Perry Challenges Pelosi To A Debate….

…. which would have been a major Pay Per View event if something like this were to take place. Perry lucked out, as Pelosi had some mercy and declined the invitation to embarrass Perry as he has done to himself over the past few weeks.  

Hahahahahahahahahahaha:

Dear Leader Pelosi [...]

I am in Washington Monday and would love to engage you in a public debate about my Overhaul Washington plan versus the congressional status quo. I think it would be a tremendous service to the American public to see a public airing of these differences. Let the people decide. If Monday doesn't work, perhaps we could find a time in Iowa over the course of the next month to discuss these issues in front of the people of America's heartland.

Should you choose not to respond or engage in such a healthy discussion, I will take it to mean you will continue your obstructionist ways in the face of much needed Washington reform.

Sincerely,

Rick Perry
Governor of Texas

Oh Rick. Oh, you poor dumb bastard. After all of your astounding debate FAIL against the brain trust that is the Republican presidential field, after considering skipping future debates because you suck so much at them, you think challenging former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi to a debate is going to save you?

Seriously, Rick? Seriously?

Aside from the fact that (a) Nancy Pelosi is not running for the Republican nomination for president, (b) you're not running for the 8th Congressional District in California, and (c) uh ... um ... EPA ... Do you really think that you can take on Nancy freakin' Pelosi when you can't even stand on a stage with Michele "Vaccines makes you retarded" Bachmann without looking like a drooling idiot?

And Rick? That closing paragraph—that if Nancy doesn't agree to meet you behind the gym after school waste her time debating you, it means she's a big ol' meanie obstructionist—is just painfully embarrassing. For you. Because—and this is probably news to you—Rep. Pelosi is actually a member of the party that is trying to work with the president to bring about that "much needed Washington reform" you mentioned. It's the Republican Party, your party, the party of No To Everything, that is obstructing said reform. And it's pretty hard to see how spending time debating a guy who can't even count to three is supposed to reform Washington.

So, no, Nancy Pelosi won't be meeting you for a debate on Monday:

"He did ask if I could debate here in Washington on Monday. It is my understanding that such a letter has come in," Pelosi said in the Capitol Thursday. "Monday I'm going to be in Portland in the morning, I'm going to be visiting some of our labs. I'm in California in the afternoon, that's two. I can't remember what the third is."

Sorry, Rick, guess you'll just have to settle for embarrassing yourself with your fellow Republicans.

9:46 AM PT: Hahahahahahahahahahaha, take two:

Perry's campaign fired back at the Dem leader, writing on their official twitter account Thursday: "@NancyPelosi Perhaps the third activity that you have forgotten is the ongoing insider trading?"

Oh, Rick. So funny. So funny, I forgot to laugh. Also, your mom.

Originally posted to Kaili Joy Gray on Thu Nov 17, 2011

Also republished by Daily Kos.

Technorati Tags: Rick Perry,Nancy Pelosi,Debates,Politics,Current Events,An American Gothic

God Told Gingrich To Run…

    … and he had better run quickly.

Bloomberg News drops this campaign-ending bomb on Newt Gingrich tonight.

Newt Gingrich made between $1.6 million and $1.8 million in consulting fees from two contracts with mortgage company Freddie Mac, according to two people familiar with the arrangement.

The total amount is significantly larger than the $300,000 payment from Freddie Mac that Gingrich was asked about during a Republican presidential debate on Nov. 9 sponsored by CNBC, and more than was disclosed in the middle of congressional investigations into the housing industry collapse.

Gingrich’s business relationship with Freddie Mac spanned a period of eight years. When asked at the debate what he did to earn a $300,000 payment in 2006, the former speaker said he “offered them advice on precisely what they didn’t do,” and warned the company that its lending practices were “insane.” Former Freddie Mac executives who worked with Gingrich dispute that account.

Gingrich’s first contract with the mortgage lender was in 1999, five months after he resigned from Congress and as House speaker, according to a Freddie Mac press release.

Originally posted to Scarce on Tue Nov 15, 2011

Also republished by ClassWarfare Newsletter: WallStreet VS Working Class Global Occupy movement.

A Judge Smacks Down U.S. Bank

by Jbearlaw     Tue Nov 15, 2011

This is a depressing time to try to believe in the rule of law in this country, because of so much in the way of rampant fraud on behalf of the banking industry, the robo-signing, the delays and obfuscations, the obvious collusion, etc.  However, there is still a long history of the rule of law in this country, and even despite our philosophical and political differences, there are lots of good actors involved, at every level.   I have no idea of what political persuasion Judge Dennis Blackmon is, but Tea Partiers and Occupiers alike should be able to applaud his opinion in Otis Wayne Phillips v. US Bank.

Sometimes, only the courts of law stand to protect the taxpayer. Somewhere, someone has to stand up. Well, sometimes is now, and the place is the Great State of Georgia. The Defendant’s Motion is hereby Denied.

The court finds the following to be the facts and law applicable to this motion: 

                                                     1.

-Otis Phillips is behind on his house payments and is in grave danger of foreclosure. 

-The United States Government paid taxpayer dollars to the largest of our financial institutions, and to European Union Banks, in order to prop up those poorly run organizations.

-Twenty Billion of those dollars were handed over to the defendant, U.S. Bank. 

-U.S. Bank agreed to participate in the U.S. Government's HAMP program to help struggling homeowners.

-U.S. Bank signed a Service Participation Agreement (SPA), in which the bailed out bank agreed to comply with the HAMP Guidelines for loan modification 

-The HAMP guidelines require U.S. Bank to perform modification services for all morgage loans it services. 

-Otis Phillips applied to modify his mortgage with U.S. Bank. 

-U..S. Bank denied the request, without numbers, figures, or explanation, reasoning, comparison to the guidelines, or anything.  U.S. Bank would not reveal to Mr. Phillips how his income, or his house, or his expenses would make him ineligible according to HAMP guidelines. 

(This court cannot imagine why U.S. Bank will not make known to Mr. Phillips, a taxpayer, how his numbers put him outside the federal guidelines to receive a loan modification.  Taking $20 Billion of taxpayer money was no problem for U.S. Bank. A cynical Judge might believe that this entire motion to dismiss is a desperate attempt to avoid the discovery period, where U.S. Bank would have to tell Mr. Phillips how his financial situation did not qualify him for a modification. Or, perhaps he was qualified, yet didn’t receive the modification, in violation of U.S. Bank’s Service Participation Agreement (SPA).  A cynical judge might think that, if the guidelines clearly prevented Mr Phillips from getting his modification, then US Bank would have trotted out that fact in mathematic equations, pie charts, and bar graphs, all on 8 by 10 glossy photo paper, with circles and arrows and paragraphs on the back explaining each winning number.1  U.S. Bank’s silence on this issue might heighten the suspicions of such a cynical jurist.  I, on the other hand, am sure that nothing of the sort could be true. Maybe US Bank no longer has any of the $20 billion dollars left, and so their lack of written explanation might be attributed to some kind of ink reduction program to save money. I’m sure there is a perfectly reasonable explanation for why US  Bank will not print out the ONE page of figures that show that Mr. Phillip’s financials compared to the HAMP guidelines to clear this all up.)

1.  Apologies to Arlo Guthrie, Alice's Restaurant. 

-Otis Phillips claims to have suffered as a result of U.S. Bank's actions, and

-Otis Phillips wishes to avoid foreclosure. 

[snip]

Clearly, U.S. Bank cannot take the money, contract with our government to provide a a service to the taxpayer, violate that agreement, and then say no one on earth can sue them for it. That is not the law in Georgia. In fact, since no administrative review is provided in HAMP [which is something you should put in your OCC letter demanding review], the courts are the only recourse.  The Bank claims that the intended beneficiaries of HAMP are the very people who CAN'T sue.  Such argument is absurd.

[snip] 

Georgia prohibits wrongful foreclosures.  In fact, Federal law also prohibits wrongful foreclosures.  Mr. Phillips claims that U.S. Bank is not the proper party to pursue such an action, and is merely the servicer of the loan, not the holder.  Further, Mr. Phillips asserts that compliance with HAMP guidelines is a condition precedent to foreclosure. 

