This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Bombshell of Foreclosure Fraud – Full Deposition of TAMMIE LOU KAPUSTA Law Office of David J Stern
HEY JUDGE COX, THIS IS WHAT THE MOTION TO QUASH IS PROTECTING!
~
The deposition of a Former Foreclosure Mill Attorney is below but...
First some background information...
By Kimberly Miller
Palm Beach Post Staff Writer
Palm Beach Post Staff Writer
A Palm Beach County judge ruled in favor
of law firm Shapiro & Fishman today, saying the state attorney
general has no power to subpoena or investigate law firms.
Judge Jack S. Cox quashed a subpoena
filed by the attorney general seeking information regarding Shapiro
& Fishman’s forelcosure-related practices.
Cox said it is the Florida Bar’s responsibility to investigate law firms, not the attorney general.
“It should also be observed,” Cox noted
in his ruling, “that the subpoena served by the attorney general is not
only overbroad, vague, inconsistent and unduly burdensome, but it is
both invasive and highly unlikely to reveal actionable conduct on the
part of the Shapiro firm.”
Really?
“overbroad, vague, inconsistent and unduly burdensome”
Has anyone received that same answer from the Foreclosure Mill on their request?
“Has no power to subpoena or investigate law firms.”
Why are they trying to protect these fraudsters? If they have done nothing wrong, then why not answer the requests?
How about we do it like this then.
Let’s play…
Florida Citizens v Shapiro & Fishman, Foreclosure Mills, et al.
You up for it? We are…
We have nothing left to lose…
Arent you a “deadbeat” yourself Mr Shapiro?
Gerald M. Shapiro of Shapiro & Fishman, CEO of LOGS Group, Faces Foreclosure
See
But aside from that how about we look at this from a post I did back in August…
LINK
– Shapiro & Fishman Accuses McCollum of Grandstanding, Files Motion
to Quash Subpoena in Palm Beach County Circuit Court
The firm’s response came Friday in a motion to quash a subpoena in Palm Beach County Circuit Court.
Why, do you ask…
Well, I am no expert on getting subpoenaed by the Attorney General, but I do have an inquisitive mind…
Is it because Shapiro and Fishmans’ attorney, Gerald Richman of Richman Greer, is located in Palm Beach County?
Or is it because Gerald Richman of Richman Greer is so tight with PBC Chief Judge Peter Blanc they decided that would be their best venue?
Quote from the LINK – Daily Business Review…
After a call was made to Sasser’s office
seeking comment, attorney Gerald Richman of Richman Greer in West Palm
Beach called the Review. He said he “heard”
about the article and wanted to speak in support of the judge on
behalf of the American Board of Trial Advocates, which he said normally
responds to what might be “unfair criticism of judges.”
When pressed about how he found out the Review was working on this article, he said Palm Beach Circuit Chief Judge Peter Blanc asked him to call in support of Sasser, who is prevented from commenting about pending cases and motions for recusal by judicial canon.
You can check out that full article here…
Never understood why they would send in
an attorney that represents a foreclosure mill to defend a Judge that
was being accused of favoring foreclosure mills, but who am I to
question that decision…
I guess Blanc and Richman must be pretty good friends for him to call on him like that…
Anyway, it might be nothing, but my tinfoil hat has been acting up lately so one never knows.
Well it looks like my tinfoil hat is still broken…
I dunno, just sayin…
Shapiro Fishman v State of Florida Attorney General - Order Granting Petition to Quash
NOW FOR TODAYS BOMBSHELL
Exclusive Bombshell of Foreclosure Fraud – Full Deposition of TAMMIE LOU KAPUSTA Law Office of David J Stern
~
“I personally did not do it because I refused to do it.”
“I wasn’t going to falsify a military document.”
“I was told that that’s fine, somebody else on your team will do it.”
~
This just in and it is unbelievable!
This is how they steal your home in Florida!
We
are neck deep in issues today so I do not have time to go through and
highlight everything, and there is a lot, but here are some snips…
FULL DEPOSITION BELOW.
TAKE THE TIME TO READ THIS IN ITS ENTIRETY
THIS SHOULD BE THE BOMBSHELL THAT STOPS IT ALL IN FLORIDA
MORE TO FOLLOW ON THIS
1 STATE OF FLORIDA
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
2 DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS
3 AG # L10-3-1145
4
5 IN RE:
6 INVESTIGATION OF LAW OFFICES
OF DAVID J. STERN, P.A.
