayed because of “implementation challenges,” a HUD spokeswoman said.
Critics do acknowledge one bright spot — the Hardest Hit Fund, a federal program that will provide $7.6 billion so that some states can administer their own programs for struggling homeowners. Of that, 70 percent will be directed to unemployed homeowners, said Andrea Risotto, a Treasury spokeswoman.
So far, $455 million has been spent. Over the last several years, academics, housing groups and government economists offered proposals to Treasury officials to help the unemployed avoid foreclosure.
One, which Mr. Fuhrer of the Boston Fed helped write, called on the government to provide loans, or grants, to unemployed or underemployed homeowners to make up for the amount of income they lost. The loan would have to be repaid once the homeowner found a new job.
Another proposal, by a non-profit group called the PICO National Network, a coalition of faith-based community organizations, would have allowed unemployed homeowners to postpone much or all of their mortgage payments for a year or more.
But administration officials have balked, arguing that regulators and “other industry stakeholders expressed strong reservations” about allowing unemployed homeowners to extend payments for longer terms, according to a Dec. 23 letter that Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner sent to Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts, who had pressed for measures that would more directly aid the unemployed.
The debate is playing out on the sidelines of partisan Washington politics, since Republican lawmakers have made clear they would like to get rid of anti-foreclosure programs altogether, and would block any new programs. Instead, it is setting homeowner advocates against administration officials over how to spend money already appropriated.
Administration officials maintain that the decision on whether to offer mortgage relief to homeowners ultimately was up to mortgage servicers and investors, not the government, which can provide incentives but not compel action.
“We as an administration have limited levers,” Mr. Parrot said. “We can push them on the margins.”
But Lewis Finfer, a PICO organizer, said he could not understand why the administration had not been more receptive given the extent of unemployment.
“We have a program to deal with this,” he said.
Many unemployed or underemployed homeowners said they would welcome an extended break in mortgage payments.
Mary Ernest, 51, of Blackstone, Mass., lost her job as a school aide and said she had been “reduced to begging, more or less,” to keep her home. Adam Heyman, 41, of Chelsea, Mass., scraped together enough money to pay the mortgage on his condominium for about 18 months. Though he finally got another full-time job, his bank had already foreclosed on his condo.
“If I had a way to slow down the process or stop it for a while, that would have been nice,” Mr. Heyman said, adding, “Now I can certainly afford to pay.”
*
OBAMA’S BANKSTER DONORS DOIN’ GOOD! PROFITS UP! FORECLOSURES UP! BANK NO REGULATION GUARANTEED! BAILOUTS FOR BUYOUTS…. And not a single bankster donor in prison!

WHAT DID THE BANKSTERS KNOW ABOUT OUR ACTOR OBAMA THAT WE DIDN’T KNOW?
Records show that four out of Obama's top five contributors are employees of financial industry giants - Goldman Sachs ($571,330), UBS AG ($364,806), JPMorgan Chase ($362,207) and Citigroup ($358,054).
*
“Obama's rhetoric covered the whole financial industry, but the key changes will affect only a few high-profile players, including JPMorgan Chase & Co., while sparing investment banks like Goldman Sachs Group Inc.”
*
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Thursday, July 9, 2009
And Harvard economics professor JEFFREY MIRON will weigh in on the state of the U.S. economy—and why the only plausible argument for bailing out banks crumbles on close examination.
*
"There is a populist and conservative revolt against Wall Street and financial elites, Congress and government," Democratic pollster Stanley Greenberg warned in an analysis this week. "Democrats and President Obama are seen as more interested in bailing out Wall Street than helping Main Street."

*
August 21, 2010
Janet Tavakoli.President, Tavakoli Structured Finance
August 15, 2010

How to Thwart the Assassins of the American Dream
Arianna Huffington's new book, Third World America: How Our Politicians are Abandoning the Middle Class and Betraying the American Dream, paints a grim picture of the State of the Union:
"Every day, Americans, faced with layoffs and tough economic times, are forced to use their credit cards to pay for essentials such as food, housing, and medical care -- the costs of which continue to escalate. But, as their debt rises, they find it harder to keep up with their payments. When they don't, banks, trying to offset losses in other areas, turn around, hike interest rates, and impose all manner of fees and penalties..."



Obama administration moves to quash state investigations of Wall Street banks

Obama administration moves to quash state investigations of Wall Street banks