This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Is HR3808 The Equivalent Of TARP 2 And Obama's "Get Out Of Bail" Gift Card For The High Frequency Signing Scandal?
Now that the High Frequency Signing (HFS, not to be confused with HFT) scandal is mainstream, and virtually every single foreclosure in the US in the past several years is under question, with the impact on mortgage servicers (who just happen to be the TBTF banks) could be just as dire as the fallout from the credit crunch, it appears that the get out of jail card for the banking syndicate has once again materialized, this time in the form of bill HR3808: Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act of 2009, sponsored by Republican representative Robert Aderholt. The bill, it turns out, has passed both congress and senate, and is now quietly awaiting for Obama's signature to be enacted into law. In summary, the bill requires all federal and state courts to recognize notarizations made in other states. That's the theoretical definition: the practical one - the legislation, if enacted, could protect bank and mortgage processors from liability for false or improperly prepared documents. In other words, with one simple signature Obama has the capacity to prevent tens of billions in damages to banks from legal fees, MBS deficiency claims, unwound sales, and to formally make what started this whole mess: Court Fraud perpetrated by banks, a legal act, and to finally trample over the constitution. Will Obama do it? Potentially - the banking lobby certainly has enough power over him and his superiors, the members of the FOMC. On the other hand, the populist revolt that will surely follow the enactment of such a law will certainly end any dreams of a second term, and potentially of a completed first one. The drama is now on: will Obama openly side on behalf of the bankers (without a "blame the republicans" fall back this time) or of the foreclosure "victims" (granted, the bulk of whom are deadbeat homeowners who should never have owned a home to begin with). We doubt a decision will be reached before the midterms, although quite a bit now hangs in the balance.
Reuters explains the situation:
A bill that homeowners advocates warn will make it more difficult to challenge improper foreclosure attempts by big mortgage processors is awaiting President Barack Obama's signature after it quietly zoomed through the Senate last week.
The bill, passed without public debate in a way that even surprised its main sponsor, Republican Representative Robert Aderholt, requires courts to accept as valid document notarizations made out of state, making it harder to challenge the authenticity of foreclosure and other legal documents.
The timing raised eyebrows, coming during a rising furor over improper affidavits and other filings in foreclosure actions by large mortgage processors such as GMAC, JPMorgan and Bank of America.
Questions about improper notarizations have figured prominently in challenges to the validity of these court documents, and led to widespread halts of foreclosure proceedings.
The legislation could protect bank and mortgage processors from liability for false or improperly prepared documents.
The White House said it is reviewing the legislation.
"It is troubling to me and curious that it passed so quietly," Thomas Cox, a Maine lawyer representing homeowners contesting foreclosures, told Reuters in an interview.
The timing certainly is odd. As readers will recall, the event that catalyzed it all occurred on September 16, giving the banking lobby sufficient time to flex its tentacles and get passage enacted quickly and quietly.
After languishing for months in the Senate Judiciary Committee, the bill passed the Senate with lightning speed and with hardly any public awareness of the bill's existence on September 27, the day before the Senate recessed for midterm election campaign.
The bill's approval involved invocation of a special procedure. Democratic Senator Robert Casey, shepherding last-minute legislation on behalf of the Senate leadership, had the bill taken away from the Senate Judiciary committee, which hadn't acted on it.
The full Senate then immediately passed the bill without debate, by unanimous consent.
It appears the chief culprit for the prompt and clinical Senate passage is one Patrick Leahy and one Jeff Sessions:
Senate staffers familiar with the judiciary committee's actions said the latest one passed by the House seemed destined for the same fate. But shortly before the Senate's recess, Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy pressed to have the bill rushed through the special procedure, after Leahy "constituents" called him and pressed for passage.
The staffers said they didn't know who these constituents were or if anyone representing the mortgage industry or other interests had pressed for the bill to go through.
These staffers said that, in an unusual display of bipartisanship, Senator Jeff Sessions, the committee's senior Republican, also helped to engineer the Senate's unanimous consent for the bill.
Neither Leahy's nor Session's offices responded to requests for comment Wednesday.
As for the bill sponsor, it appears his interest is rather innocuous compared to what may have been a solid 30 pieces of silver before the abovementioned two gentlemen:
The bill was first sponsored by Aderholt in 2006. He told Reuters in an interview that he proposed it because a court stenographer in his district had asked for it due to problems with getting courts in other states to accept depositions notarized in Alabama.