7
8 ____________________________/
9
10
11
12 DEPOSITION OF TAMMIE LOU KAPUSTA
13
14
15
16 12:11 p.m. – 1:58 p.m.
September 22, 2010
17 Office of the Attorney General
110 Southeast 6th Street, 10th Floor
18 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301
1 P R O C E E D I N G S
2 – - -
3 Deposition taken before Kalandra Smith, Court
4 Reporter and Notary Public in and for the State of
5 Florida at Large, in the above cause.
6 – - -
7 THEREUPON:
8 TAMMIE LOU KAPUSTA
9 having been first duly sworn or affirmed, was examined
10 and testified as follows:
1 Q Let’s go to the assignments of mortgage. They
2 were prepared in-house?
3 A Yeah.
4 Q You’re smiling. You want to tell me about
5 them?
6 A Assignments were done sometimes after the
7 final judgement was entered.
8 Q Do you know why that is?
9 A Because that’s what we were directed to do
19 Q Can you tell me the execution of the
20 assignments, how it worked?
21 A Assignments were prepared again from the
22 casesum. All of our stuff comes from the casesum. They
23 would be stamped and signed by a notary or not. Per
24 floor we had a designated spot to place them and Cheryl
25 would come once a day and sign them.
22
1 Q Sign them as what?
2 A As –
3 Q For the bank?
4 A Correct.
5 Q Or for MERS or whoever it was for?
6 A Correct.
7 Q Would these notaries be there watching her as
8 she signed?
9 A No.
10 Q She would just sit there and sign stacks of
11 them?
12 A Correct. As far as notaries go in the firm I
13 don’t think any notary actually used their own notary
14 stamp. The team used them.
15 Q There were just stamps around?
16 A Yes.
17 Q And you actually saw that?
18 A I was part of that.
19 Q You did it? Are you a notary?
20 A No, I’m not.
21 Q Did you sign as a witness?
22 A I did not. I signed as a witness on one
23 document and after that I decided that I didn’t want to
24 put my name as a witness anymore.
25 Q Tell me about the stamps. You stamped them?
23
1 A Yeah, I had stamps. Each team had a notary on
2 them or notaries that I was aware of. Whether they were
3 or weren’t wasn’t –
4 Q You had stamps?
5 A Correct. We would stamp them and they would
6 get signed.
7 Q Stamp them in blanks?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Who would sign them?
10 A Other people on the team that could sign the
11 signature of the person or just a check on there or
12 whatever.
13 Q Was that common practice?
14 A Yes.
15 Q Was that standard practice?
16 A Pretty much.
17 Q What about the witnesses?
18 A Those would be signed by juniors who were –
19 Q Standing there?
20 A Here, sign this. It has to go to Cheryl, sign
21 it. Then it would go and sit at the desk where Cheryl
22 would sign everything.
23 Q Out of view of the notary and out of view of
24 the witnesses?
25 A Correct.
24
1 Q Do you know who implemented this procedure?
2 A Cheryl.
3 Q Cheryl did?
4 A Um-hum.
5 Q Did anybody else sign with the firm for the
6 banks?
7 A Yes.
8 Q Who was that?
9 A There were people that were responsible for
10 signing Cheryl’s name. Cheryl, Tammie Sweat, and Beth
11 Cerni. Those were the only three people that could sign
12 Cheryl’s name. If you ever look at assignments you’ll
13 see that they are not all the same.
14 MS. EDWARDS: What are the names again?
15 Cheryl, Tammie?
16 THE WITNESS: Tammie Sweat and Beth Cerni.
17 MS. EDWARDS: Could you spell that.
18 MS. CLARKSON: C-E-R-N-I.
19 BY MS. CLARKSON:
20 Q Did they practice Cheryl’s signature?
21 A I would assume so.
22 Q Did you ever see them?
23 A Not practicing but I’ve seen them sign it.
24 Q Did you see somebody sign Cheryl’s name?
25 A Yes.
25
1 Q That wasn’t Cheryl?
2 A Yes. All the time.
3 Q Did Cheryl know about this?
4 A Yes.
5 Q Was it at her direction?
6 A Yes.
16 Q Did anyone quit as far as you know due to the
17 practices?
18 A I’m sure but they wouldn’t come right out and
19 say I quit because of the practices. I know that people
20 had left because they were uncomfortable with the things
21 that they were being asked to do, as most of us were.
22 When it got really sticky there were a lot of us that
23 weren’t here.
24 Q What does really sticky mean?
25 A They wanted us to start changing the documents
33
1 and stuff and doing stuff that we weren’t supposed to be
2 doing as far as service.
3 Q What documents did they want you to change?
4 A Manpower documents. A lot of judges started
5 requiring, because of the Jane and John Doe issues,
6 required that you have a military search for all the
7 defendants. If you named a Jane and John Doe as an NKA
8 you had to pull a military search on them. Unless you
9 have somebody’s social security number technically you
10 can’t pull a military search supposedly.
11 The program that we used for the program that
12 we used, you could put in the main defendant’s social
13 security and John or Jane Doe’s name and it would give
14 us a military search saying that they were in the
15 military.
16 Q You would get their social security number
17 because the bank documents contained it?
18 A Correct. The lenders, the referrals had the
19 socials.
20 Q Did you put the social in on everybody to find
21 out their address for service?
22 A Not everybody. I personally did not do it
23 because I refused to do it. I wasn’t going to falsify a
24 military document. I was told that that’s fine,
25 somebody else on your team will do it.
1 Q What do you mean falsify a military document?
2 A Well, I’m using the main defendant’s social
3 security number on somebody else’s name, not his name.
4 John Doe and the main defendant was James, I was taking
5 James’ social security number and putting John Doe’s
6 name in there. I wasn’t but that’s what the practice
7 was. The judges started saying we’re not going to
8 consider service completed until –
9 Q There’s a miliary search?
10 A Correct.
11 Q So why wouldn’t they use the right social
12 security number for the right person?
13 A Because you don’t have a social for an NKA or
14 unknown tenant. They wouldn’t enter a final judgement
15 unless the military doc was there.
16 Q So you just used anybody’s?
17 A Correct.
9 A So what we had to do from that point, again
10 the affidavits were still split in two pages, at that
11 point we were supposed to be sending them back to the
12 banks to be signed now. The problem being that a lot of
13 times we wouldn’t get them back or executed in time for
14 the hearings. So we had what they called signature
15 pages that Tammie Sweat or someone else would have in
16 their possession. If we couldn’t get it back from the
17 bank executed in time we would just take a signature
18 page and put it on the affidavit.
19 Q What was on the signature page?
20 A The signature and notary from the bank.
21 Q Were these documents photocopied or were they
22 original documents?
23 A Some were photocopied.
24 Q How would you get that many from a bank
25 original? The bank supplied them to you.
42
1 A Well, what would happen would be like if I had
2 file A and that one didn’t go to hearing because there
3 was something wrong with it and file B was going to
4 hearing but it was the same bank, I would take the
5 signature page from A and give it to B.
6 Q Oh give it to another file?
7 A And just re-execute this file.
8 Q Okay. That was common practice?
9 A Yes, after Cheryl couldn’t sign.
10 Q Did Cheryl know?
11 A Yes.
12 Q Cheryl knew about all the practices because
13 she is the one who ran the office?
14 A She was the one who implemented them.
15 Q Were there any other activities or practices
16 over at David Stern’s firm that made you feel
17 uncomfortable or that you were unwilling to do?
18 A I don’t know how to answer that question.
19 It’s a loaded one.
20 Q Take your time.
21 A Yeah. Some of the things that were done there
22 just were not on the up and up.
23 Q Explain to me in as much detail as you can
24 what those things were.
25 A I don’t even know where to start with it.
Now that’s some BULLSHIT!
~
MUCH MORE IN THE DEPO BELOW…
~
4closureFraud.org
~
Full Deposition of Tammie Lou Kapusta Law Office of David J Stern
»
- advertisements -
Having trouble understanding why the AG wouldn't be allowed to go after a law firm but for arguments sake let's say it's procedural and Judge Jack S. is correct. The Florida Bar Association should have acted on this. Why are they sitting on their hands? Or is this another argument against self regulation?
So, when does the movie "Cheryl does Florida" hit the streets?
Fuck it! Where's John Grisham when you need him?
"Cheryl" is going to the Florida state pen.
This is pretty hilarious. I interned at David J Stern during the summer of my sophomore year at Columbia (1986). Total run of the mill ambulance chaser back then. David wore running shorts in the office 99% of the time (despite the fact I often picked up his dry cleaning). Looks like he moved up in the world since then! [I never considered a career in law.]
Start the disbarment hearings - there are going to be a lot of unemployed attorneys joining the ranks of the 99 weekers.
The question is whether attorneys will indeed be willing to go after their own. Very taboo within the bar to do so.
Thats why sharks very rarely attack each other - professional courtesy!
Everyone must pay their fair share, especially the people that have to pay for other people's mortgages.
Signed,
DJ Timmy G
Barrax O.
Dubya
Hankster
Judge Cox,
This is our favorite music:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lo5BBHtn4tM
Joker
Interesting post, amazing that they can keep doing this shit, LMAO
I have just read most of the deposition, and WOW. What a mess. I was really disgusted by the part about the "rocket docket", where a couple lawyers from the firm would take 500 files to a judge on Fridays, and any foreclosure that wasn't contested was signed off on. I'm thinking about squatting in a Fannie Mae foreclosure now. I wonder which will be cleaned up first, the gulf oil spill or the foreclosure disaster...
If the paperwork generated by the forclosure mess is shredded, it might be enough to soak up the oil from the gulf ... just thinking ;-)
talking about kickbacks,
anyone?
You just have to play golf with them.
rule rather than the exception - it smells doesn't it?
Depositions are a bitch, bitchez.
Listen, we can't let citizens get off on technicalities. The system would collapse. We are a nation of powerful institutions not citizens. Let's get a grip. Do you want to live in a powerful nation or do you want be let every hick tie up our great banks in knots over some little technicality. Remember, they are behind on their mortgages.
But it's OK to let the banks get away with a fraudulent Ponzi scheme forever, because they're TBTF, right?
Consider that the "money" loaned to the "deadbeat" homeowner was fraudulently created, out of thin air, in keeping with the fractional reserve scam.
Are we, the people, really obligated to repay these fraudsters?
I am so sick of the short sightedness of this argument. Yes people overbought and are behind, but they were led down that road, that doesn't make them innocent but it shouldn't leave them holding the entire damn bag either. And don't say people were stupid, when you sit and repeatedly watch everyone around you buy more than they can afford and sell it 2 years later for a $30K gain you will most likely weigh the empirical evidence and do likewise. Unless housing was being sold for less than half of what it was no one could afford to lay out the cash for a house straight up and NONE of these people expected to be unemployed for 2-3 years straight so they did not intentionally get behind. A business can easily default, reorganize and keep almost all of its assets for taking on too much debt, but a person must be kicked out of their home? This is not a black and white argument.
disclosure: I am NOT in foreclosure, I rent and always have.
Since when did "you bought it - you own it" - not apply? When the bill comes due? WTF. As crooked as the Banksters are - the bottom line is that if you can't afford the house - and can't sell it - then move out and turn in the keys - go BK...what else is there to do?? Just about any other alternative ends up as yet another social welfare program that somebody has to pay for. And I can guarantee it won't be the Banks in the end...
I'll enjoy the Banking and R/E industry squirming here as much as the next guy/gal but i'm not in favor of bailing out foreclosures.
No offense intended, still kicking, but you didn't answer that nimrod, rapier, quite correctly.
First, the lending services and banks wilfully and knowingly broke the laws, as they must produce the mortgage, proof of their ownership of said mortgage and proof of default on said mortgage.
Next, there have been any number of news articles the last few days of banks (JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, etc.) actually illegally and fraudulently foreclosing on houses which were owned outright, and some of them had been cash purchases with absolutely no bank involvemement of any kind!
Third, those involved in the foreclosing should have been rightfully sitting in jail by this point.
http://www.chinkinthearmor.net/
And please keep in mind, the housing foreclosures have nothing to do with the economic doldrums and meltdown.
That was brought about by the design and production of perhaps the first global financial virus the world has yet witnessed.
The peddling of securitized debt, those securitized financial instruments known as credit derivatives, heavily pushed by JP Morgan Chase, the Group of Thirty (group30.org), Goldman Sachs and the major Wall Street investment banks.
The incredible number of layers and layering of ultra-leveraging, allowing for layer upon layer of ultra-leveraged speculation, producing all those thieving psychos known as debt-financed billionaires is the principal cause and will be for quite some time.
When a bank or investment house issues securities and other financial instruments based upon securitized debt, another bank or firm purchases it marks it as an asset, then generates further debt-based instruments on the liability side, and this chain goes on and on and on, producing an extraordinary daisy chain of compounded risk to almost infinity.
