Replies to post #14417 on NSS ~ Counterfeiting Stock ~ MM Games Played

[SevenTenEleven]

Government mortgage fraud lawsuit against BofA headed to trial

Reuters – 6 hours ago

By Jonathan Stempel

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A U.S. government lawsuit accusing Bank of America Corp (BAC) of fraud in the sale of billions of dollars of toxic mortgage loans to Fannie Mae (FNMA) and Freddie Mac (FMCC) is on track to go to trial next month after a judge rejected the bank's bid to dismiss the case.

In an order made public on Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff in Manhattan said there were "genuine factual disputes" that justify letting the case continue against the second-largest U.S. bank.

The order clears the way for the case to proceed toward a scheduled September 23 jury trial. Only a few prominent cases tied to the financial crisis have ever gone to trial.

Rakoff also said he expects to decide before trial which theories he will allow the government to pursue. He said he would explain his reasons for Tuesday's order "in due course."

The U.S. Department of Justice sued Bank of America last October, joining a whistleblower lawsuit originally brought by former Countrywide Financial Corp executive Edward O'Donnell.

It alleged that Countrywide, acquired by Bank of America in July 2008, caused more than $1 billion of taxpayer losses by selling defective home loans to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the mortgage financiers seized by the government in September 2008.

The government said the loans went through a program called the "High Speed Swim Lane" - also known as "HSSL" and "Hustle" - that Countrywide devised in 2007 to speed up loan processing, even if it meant ignoring safeguards to help ensure that loans were sound and not tainted by fraud.

Bank of America, in court papers, countered that HSSL was a "legitimate and good-faith effort" to develop systems for making prime loans after the collapse of the subprime market.

A Bank of America spokesman, Lawrence Grayson, said after Rakoff issued his order, "This program ended before our purchase of Countrywide, as the government acknowledges. We believe there was no fraud."

At an August 13 hearing, Rakoff signaled that the government could take its case against Bank of America and former Countrywide executive Rebecca Mairone to a jury.

"The government's theory in part has always been that the defendants, through their own internal processes, covered up how defective the loans were and made them appear - even for the purposes of their ultimate internal figures, let alone what they represented to others - less defective than they were," Rakoff said. "That may be right, that may be wrong."

CHALLENGE FOR CEO MOYNIHAN

While Bank of America Chief Executive Brian Moynihan has made major strides in resolving litigation tied to the financial crisis, with the bank having already agreed to pay more than $45 billion, the lawsuit makes clear his work is far from done.

Indeed, the Charlotte, North Carolina-based lender was hit just three weeks ago with lawsuits by the Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission alleging fraud in an $850 million mortgage debt sale in early 2008.

In the case before Rakoff, Bank of America was sued under the federal False Claims Act and the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act (FIRREA), a 1989 federal law passed in the wake of that decade's savings-and-loan crisis.

FIRREA has a lower burden of proof and longer statute of limitations than other laws often used in financial fraud cases.

Earlier this month, Rakoff endorsed a broad interpretation of FIRREA. He has also taken a tough line in SEC cases against banks, initially rejecting a Bank of America settlement over Merrill, and rejecting a separate accord with Citigroup Inc (C.N) because that bank did not admit wrongdoing.

"Admitting it did something wrong could have preclusive effects in subsequent private civil litigation or parallel litigation involving the government, so the bank needs to tread carefully," David Freeman Engstrom, an associate professor at Stanford Law School, said in an interview about Bank of America. "Rolling the dice and going to trial may be more attractive."

The case is U.S. ex rel. O'Donnell v. Bank of America Corp et al, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 12-01422.

(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Additional reporting by Nate Raymond; Editing by Tim Dobbyn and John Wallace)

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/bank-america-fails-end-u-155251681.html

[DiamondFire]

fourkida_9pets: thanks for this article....a must read for every single person who trades stocks.

Shorting and actually wanting/making money off a company's stock going down doesnt make sense to me on any good human level....I have heard the arguments I dont care lol.....people will naturally sell high and buy low....we dont need a third ridiculous and fear mongering element in this often frail picture, who can feed off manipulation and confusion in the trading market and these financial Boards.


....its tough enough, and no one gets hurt with a rising pps - certainly not our American companies and the Average Working Joe investor......only ones hurt by a rising pps are the small percentage of those shorters out there, and some people who are mad that they missed the run.

Thanks again...have a good weekend!

[SevenTenEleven]

BCIT - From the BCIT board. Worth the read!

Iluvbbs Member Level Sunday, 03/16/14 08:19:10 PM
Re: agribusiness72 post# 155915
Post # of 155923

What?!?!

Tell me where I lost money?? You've what.....been here 3 seconds and you are going to presume you know my motives?? For your information as Scottrade was closing it's clients out of buying before the halt, I was still buying all they would sell to me at 5 cents.........and THAT'S about ALL you need to know. Ever heard of a BEAR trap?? Well you're witnessing one right before your eyes. Once you guys started to sell POST Lock you guys wrote your own epitaph and 1200 of us saw it.

Suffice it to say, you guys made a HUGE mistake in thinking you could take on TM and CH and win. These people are professionals at what they do. Forensic analysis....it is these type of people whom you always want on your side when you are in the "RIGHT".....just as I knew in the deepest recesses of my soul when I was buying every share I could lay my hands on at 5 cents.

You see, I firmly believe in KARMA. Personally speaking, I am sick of the corruption and in your face "stealing" that not only do some people think they will always be able to get away with but , in fact, "flaunt" the fact that they think they will never be convicted nor will there be consequences for their actions......sound familiar.

I just can't wait to see who gets the last laugh when we start trading again and folks realize what this is going to cost them to make 1200 shareholders "whole" again. The numbers are truly astonishing....there simply are not enough zeros on my old Sanyo calculator.

And believe me brother or sister, I, and a bunch of other shareholders, are already well on our way to being made "whole" again and it is only going to get more and more expensive as shareholders start taking brokerages to "trial" in "criminal" courts and then not only asking for monetary damages...... but for criminal liability to also be imposed on the convicted.

I was "stolen" from. A person sworn and licensed to protect my interests in the US Securities Markets effectively "stole" my money 8 years ago by withdrawing that money from my account and never did anything more than to put a I.O.U. back in. I did not think I was buying a I.O.U. but I thought I was purchasing hundreds of thousands of shares of a public company in validating certificate form.

Therefore, although it has taken 8 years to prove 1200 shareholders were "stolen" from, I also think that the brokerages from the top all the way down to local office brokers should be held "criminally" liable if they were involved in this in any way.

If some of the posters to this thread are one of those brokers who perpetuated this crime against any one of the 1200 shareholders here, I would think getting "your affairs" in order might be a wise thing to start doing as well as trying to cut some sort of deal with your district attorney. Do you have ANY idea of the magnitude of what punitive damages means to a case like this?? I guess not.

How angry I am about all this past 8 years of lies is minor compared to some of the other shareholders and then compound that anger with the fact that some of these share holders have a "net" worth 100's of times my own and not only can they AFFORD to go after the criminals......they ARE coming for those people who stole from them.

"Time is your Friend"
Thomas Megas

I so remember him telling us that back in 2005 and how right he was.....

Tic Toc

Next??

Peace to all

JMO/FWIW

KEEP GOING BCIT!!!!

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=98898022

[fourkids_9pets]

9/2006

But in case you guys didn't know, naked shorting a stock does not pay. A FTD is a terminal hang. You can't collect on it. There are big companies and powerful people out there who pay for the service of the naked shorts to destroy competitors or to gain control of them for the lowest possible price.

If it was easy to get proof of a naked short then it wouldn't be going on any more. It will only take one to expose them and they will have to do one of two things. Quit doing it or find a different way to do it.

The one thing I do know is that very often the shorts will get a hold of a large block of shares prior to a pump and dump. They will get as many shares as they can. After the pump they will dump a certain number depending on the success of the pump. They normally have a set amount they plan on making from the pump and will sell only the shares that represent that amount. then they take out a legal short for the remainder of the shares they possess so there is no problem later locating them. Then the naked shorting takes palce to tank the stock. They cover the legal short they took out at the top and the naked short shares just hang out there never covered. So getting shares offshore is critical to the process.

That's probably why I am the only one standing up and talking and the others just went away quietly.

Where are they? The biggest badest xxxxxxx are where now?

Afraid to talk? Changed alaises and started over for somebody else? Just walked away? Don't want to admit what they did or why?

That control of the $XX million is consistent with the way shorts operate. They usually trade the stock to make the money they pay their employees with. Like I stated before, a naked short share is never covered and therefore never able to collect on. You guys call it a "FTD" but we call it a "terminal hang". Meaning, it hangs out there for eternity. Groups pay the shorts to destory the companies. The shorts generally try a pump and dump to raise some extra funds then short all shares that can be found, covering at the bottom after naked shorting about 10 times the O/S. So they make money up front, then pump and dump, then short every legal share they can get their hands on before naked shorting it all the way to the basement and covering the legal short they have. Yes, they make money 3 times on one company at the expense of the company and those who do not understand how the sub penny market operates.

Why cover at all if they are going to end up going naked at the end?

When a short gets a job they want to make money too. The cost from the group hiring the short is nothing when compared to the money the shorts make when they destroy the comapnies. First there is an accumulation of shares. The shorts actually go long to start. Then they pump and dump those shares at the top. Then they instantly short the shares they sold. There are places around the world that will accept short sales on OTCBB and pinks. Then they naked short after taking their legal short position. The naked shares are never covered but the legal shares are covered at the bottom. The naked shares are used to ensure the price collapses so they can cover the legal shorts they have.

9/2006