Aderholt said organizations of court stenographers supported the bill, but said he wasn't aware of any backing by banks or other business groups.
Aderholt said that he hadn't expected the Senate to pass the bill, and "we were surprised that it came through at the eleventh hour there."
Unfortunately even if the prompt Senatorial passage of the bill was the bankers' plan all along, they may have shot themselves in the foot by leaving it up to the president to determine if America is now a banker corporatocracy (what some may call a fascist regime), or still a place that believes in laws and regulations, as broken as they may be, in broad daylight. Our sense, is that this bill will not pass, although we have on many occasions in the past underestimated the degree of corruption in this country. On the other hand, should tens of millions of Americans have a crystallized image of one person who in their view will be "responsible" for their inability to pay their mortgage bill on time, then we just may be one step closer to the full societal collapse that many predict will accompany the end of Keynesianism.
The ball is now in the president's court.
h/t Jeff
»
- 25387 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Let me get this straight.
Dick Weed and a cohabiting coborrower Tina Slote buy a home and use someone else's money to pay for it. They both love their new property and are shagging all over every room. Then Dick discovers that Tina is really Geo Wash's lost brother Tim. Likely something very much like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQ_DZbVONaA
Game over, no longer need the house with over financed mortgage.
So, Dick and Tina/Tim get foreclosed upon. they got the money, no dispute about that. They are a year behind in payments, no dispute about that. Originating Bank O sold the loan to Bank B, which sold to Bank C, and sold to mortgage pool MBS. All acknowledge the various payments were made to purchase the mortgage and were received.
Now some whore attorneys are playing games and accusing the people who loaned the mooney with some sort of fraud because of possible improper notarizations. The documents speak for themselves and are executed by legitimate officials. The notarization means very little, unless possibly there is some ownership dispute between the different transferees. There is not such a dispute.
Never underestimate the ability of some attorneys to confound and avoid justice. Screwing some banks to earn a fee is just good sport. Getting Reuters to run some of the favorable propaganda is just icing on the cake.
Problem is that the banks can't reproduce any of the documents along the chain.
Frankly, if I violate one iota of a contract with the bank, my ass is grass, I think the banks should have to deal with the same bullshit the average american has to.
Problem is that the banks can't reproduce any of the documents along the chain.
That is patently incorrect. Otherwise, how could there be questions about notarizations?
Frankly, if I violate one iota of a contract with the bank, my ass is grass, I think the banks should have to deal with the same bullshit the average american has to.
Another bag of nonsense. Banks extend loans and change terms all the time. They really don't want your fish tank or tv, no matter how proud you are of them. I've taken four years to repay what was originally a two year loan, there was good reason and decent cash flow. I asked, they agreed. The bank was happy to still earn the interest.
Is this really the first time you've heard of this? It's much more complicated than you represent and it's been discussed over and over and over again in the comment forums for the past week.
Nonetheless, every time a new post goes up, a crowd rolls through that seems compelled to protest squatter's rights in vivid moral umbrage. There's nothing wrong with not knowing if it's genuine ignorance, but this routine is really getting old and I'm beginning to think that it's perversely deliberate in most cases.
Not necessarily yours, but you can understand my reluctance to take this up one more time? Look at the comments above yours here and see that the foreclosure mess is far more than a problem of notorization, either as you characterize it or otherwise.
Revisit the last five related posts from the past couple days. You'll be up to speed in no time . . . if you really want to be.
Nah. It's easier to carp about the "squatters" who are deadbeats, or Obama who hasn't done shit yet. Bitching on a website is a whole lot easier than actually doing anything.
And for more bang for your buck as an agent of disinformation/FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt.)