Next, one has those credit default swaps truly compounding risk to infinity, for every time someone tries to back out their lousy deal obligations, they generate two new debt instruments, which generates four more counterparties, and this chain again expands in an exponential fashion.
When a link in the chain is altered, the entire sham-based construct is radically altered, and that is why is correctly referred as compounding risk to infinity (not the removal of risk as those sham meisters proclaim).
Christ, people... rapier's comment was sarcasm.
Read it again.
Note last line especially.
Sheesh.
Yep that's my fault, I apologize, I have just seen several people try to say the homeowners are at complete fault and it truly pisses me off, I think I skipped the last part of his post and went off, my apologies.
At least you owned your error. Look at the ones who didn't.
Seems to be a pervasive problem here of people not even reading articles but jumping right into the comments -- hoping to grab the top spot with some inane "bitchez" comment. All the junking is now a badge of honor.
Many people using the comments to post their pet peeve, and that usually some racist or political rant. With links to their favorite tin-foil hat websites.
This has to stop or I'll be outta here.
In my mind this is starting to get to the root of the issue of how and why this all happened. Too many people with too much money looking for somewhere to put it. Like it or not, that is what enabled the marketing of exotic investment products (credit derivatives,etc). Why did it happen now and not 30 years ago? Because of tax policy changes over the last 30 years that enabled so many people to accumulate so much money.
I'm sure this will not be a popular viewpoint here but instead of junking me please explain how I am wrong.
It goes much deeper than that, it has nothing to do with being allowed to accumulate your money because the government allowed you to by not taxing it. This is CD's territory but it all boils down to morality, when is it enough, why exactly does someone need more than 1 billion dollars? Sure you are entitled to it you earned it but morally that money should be willingly leaving your hands to do some good, people are selfish and greedy because most stopped believing in anything bigger than themselves, whether that be their fellow man, God, or some other diety. My key point is willingly given, no one should being taking it from you.
still kicking, I can't see which side you're defending, but let me put it like this:
The banks, through mortgage brokers and their own originators, sold shitty loans they knew would become non-performing within months. With the blessing of the ratings agencies - which they controlled - the put the mortgages into securities and had them rated AAA and sold them to anybody with enough money to invest in their "Golden Opportunities."
Then, when the shit started falling apart, they ran to the government, pointed a gun at them and threatened them with "Martial Law" (Hank Paulson) is the gov, i.e., taxpayers, didn't pony up $700 billion.
They took that money and paid themselves fat bonuses, went on lavish cruises and bought expensive properties for themselves. AND, they began foreclosing on properties which they didn't have title to.
So, let's add up how many ways these crooks are going to get paid: Fees n loans, fees on securities, money from TARP, foreclosures, and, to top it all off, they've managed to sink most of the country with real estate values 20-50% lower than they were 5-10 years ago.
If any homeowner with a mortgage that is underwater decides to simply stop paying, can you possibly blame them? The banks, the very ones holding their mortgage, committed massive fraud on the public, the government and the courts. They've already been paid over and over and above anything they've reasonably "earned." These a-holes should all be behind bars, but because they're rich and wear nice suits and pay off politicians and probably judges, they're allowed to walk free.
Nobody who took out a mortgage or a home equity loan from any of the biggest lenders or has the word MERS anywhere on their documents, from 2003-2008 should pay another nickel.
Yes, they should get the houses free and clear and the banks should eat the losses and the executives should be tried and imprisoned. Am I dreaming? No. I believe in justice and it's about to be served big-time in the good old USA.
If it isn't, we no longer have a union of independent states, a Republic, a country. It's freakin' over. Time to take to the streets.
I applaud the bloggers (I'm one of them) who have been on top of this issue and continue to publicize it. Without the effort from bloggers and webmasters the banksters would get away scot free. They have thus far, but that HAS TO CHANGE.
Rick I absolutely was not defending the banks, I agree the people should keep there houses it's either the banks get them or the people keep them and FUCK the banks so lesser evil is let the people keep them. What I was trying to say though is that I agree many people over bought what they could afford. In a true market the government would have told the banks to fuck off and that they could either forclose and take a house they couldn't sell or take a haircut and allow the person to renegotiate the terms of their loans and keep the house. The taxpayers never should have bailed out the banks.
