During Attorney General Eric Holder’s testimony before the House Oversight Committee he made an interesting statement in response to a question from Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA).
|By: DSWright Friday May 24, 2013 2:20 pm|
|By: Cynthia Kouril Monday February 27, 2012 4:15 pm|
I just thought of something, if it is now acceptable to use forged and perjurious documents in foreclosure cases, DOCX, LPS and the other document mills have a huge new market available to them with homeowners. If forged and backdated allonges and assignments are OK, so too should be forged Satisfactions of Mortgage. Once the homeowner obtains a forged SAT from a document mill and files it with the county clerk, in theory, shouldn’t their foreclosure case be dismissed?
|By: Cynthia Kouril Tuesday January 31, 2012 3:20 pm|
Any deal that immunizes robosigning sabotages everything because the robosigning is the smoking gun. No one resorts to creating fabricated documents unless they are desperate and know they have no other hope of winning. It’s the illegal strategy equivalent of a Hail Mary Pass after time has run out. Had the robosigning never been exposed, they might have gotten away with winning through perjury, so the idea of immunizing it is preposterous.
|By: Michael W. Hudson Saturday May 14, 2011 1:59 pm|
Rarely do lies simply go out in the world and stand on their own. To have staying power, they require a complex network of ancillary lies and human enablers (sometimes knowing, sometime unwitting) who create a web of falsehood. These tangled webs can drain families’ bank accounts, get people killed, cause great institutions to fall, even help crash an economy.
|By: Jim White Friday October 22, 2010 8:00 am|
In leaving an early-morning voicemail for Professor Anita Hill, insisting that she apologize to Clarence Thomas for “what you did with my husband“, Ginni Thomas has re-ignited scrutiny into Thomas’ testimony at his confirmation hearing. That scrutiny does not leave the Supreme Court justice in a flattering light. In fact, yet another credible witness has come forward today, adding one more person relating a nearly identical description of Thomas’ outrageous behavior toward women (pdf) and his obsession with pornography. With multiple victims of Thomas’ inappropriate behavior coming forward, the question now must be asked why we allow a Supreme Court justice to remain on the bench when it is clear that he committed perjury in his confirmation hearing by categorically denying confirmed events.