YAY! Apparently I hit a nerve. Lots of flack coming my way!

There is an old saying that when you start getting lots of flack, you know you are close to the target. It is confirmation. Lately the old attacks on me have been renewed with vigor!

In all cases involving false claims of securitization of debt, the claims are  totally false with no redeeming explanation.

Trying to kill the messenger will not kill the message. Everyone knows they were screwed by the investment banks. I only explain how it was done.

I have been saying the same thing for 14 years but I keep changing the way I say it so that people will understand that no loan has been securitized. No “securitized” debt has been purchased and any “Successor” to MERS or anyone else is a successor to nothing. The debt was eliminated by the securitization process used by the investment bank.

There is not a single person, company or business entity that has any books and/or records that shows or reports any ownership of any debt, note or mortgage of any homeowner. Foreclosures are a pure profit scheme. No part of foreclosure proceeds go to anyone who has been harmed by “nonpayment” from a homeowner.

So addressing the current attacks from recent days:

1. Attached is my resume for the attacks claiming I am a “so-called expert.” I am an expert with direct, personal and detailed knowledge of investment banking particularly as it relates to layering of securities elements of tangible and intangible assets. RESUME NFG 2020 version
2. As for being a “so-called lawyer” I am a member of the Florida and Federal Bar in good standing. Look it up at https://www.floridabar.org/directories/find-mbr/
3. I have repeatedly won cases for homeowners as sole attorney, co-counsel, consulting counsel and expert witness and never been contradicted by any sworn statement of anyone, much less someone with knowledge of the false claims of securitization of debt. Nobody with knowledge has ever written an article contradicting me. But it is true that some judges have expressed their displeasure with me — but not the ones who wrote lengthy opinions and factual conclusions in which they entered final  judgment exactly as I asked. 
4. As for having theories and not evidence, I propose not theories but methods that have proven effective in most cases where my instructions have been followed. So for example, it is axiomatic that no homeowner has the evidence to prove that the claim is scam precisely because it was concealed. But you can create admissible evidence. By asking the right discovery questions and enforcing discovery to the point where you get an order compelling answers and responses — and then asking for and getting sanctions when they still don’t respond — you have an inference that completely ruins their case that is based upon legal presumption arising from what appears to be facially valid documents (but which we all know are fabricated). That new inference IS evidence and it is precisely why many homeowners win when they persist.
5. As a blogger I am in the company of anyone who wants to call themselves an expert. I can’t help it if I really am.

Posted in Uncategorized |