We definitely needs a thumbs up thingy to click. Well said Rick!
"If any homeowner with a mortgage that is underwater decides to simply stop paying, can you possibly blame them? "
Actually, yes. I'm underwater on some investments...I can't just walk away...I can stick it out or sell at a loss. What's different here? The homeowner can go rent as an alternative. There needn't be any sympathy for any of these groups - the homeowners, the Banks, the R/E jerks, the lawyers. Because in the end they are all out to stick the losses to the taxpayer. That's the game in play. I'd rather shove a molotov up all their collective asses than pay for their stupidity and incompetence. Figuratively speaking, of course.
A man after my own heart. The Perfect Con occurs when you can pull it off and look like the victim.
http://thecivillibertarian.blogspot.com/?zx=5bbdd65ed0aa0799
I do love Ya Rick!!!!!
complexity is an easy way to hide the truth and to lie out of the truth. the more complex the less honest the investment.
http://covert2.wordpress.com
This gets cached somewhere and never goes away. Try thinking before you call for violence. If you actually do it your own words will follow you to your trial.
God please let me be on that jury. My job will be to convince 11 strangers to let him walk. It will occupy my every waking and sleeping moment.
What's the endgsme? Bankers get title to property and wait until the economy comes back? How so they make money in the meantime?
They don't make money, when title goes back. What's worse, is that the MBS market implodes as well. Which means the economy isn't coming back, not for a long time. And that, in a nutshell, is the entire endgame.
This is why Obama should've nationalized the Banks 2 years ago, like a lot of us have been saying. We'd be coming out of this mess by now, instead of starting to go into it.
2341 to 1
on glenn beck; nice work tyler
This is what happens, Larry. This is what happens when you f*** a stranger in the ass. THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS, LARRY!
What Larry goes back to Harvard?
"Is this your homework, Larry? Look, Larry. You're entering a world of pain, son..."
"We're going to cut your dick off, Larry."
This is a stalling tactic to keep the housing market from crashing completely...
awesome
I cannot follow your logic. Kicking people out of their houses won't help the housing market.
Really sorry for having to say that - but here it comes:
Told ya so...
I appreciate your vigor in trying to uncover the unmitigated corruption that has gripped our nation. But you will only be appreciated in hindsight. Don't think anything but bullets and blood will stop those fuckers.
I had a chat with a friend of mine last night - he's of course underwater over here in CA. After about five minutes I gave up, not because he was disagreeing or being unreasonable - he had no clue as to what's going on. Still thought he could sell his house for $30k less than he bought it for. 99% of the public has no idea what's going on. Hey gotta run - American Idle is doing reruns.
Americans are financially illiterate which is part of the big picture plan - read G Edward Griffin's, "Creature from Jekyll Island" - the banksters setup fancy, altruistic sounding foundations to control the education system in America - what we are dealing with is the result of that process: a bunch of financially ignorant sheep
Matching chrome bracelets and fitted with leg shackles? hmmm
hey thats me...look Ma ..i am famous!
Junior?
Is that you?
I am proud of you. Now do your mother a favor dear and take the clothes out of the washing machine and put them in the dryer for me. Thanks.
Time to come upstairs now dear. Dinner.
And don't forget to wash your hands. You've been playing with the interwebs.
Aw mom...I'm not done playing with all my imaginary.....err. virtual friends.
lol, never understood your icon until now. artful, to be sure!
It is amazing how the lawyers have been able to avoid the heat in this hole (pun intended) subprime disaster.
They designed the whole shadow banking architecture. Some quant dreamt it up, put lawyers had to paper it. Now we see that the papers were... well simply a pile of papers in practice.
They manufactured reams and reams of useless boiler plate that no one read.
They helped conceive of and design MERS.
They closed millions of crappy mortgage financings and allowed their clients to play fast and loose with the record keeping and real estate recording process.
Now they are committing foreclosure fraud, while the class action litigation contingent is getting all rev'd up.
Meanwhile the Lehman bankruptcy alone is generating gazillions of legal fees for the exalted profession.
I could go on, but you get the idea.
It is amazing how the lawyers have been able to avoid the heat in this hole (pun intended) subprime disaster.
What about the lawyers that approved illegal waterboarding? They are walking free, so it seems if you are a lawyer you can virtually get away with theft, murder, whatever one wishes. You have a problem with that, punk? Well, do you?