Augustus - read my re-post above. This is not the issue. No one thinks that those who are no paying their bills should live in their home indefinitely. The problem is much bigger than that - it has to do with the MBSs themselves being defectively formed and thereby casting doubt on their value, and the repercussions of that problem. Yes, deadbeat borrowers are successfully defending foreclosure suits, but it's because the plaintiff attempting to foreclose doesn't own the mortgage. I tend to agree upon reflection that this notarizations bill is a sideshow - what should disturb all of us about this bill is the ease and swiftness with which a bill banks have demanded be passed, in a misguided effort to cure their much bigger problem I have outlined, passed with nary a peep from our elected representatives. No debate, no open discussion, just Banking Bob Casey sneaking the bill out of Committee so it can be passed in the figurative dark of night. Who are their constituents? This tells you. And let's face it - enabling Robo-notaries to sign documents without any verification, and making it law that it cannot be challenged, removes a traditional obstacle to the judicial process, that of insuring the pleadings are accurate and the result of a thoughful person, taking the process serioulsy, and ensuring the accuracy of their contents. With this bill, find the most lax state, set up the foreclosure mill, and get back in business, since sloppy pleadings can be filed without absolutely no penalty for false statements other than the penalty of dismissal, with leave to try again.
Thanks for keeping our eye on the ball, Ned.
Of course, the MSM having shaped the issue as simple roto-signing (akin to octomom), getting rid of this little technical problem of electronic "notarization" would mean that the process could legally be automated ("hey, it was an unfortunate IT systems glitch" provides another degree of freedom in plausible deniability) and it would satisfy the MSM that there's no longer any issue to (pretend to) pursue.
The horror. The horror.
So long as financial institutions pose systemic risk, they get to do whatever the hell they want... simple as that. This is simply the derivative of that obvious problem. This is why they continue to attempt to consolidate... it's a desperate attempt to pose more and more systemic risk... and get more and more life support.
They are going to blow-up. It has to occur after the election. Barack has been spending too much time running around saving he saved the world financial system and he needs to ensure there are not enough votes in the House or Senate for impeachment proceedings. He wants to make the same deal Bush made with him for a peaceful transition of power. Probably the same deal Clinton made with Bush II and Bush I made with Clinton.
This explosive MBS device was first armed during the Clinton years, proliferated during the Bush years, and wil detonate during Obama's watch.
Did not think anything else could surprise me. This one drew one word out of my mouth, "FUUUUUCK!" I knew the socialist/fascist state was bad, and I knew that we had most likely passed China as the most corrupt nation on the planet (at least on the surface, we've always been neck and neck with them behind closed doors). This, this is simply throwing the remaining shards of the Constitution under the bus.
Fuck, that is some serious shit.
Obama will sign it.
Gasparino's recent book explains how Obama has always been in their pocket..... who knew! This will just put the talker in chief in a worse spot for 2012 when he signs this, if the MSM can't hide it well.
TPTB make trillions off of financing the government debt and spending programs so there's huge money in marxism except for those who work and pick the cotton.
Obama has committed a pre-crime. He must be punished.
"The drama is now on: will Obama openly side on behalf of the bankers (without a "blame the republicans" fall back this time) or of the foreclosure "victims" (granted, the bulk of whom are deadbeat homeowners who should never have owned a home to begin with)?"
Let's start a pool. I will go with Barry signing the bill. How did that make it through Congress? I am Jack's lack of surprise.
"I want to tell everyone I am not a market analyst....I am not a prophet I am not a seer I am not a revelator....I am not a prophet, I am not a liberal either....look at gold prices...dollar...oil...I am not a market analyst....the dollar will go down....gold, good....silver, good....."
I think this guys got it, and he isn't a market analyst!
my thoughts vol 1:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJcx_kmpjvo
Is that Bravo ?
Scrap metal, jobs, deeeeploma', ...... 7 dollar oil in 2012 ... Stop it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qoCq-KsmZU
Na. Bravo is a market analyst!
Pool is a good idea if there's anybody who thinks he won't sign it. Not so much I think.
Great video. That guy has a couple things that don't add up but he's thinking and he's figuring stuff out. He doesn't understand that you're not "playing with the houses money". You're playing with your money you just haven't been robbed as much by the house. You got robbed by the money changers but nothing lke what the house does.
i'm in -- bill gets the B.O. Nov 5th,
right before they "find" the falconer.
^-- Citation Needed. This fully assumes that the populace actually has a clue what's going on. Give them a few more shows of Dancing With The Stars and throw in an iPad and they will forget what we were even discussing.
Gold takes my short line at 1349. Not a big loss though. But Gold still not able to take on EURO or AUD. It is well below its all time highs in EURO. Quite clearly Gold is running real thin on speculative COMEX. Be very cautious of this rally with all stochastic showing divergence. It is one of those overstretched leg which can confound a lot of folks while bugs will lose all their senses as they will shout the end of the world is near.
