What Banks, Governments and federal Law Firms Hope You Never Discover Mortgage Fraud Scam Exposed



a well this is a promissory note is there an agreement between mr. Smith the borrower and the defendant yes do you believe the agreement includes a lender and a bower borrower yes I'm a lender and mr. Smith is the borrower what do you believe the agreement is we have the borrower sign the note and we give the borrower a check does this Agreement show the words borrower lender loan interest credit or money within the agreement sure it does according to your knowledge who was to loan what to whom according to the written agreement the lender loan the borrower a $200,000 check the borrower got the money and the house has not repaid the money do you believe an ordinary person can use ordinary terms and understand this rate agreement yes okay do you believe you or your company legally owned the promissory note and have the right to enforce payment from the borrower absolutely we own it and legally have the right to collect the money does the $200,000 note have actual cash value of $200,000 actual cash value means the promissory note can be sold for $200,000 cash in the ordinary course of business yes so according to your understanding of the alleged agreement how much actual cash value must the bank loan to the borrower in order for the bank to legally fulfill the agreement and legally owned the promissory note $200,000 okay so according to your belief if the borrower signs the promissory note and the bank refuses to loan the borrower $200,000 actual cash value with the bank or the borrower own the promissory note well the borrower would own it if the bank did not loan the money the bank gave the borrower a check and that is how the borrower financed the purchase of the house okay do you believe that the borrower agreed to provide the bank with two hundred thousand dollars of actual cash value which was then used to fund the two hundred thousand dollar bank loan check back to the same borrower and then agreed to pay the bank back two hundred thousand dollars plus interest if the borrower provided the two hundred thousand to fund the check there was no money loaned by the bank so the bank cannot charge interest on money it never loaned okay so if this happened in your opinion would the bank legally own the promissory note and be able to force mr. Smith to pay the bank interest and principal payments well I'm not a lawyer so I cannot answer legal questions well n is it Bank policy that when a borrower receives a two hundred thousand dollar bank loan the bank receives two hundred thousand dollars actual cash value from the borrower that this gives value to a two hundred thousand dollar bank loan check and this check is returned to the borrower as a bank loan which the borrower must repay well I do not know the bookkeeping entries I'm asking you if this is the policy well I do not recall okay mr. banker do you believe the agreement between mr. Smith and the bank is that mr. Smith provides the bank with an actual cash value of $200,000 which is used to fund a $200,000 bank loan check back to himself which he isn't required to repay plus interest back to the same Bank I am NOT a lawyer did you not say earlier that an ordinary person can use ordinary terms and understand this written agreement yes okay okay mr. banker I'm going to hand you back the bank loan agreement this is Exhibit B is there anything in this agreement showing the borrower had knowledge or showing where the borrower gave the back authorization or permission for the bat to receive $200,000 actual cash value from him in the note and to use this to fund the $200,000 bank loan check which obligates him to give the bank back $200,000 plus interest no there is not okay so if the borrower provided the bank with actual cash value of $200,000 in the note which the bank used to fund the $200,000 check and returned the check back to the alleged borrower as a bank loan check in your opinion did the bank long $200,000 to the borrower in that case no so if a bank customer provides actual cash value of $200,000 to the bank and the bank returns $200,000 actual cash value back to the same customer is this a swap or exchange of 200,000 for 200,000 yes okay so did the agreement call for an exchange or swap of two hundred thousand dollars to be swapped out for another two hundred thousand dollars or did it call for a two hundred thousand dollar loan a two hundred thousand dollar loan good so is the bank to follow the Federal Reserve Bank policies and procedures when banks grant loans yes so what are the standard Bank bookkeeping entries for granting loans according to the Federal Reserve Bank policies and procedures and I'll hand you mouth the banker Fed publication entitled modern money mechanics labelled Exhibit C the promissory note is recorded as a bank asset and a new matching deposit or liability is created then we issue a check from the new deposit back to the borrower so that is it's not a swap or exchange of two hundred thousand dollars for $200,000 well this is the standard way we do it answer the question is it a swap or exchange of two hundred thousand actual tax value for two hundred thousand actual cash value if the note funded the check must they not both have equal value well I'm sorry I'm going to have to plead the fifth amendment on this okay tell me if the bank's deposits or liabilities increase do the bank's assets increase by an asset that has actual cash value yes is there any exception not that I know of so if the bank records a new deposit and records an asset on the banks books having actual cash