Comments on: KABOOM | In re: VEAL – How Long Must This Keep Going On?

By: angry & NOT TAKIN IT!

angry & NOT TAKIN IT! — Tue, 14 Jun 2011 16:08:57 +0000

bozo returns

http://api.ning.com:80/files/4OhqJL3wNbSobbjj1tbpWyZh5bV9V52djkQbgVWPO5CfPOFejF68PZEknaV1B8ig-AaU-RJAMSNCLsUwO1UIzpNCsnRoQWBu/mushroomcloudbozoopt.jpg?width=540

By: Shelley A. Erickson

Shelley A. Erickson — Tue, 14 Jun 2011 04:25:17 +0000

This case is almost identical to my sons case. Two ROBO signers on it G. Hernandez and Leticia Quintana, and all else is pretty much the same story. He is in the ninth circuit appealant court. Hope the same happens. I dont understand why this hell is not stopped either. I do know I guess I just do not understand how they get a way with it without going to jail and a permanent moritorim is not established and the homes given to the homeowner.

By: l vent

l vent — Tue, 14 Jun 2011 01:56:51 +0000

In reply to Ron Moss. I sure hope Fannie and Freddie reap what they have sown. They are the cause of all of this. They are the 500 pound IMF OWNED gorilla in the room. Fannie and Freddie are FORECLOSUREGATE. They instituted and ORIGINATED THE MORTGAGE FRAUD FROM ORIGINATION TO FRAUDCLOSURE. THE BANKS WERE THEIR PERPS AND FANNIE AND FREDDIE WERE THE NEW WORLD ORDER PERPS. THEY WANT TO DESTROY OUR NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY. THIS IS A FOREIGN OWNED MULTINATIONAL TYRANNY THAT HAS HIJACKED AMERICA VIA TREASONISTS HIDING WITH IN OUR OWN COUNTRY AND GOVERNMENT POSING AS AMERICANS AND AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS THEY ARE NOT AND NEVER WERE.

By: chunga85

chunga85 — Mon, 13 Jun 2011 22:10:54 +0000

Don't look now but Magistrate Martin to the rescue! On the very same day he opines the exact opposite of Judge Haines! A Tale of Two Cases (Veal vs. Fryzel Opinions)

By: Readdocs

Readdocs — Mon, 13 Jun 2011 21:34:21 +0000

Things are beginning to blow up in their faces. Look at the Market Tickers website today.
Everything from B0A and MERS.

By: Pamela

Pamela — Mon, 13 Jun 2011 20:34:39 +0000

Wow I’m surprised anybody is paying attention to the UCC.I was told that this is a archaic form of law and that it was not usable in a court of law that judges didn’t know how to address these issues and because of that they would count it against you if you brought it up in court.They have actually been known to throw out cases if you bring this up.They are also this way in regards to common law.My question is:if this is sooo archaic then why has it always been this way?Why are these laws left on the books if they are viewed in this context by judges?Seems to me thier must be some amount of validity to them or they would have been taken off the books long ago.I’ve already addressed my specific case with the UCC .I am unclear as to whether I will be allowed to use it in court!!!This is also referred to as Administrative law.Anybody got any ideas on this?

By: Ron Moss

Ron Moss — Mon, 13 Jun 2011 20:22:22 +0000

This has become the national song, replacing Star Spangled Banner. Will I live long enough to reap what we have sown