All this rally means is the next leg down will be so fast it will blow 50% of bugs away. I am still of the opinion, that China will raise rates soon and Congress will most likely increase taxes on Precious metals holdings.
Watch EUR/JPY. It is waiting on its upper channel for a break to 120 / 125. Huge move coming. I spoke about EUR/GBP yesterday. Already takes out .8770. Am in from .8380 which was the 20DayH. EUR/USD has already run way too fast and very close to 1.4025 levels.
But my favourite is Silver. Takes out 23.3. Wow.
I'm not so sure. You really think gold is going down? The Central Banks are gold bugs, they won't sell.
Tonight: Alisdair Macleod -- says Eurozone will need $4 trillion more to prop up EU countries. & The global currency war is the planned coordination of each country monetizing their own respective debts to prevent each country from having to competitively hike bond rates to huge levels to attract foreign investors. Therefore, no end in sight, just at the beginnning. Very bullish long term gold, PMs. Price suppression of PM was real and not working anymore. Demand for physical is now strong and being felt.
Me: Maybe the EUR has not gone up, the others have just gone down for now (AUD still looks good long term as long as China keeps sucking up raw materials).
Comparing fiat to fiat is a hologram right now. Try channeling exchange medium vs price of gold (or oil) but run the program that factors in sovereign debt and the history channel.
.
Comparing fiat to fiat is a hologram right now. Try channeling exchange medium vs price of gold (or oil) but run the program that factors in sovereign debt and the history channel...
Nice algonaligies.
Like apples of gold in settings of silver
How are you at writing your name in the snow? :)
Sorry, but Gold & Silver are just minor skirmishes in the Totally global Currency war(s)!
You don't know dick about jane.
Flag as talking out your ass.
H.R. 3808, the Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act is not an international agreement and will not prevent foreigners from taking legal action to get their money back for being misled into buying MBS when there was no mortgage to back up the prospectus.
BernardLawrence "Bernie" Madoff told his investors that they would get great returns from his method of investing in the market. HE DID NOT INVEST IN THE MARKET.
SIMILARLY,
Salesmen at the banks etc. said that they would get great returns if they invested in mortgaged back securities. THEY DID NOT HAVE MORTGAGES IN THOSES SECURITIES.
IT WAS A SCAM.
EVERYONE OF THOSE SALESMEN SHOULD BE TREATED THE SAME WAY AS "Bernie" Madoff.
JAL
Good luck contesting a notary from Alaska in a Florida court. Plus is there an actual standard in place for electronic documents? Most states require wet ink signatures, this would allow them to produce an electronic record and get it accepted.
The gap between ZH news and the msm used to be 6 to 8 weeks. The gap is closing. ZH breaks and story and now it only takes 10 to 14 days for cnbs or hp to pick it up. I think the end will come when you read it on ZH @ 8pm and the next morning Matt Lauer has it as his lead story. We still have a little time to prepare, right?
One more step in destruction of the middle class ...the ultimate goal.
Shearing the middle class no longer satisfies the elite. They're in slaughter mode now.
This is why big government (euphemism for socialism) and central planning doesn't work. It's crony capitalism and one stop shopping for corruption.
I miss rule of law and localism which tends to level the playing field somewhat, so leave it the way it is and let the chips fall. Them's were the rules.
The banks should have used their clout a years ago to fight off taking the sub-prime liar's loans instead of forcing more engineered problems on taxpayers.
They should take their medicine, and if it's a suppository and doesn't taste good, it's their fault.
.
The Perfect Con. The bank that masquerades as a country.
http://thecivillibertarian.blogspot.com/
Suppose...well...suppose you read this:
http://www.freestatevoice.com.au/obama-tells-jews-no-more-by-texe-marrs
...and you might think all is not well at 1600 Pennsylvania ave.
That is a TOTAL disinformation piece!
lol jew tells jews no more, uh huh.
http://www.savethemales.ca/is_obama_literally_americas_fi.html
He'll hedge with a "prudential review" clause to be carried out at the direction of the fed...
What is bi-partsan, you scratch my back, I scratch yours.
It just shows that the system is so corrupt that it does not matter to which party you belong.
You are either a democrat or a republican owned by bankers lobby.
America is doomed with these rascals in charge along with that "Economic Hitler" Bernanke!
get those 3% bricks ready people. It's on. Oh the Humanity !
The farcist regime is turning to a fascist regime, only to be turned to the ashes regime.
Once again we will get the "shaft."
Will you please post the names of those who voted to pass this ASAP
Wait a minute.....! Did you say that they approved a war with Iraq or was it secret monitoring of U S citizens telephone calls or a Patriot or "Traitor's Act"...?
What did you say they approved..?
I see the words "unanimous consent" were used to describe passage of the bill. That means all 50 senators and all 435 representatives voted "YES" therefore all Republicans and all Democrats are complicit in the action. Surprised?
Most corporations have been incorporated in Delaware.
If Delaware passes a retro-active law allowing robo-signers without original documents, then based on this latest proposal the other states would need to respect it. This is an expansion on the mere notary issue, but I think this is the direction.
That way a state would be responsible and nobody in Washington would take the heat for siding with the bankers that a congress person recently said "frankly they own the place".
We have a major structural flaw in our economy that may be intentional or an oversight, I'll leave it for others to judge the intent of the bankers. Banks no longer have real deposits to loan out, the loan is literally created out of thin air. So everyone that states home "squatters" do not deserve a free house is reasonable, but on the other hand should ownership of real assets revert to a bank that did nothing but create a loan out of thin air?
Everyone is focused on the P&L of banks, but they are backstopped and we need to start asking important questions like who owns all the houses and stocks with the for profit private Fed buying up all assets with our money - the BALANCE SHEET side.
The banks won't let supply and demand work themselves out in the market to clear with a lower price, so more than likely if they kick out current residents the property will be empty for a long time (current inventory is well over a year). So I ask you, who has more of a claim on a property - one that put down a significant down payment and a number of payments, or an entity that created a loan out of the air with a key stroke? Think about it. Think about the fraud, write loans to everyone backed up by hard assets and then take ownership of those assets when the inevitable happened once liquidity was reduced in the economy.
As Charles Lindbergh said in 1913, from now on all deflation will be scientifically created. Congress voted that they can invest based on insider information, so they could all be buying leveraged SPY calls on fed briefings about POMO actions along with those connected to the fed. At least Obama gave us a tip last year when he said now would be a good time to invest for the long term - we need another indication now and we could all inflate together. The market is now the fed, I said it months ago that TA and fundamentals do not matter - the only thing that matters as Lindbergh pointed out is what will BB do.
Based on reality, record market cash outflows, economics/demographics, geopolitical risks, etc. logic says depression, biflation, less growth. Everything is over valued based on this back drop, yields are essentially zero or negative considering inflation, they are trying to save the banks by starving everyone else. So it becomes a question of what will BB do and what will the market makers that are trading against their own clients do? Why risk getting shanked by the market makers with their intended volatility that eats up stop losses like a game of centipede? We would need a signal to invest in this, or it is really just a casino. Is the market the mechanism they will use to transmit inflation? Should we all go long?
Were our founding fathers right about the international bankers and the warning that we would wake up tenants in the land that our forefathers conquered? The fed is a private bank owned by the largest banks, and these are owned by a handful of powerful families that also own many other corporate interests.
I find it humorous to hear so many on this blog stating how stupid and moronic BB and the fed are - could it be that they are not stupid but diabolical? Could it be that they are actually evil geniuses enacting a well thought out end game that results in transferring hard assets and product assets into their hands? They own a printing press that can not be audited. Understand that they do not need paper money, they OWN A PRINTING PRESS and would like to exchange that paper for real stuff.
Most of the people that call other people stupid are very poor at understanding individual interests, the players, etc. - typically the pot calling the kettle black. Perhaps we should ask what the goal is before we assess IQ level.
Excellent food for thought. Good to see you posting.
I see considerable paranoia in this thread. We must not repeat the Japanese mistake of the 1990s. That requires us to be tough. Where the borrower is in default the balance sheet of the bank must be marked to market. That is done by foreclosure and liquidation. Let's not bail out the deadbeats who took these loans. Do they deserve free houses courtesy of the states that require judicial foreclosure? Many states do not have such onerous requirements.