value with the actual cash value always come from a custom of the back or an investor or a lender to the bank yes all right is it the bank policy to record the promissory note as a bang asset offset by a new liability yes it is does the promissory note have actual cash value equal to the amount of the bank loan check yes then does this bookkeeping entry prove that the borrower provided actual cash value to fund the bank loan check yes it does the bank president told us to do it this way all right how much actual cash value did the bank loan to obtain the promissory note nothing then how much actual cash value did the bank receive from the borrower $200,000 so then is it true you received $200,000 actual cash value from the borrower plus monthly payments and menu for closed and never invested one cent of legal tender or other depositors money to obtain the promissory note in the first place is it true that the borrower financed the whole transaction yes are you telling me the borrower agreed to give the back $200,000 actual cash value for free and that the banker returned the actual cash value back to the same person as a bank loan I was not there when the borrower agreed to the loan do the standard fed publications show the bank receives actual cash value from the borrower for free and that the bank returns it back to the borrower as a bank loan yes okay do you believe the bank does this without the borrower knowledge or written permission and authorization no to the best of your knowledge is there written permission or authorization for the bank to transfer $200,000 of actual cash value from the borrower to the bank and for the bank to keep it for free does this allow the bank to use this $200,000 actual cash value to fun the $200,000 bank loan check back to the same borrower forcing the borrower to pay the bank $200,000 plus interest yes then if the bank transferred $200,000 actual cash value from the bar or to the bank in this part of the transaction did the bank loan anything of value to the borrower is it the back policy to first transfer the actual cash value from the alleged borrower to the lender for the amount of the alleged loan yes it is does the bank pay RS tax on the actual cash value transfer from the legend' borrower to the bank as income no because the actual cash value transferred shows up like a loan from the borrower to the bank or a deposit which is the same thing so it's not taxable if a loan is forgiven is it taxable yes it is is it the bank policy to not return the actual cash value that they receive from the election borrower unless it is returned as a loan from the bank to the alleged borrower yes you never pay taxes on the actual cash value you receive from the alleged borrower and keep it as a banks property no new taxes paid when the lender receives the actual cash value from the alleged borrower does the bank claim that it then owns it and then it is a property of the lender without the bank loaning or risking one set of legal tender or other depositors money yes are you telling me the bank policy is that the bank owns the promissory note which is the actual cash value without loading one set of other depositors money or legal tender that the alleged borrower is the one who provided the funds deposited to fund the bank loan check and that the bank gets funds from the alleged borrower for free is the money then returned back to the same person as a loan which the alleged borrower repays when the bank never came up with any of its own money to obtain the prime sorry notes am i hearing this right I give you the equivalent of $200,000 you return the funds back to me and I have to repay you $200,000 plus interest do you think I'm stupid all the bank to doing this Congress allows this because Congress allow the banks to breach written agreements use false Abyss leading advertising act without written permission authorization and without the alleged borrower's knowledge to transfer actual cash value from the alleged borrower to the bank and then return it back as a loan the Borgata check in the health is it true the actual cash value that was used to fund the bank loan check came directly from the borrower and that the bank received the funds from the alleged bomber for free this is true is it the bank's policy to transfer actual cash value from the alleged borrower to the bank and then keep the funds as the bank's property which they then loan out as bank loans as if they actually owned owned it and loaned their own money yes was it the bank's intent to receive actual cash value from the borrower and return the value of the funds back to the borrower as a loan yes do you believe that it was a borrower's intent to fund his own bank loan check I was not there at the time and I cannot know what went through the borrower's mind so if a lender loan the borrower $10,000 and the borrower refused to repay the money do you believe the lender is damaged the balloon is not repaid the lender is damaged so is it the bank policy to take actual cash value from the borrower use it to fund the bank loan check and never return the actual cash value to the borrower the bank returns the funds was the actual cash value the bank received from the alleged borrower returned as a return of the money the bank took or was it returned as a bank loan to the borrower as a limb so how did the bank get the borrower's money for free that's how it works no more questions your honor all right so there you have it I think we've beaten that dead of course quite sufficiently and the fraud should now be crystal clear

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *