Skip to main content

View Diary: HIDDEN SECRETS: Countrywide, Bank of America & The US Patent Office (43 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I made it clear in the article (4+ / 0-)

    1.  The names of the quants who did the bidding for the TBTFs are included in the information.

    I would find them to be interesting witnesses to ask questions like:  Who hired them?  For what?  What were the parameters of the patent/project?  Was the project/patent designed to interconnect with another project/patent?  If so, which one?  Did you collaborate with other Patent holders?  

    I believe a good Prosecutor could create a very long list of questions to ask.  I just winged (or is it wung) the above questions.

    2.  The details of how the internal systems work are in the patents fo the TBTFs.

    Have you never wondered how a mortgage could change hands a few times in one day?

    There was obviously a lot of electronic collusion.

    But fear not.  I doubt there are those who will dig.  

    It's difficult to be happy knowing so many suffer. We must unite.

    by War on Error on Wed Feb 06, 2013 at 06:21:05 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  I don't really disagree with you but how are you (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      War on Error

      going to get to the point where someone is allowed to ask those questions?  There can't be a fishing expedition. Yes a lot of electronic actions and not to be a smart ass, but so what?  Is there anything more than just patents being assigned?  Which seems to happen a lot and may not be a big deal.  You might have something here but I'm not smart enough to imagine what it could be. Good luck.

      Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

      by thestructureguy on Wed Feb 06, 2013 at 07:06:47 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Law suits are in the works. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        War on Error, semiot

        Civil suits are different from criminal suits in that the entity charged with a tort or malfeasance can be forced to respond to interrogatories. If plaintiff's attorneys know the right questions to ask, the financial entities they are suing can be forced to reveal what they knew, when they knew it and what they did with the information. If they acquired patents to information processing systems that would enable them to make good financial predictions and didn't use them, or ignored the information produced, then they can be found willfully negligent and guilty of a tort (having done someone wrong).

        The the civil law is only about property and money, defendants can be forced to provide evidence against themselves, if a judge finds at the outset that the complaint is reasonable. Indeed, in a civil suit, if the defendant does not answer the charge and just ignores it, the judgement goes to the plaintiff automatically. That's why in civil cases, the defendants always deny the accusation. Otherwise, they've lost before the case is begun.

        We organize governments to deliver services and prevent abuse.

        by hannah on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 02:37:43 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  As Spitzer told Rachel Maddow the other night, (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      War on Error, LilithGardener

      being wrong is one thing, lying is another. If the banks had all these analytical tools at hand, then they can't argue they were simply guessing wrong. Knowledge is a necessary element in fraud.

      BUT, let me suggest a slight emendation. It wasn't a matter of the banksters relying on being bailed out because they are too big to fail; rather, they planned to fail, regardless of whether they would get bailed out because failure is a safer bet than success.
      If the driving interest in an enterprise is repeat custom from a captive market to generate a reliable stream of profits, then the logical result is products that fail. Failure is the key to longevity, regardless of whether it's widgets or investment vehicles that are being produced. Success is terminal. Something that never wears out, never needs to be replaced and market saturation rears its head.

      The real estate mortgage bubble was designed to fail. Dealing with the collapse would generate revenue from fees for years, if not decades. And not just for the banksters. Assessors, lawyers, surveyors, brokers, agents, appraisers, insurers, engineers and politicians would be kept busy straightening out the mess. It's like the aftermath of a hurricane or tornado, but better because planned. And most of the damage is on paper. A man-made disaster in the digital environment is definitely better than mother nature's revenge -- unless it leads us to ignore what mother nature might have in store.
      Using all those dollars tied up in the real estate bubble as an excuse not to fund infra-structure, health care, healthful nutrition and education, etc. is what's bad. And that's not the banks' fault. Congress is tasked with managing the currency. Deprivation and rationing are not managing when, in fact, the substance is in infinite supply.

      We organize governments to deliver services and prevent abuse.

      by hannah on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 02:28:51 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  As always, brilliant Hannah (0+ / 0-)

        how about Class action suits against each member of Congress that refused to stop the housing heist.  Against DOJ, AGs in every State etcetera etcetera.

        I, a lowly citizen, reported the MERS stench back in the fall of 2008.  I couldn't find any MERS patents, btw.  Darn!

        It's difficult to be happy knowing so many suffer. We must unite.

        by War on Error on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 03:09:29 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  The wheels of justice gring slowly. (0+ / 0-)

          I reported lot flipping in the early eighties. An investigator came to my house and took away the data from the deed records. I never heard anything back until some banker, many years later, asked me at some community function how come I had lodged a complaint against the predecessor Savings and Loan. I told him because I thought it unfair that speculators could get money, but homeowners who'd lived in certain neighborhoods for generations couldn't get loans to bring their houses up to code so they could qualify for homeowner's insurance. That was at a time when defaults on home mortgages were at less than one half of one percent. The lending practices were blatantly discriminatory and community development programs were designed to remove home owners and make inner-city land available for commercial uses. it was a scam which the CRA was designed to address, but it didn't work. ACORN suing one bank at a time to make them open their books to inspection was a hopeless enterprise. Obama knew that. That's why ACORN was allowed to expire after Dodd/Frank passed. I learned that lesson when I tried to use CRA in 1979.

          We organize governments to deliver services and prevent abuse.

          by hannah on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 06:23:44 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site