Spin.
Now that the banks are at risk of writing down the entire amount, now you want to mark it down to market instead of model? Mark it Zero Dude. I agree all properties should be marked to market but we won't know that until shadow inventory is included.
Let's not bail out the fraudulent bankers (again) who created NINJA loans out of thin air, then created MBS, sold it off in tranches, and never properly recorded the transactions. Why don't we let the owner of the title foreclose, so who owns the property? Only following the law will provide you with the answer.
Do bankers deserve free houses? The government could have been freed from the clutches of the bankers when they were bankrupt, before the bailout. In the case of Germany, the bankers were bailed out after threatening to crash the system and then those same bankers shorted the same debt taken on to bail them out (government bonds), which is why Merkel outlawed the naked derivative shorts. Think about that, think about how utterly classless that was.
This is a second chance to balance the power. Most people don't get it, but without the federal reserve providing private funding for budget deficits how would the government deficit spend? Do what we want or we won't issue debt, and don't think of issuing your own debt. This is another opportunity for political independence. The first revolution was fought against the bank of england that controlled the crown according to Benjamin Franklin, now do you understand why they don't like the founding fathers?
The real cause of the flash crash was pre-meditated to ensure true financial reform was not passed. Since that was not reported in the media, they clearly own it since this was the most obvious market manipulation on the day of a key vote. Apparently nobody wants to be the next Bob Woodward or Deep throat.
Wouldn't this be TARP 3? I always considered TALF to be 'TARP2'.
How long has this been on his desk? If he hasn't signed it yet he will wait until after the elections.
Ok, I have two questions but first I have to admit that I'm not as financially astute as most of you ZH posters so please bear with me.
1) What does this mean for all of the RMBS and CDO's out there? Does this mean that they won't blow up or still will because of the recent states, MA, NC, and others that have put a moratorium on foreclosures?
2) Has anyone read Denninger this morning about Ohio suing GMAC/Ally to the tune of $25k per robosigned forclosure? The reason I ask is this: isnt't GMAC still actually part of General Motors? And doesn't the government own ~60% of General Motors? So if this bill gets signed by O'Bummer, does it negate the fraudulent forclosures in the Ohio AG's suit and what impact does that have on, well um...... the Federal Governments responsibility to pay out the settlement if GMAC/Ally get punished with that judgement?
Once legislation reaches the President's desk, he only has 10 days to sign it or not. If congress is still in session, a bill becomes law after 10 days with or without the President's signature. If he does not like the bill, he can of course veto it. If congress is not in session, if he doesn't sign the bill within 10 days, it does not become law. This is known as a pocket veto.
If I read the Reuters article right, the bill passed the Senate on 9/27, and the Senate adjourned the next day. Today would be 10 days from the date the bill was passed, and with the Senate not in session, the bill does not become law unless Obama signs it today. He can't hold the bill until after the mid-terms
Good point. Per the "Last Action" section of:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-3808
it appears that it was 'presented' to the president on 9/30. I don't know how weekends are accounted for, but I would presume he has until Monday close of business to sign it, else it's a pocket veto.
Then get ready for a Friday evening signing, almost incomprehensible news factoid on Saturday, forgotten by Monday.
The legislation could protect bank and mortgage processors from liability for false or improperly prepared documents.
Yeah im not sure how this has any effect on the current slew of class action suits being brought forth. They are alleging so much more than robo-signing that this bill may get some folks out of a few perjury charges but doesnt change the fundamental body of contract law and UCC or any dismiss any allegations of fraud based on the facts. They knowingly gave forgeries and false affidavits and violated the basic tenets of a contract--full disclosure, valuable consideration, etc. Demand money on alleged debt that is alread extinguished and simply have no standing. Thats been the argument since the start. This is starting to look, like most everythign else they report about this like a distraction from the facts.
This doesnt mean much unless its twisted which is not beyond the scope of the imagination in this lawless fantasy world of banking. It's up to the courts.
bingo. thank you.
Updated FTSE weekly chart:
http://stockmarket618.wordpress.com
I'm surprised this wasn't law of the land decades ago.
Besides, if Jeff Sessions is onboard, I'm cool with it. He's one of the few good guys in Congress.
This is a great post. you got cheap handbags online .I like cheap designer handbags as well give you designer handbags outlet