                                                      Conclusion

There is no merit to Defendant's motion to dismiss, and same is hereby denied.

That's the kind of thing that makes you believe in this country.  Congratulations, Judge Blackmon!  Picture of Judge Blackmon here. 

12:15 PM PT: Just want to say thanks to all who've stopped to read and rec.  Hope you enjoyed Judge Blackmon's wit as much as I did.  This is exactly the kind of thing that the Banks are trying to get immunity from, in the negotiations with Attorneys General all across the country, and from the U.S. Treasury and Justice Departments.  Judge Blackmon's opinion demonstrates just how stupid it would be for the A.G.'s, Tres., and Justice to do so; it's just common sense that these banks need to be held accountable, and the law provides a means to do so, if only they will let it. 

2:39 PM PT: Once again, thanks to all.  Time to go, so won't be responding to any more comments. 

Originally posted to Jbearlaw on Tue Nov 15, 2011

Also republished by ClassWarfare Newsletter: WallStreet VS Working Class Global Occupy movement.

Technorati Tags: U.S. Bank,Dennis Blackmon,Georgia,Mortgage Fraud,The Economy,Current Events,An American Gothic

Bank Of America Makes Millions Charging Fees To Withdraw Unemployment Benefits

by Marie Diamond

Published on Monday, November 14, 2011 by ThinkProgress

Late last month, a national backlash forced Bank of America to abandon its plan to charge customers $5 a month to use their debit cards. But Huffington Post reports that the corporation has quietly been mining other sources of fees, preying on its most vulnerable customers to rake in millions in revenue:

  Shawana Busby does not seem like the sort of customer who would be at the center of a major bank’s business plan. Out of work for much of the last three years, she depends upon a $264-a-week unemployment check from the state of South Carolina. But the state has contracted with Bank of America to administer its unemployment benefits, and Busby has frequently found herself incurring bank fees to get her money.

To withdraw her benefits, Busby, 33, uses a Bank of America prepaid debit card on which the state deposits her funds…Busby visits the ATMs in her area and begrudgingly accepts the fees, which reach as high as five dollars per transaction. She estimates that she has paid at least $350 in fees to tap her unemployment benefits. [...]

In short, the same banks whose speculation delivered a financial crisis that has destroyed millions of jobs have figured out how to turn widespread unemployment into a profit center: The larger the number of people who are out of work and dependent upon the state for sustenance, the greater the potential gains through administering their benefits.

Millions of jobless Americans like Busby have little choice but to rely on the bank’s prepaid debit cards to collect their monthly benefits. Forty-one states have contracted with Bank of America, Wells Fargo, JP Morgan Chase, and other banks to provide access to public benefits, allowing them to collect unlimited fees, both from the unemployed and state governments. South Carolina, for instance, pays Bank of America a fee for each transfer it facilitates on a debit card, and for handling direct deposit of unemployment benefits.

Families who are living hand-to-mouth are outraged to discover that banks worth trillions of dollars are taking such a big cut of their benefits, when they depend on every penny. The New York Times reports today that banks have been quietly raising fees on everything from replacing lost cards to monthly maintenance. BofA customers can be charged $1.50 for speaking to a customer service operator more than once a month, $1.50 for using an “out-of-network” ATM, and $0.50 for entering the wrong PIN number too many times.

Bryce Covert at New Deal 2.0 reported earlier this month that, “big banks are making a tidy profit by acting as middlemen for what should be publicly provided services.” U.S. Bancorp made $357 million in revenue from its unemployment benefit card division — more than one-fourth of its total revenue. Meanwhile JP Morgan “made $5.47 billion in net revenue for most of last year in the division that handles food stamp cards.”

Fed up with big banks’ exorbitant and never-ending fees, customers have been flocking to credit unions. One survey found that credit unions gained at least 650,000 new customers since September 29, the day Bank of America announced its debit card fee.

© 2005-2011 Center for American Progress Action Fund

    Also republished to Commondreams.org

Technorati Tags: BoA,Bank Of America,Unemployment Benefits,Bank Fees,Credit Unions,Wells Fargo,JP Morgan Chase,Current Events,An American Gothic,1%