He's Baack ... and spot on

[don]

from the TBTF bunker....

[tsetsefly]

Re: He's Baack ... and spot on

Is it true? I found it in the comments section:

Obama did not veto-he only failed to sign ...and a bill left unsigned for ten days while congress is officially still in session, AUTOMATICALLY becomes law.
Has Lord Harry left Washington yet?
Is BHO the brilliant constitutional scholar somehow not aware of this technicality?
If he"s against the bill, why not officially and permenantly kill it by going on record with a veto?

[Spartacus]

Re: He's Baack ... and spot on

That is FRIGHTENING, truly disgusting.

The banks knew long ago they were violating the law.

They had enough lead time that they were able to plan out a strategy to

donate money
influence legislators
write language into legislation to LEGALIZE their crimes before it even became well known they were criminals

And they almost got away with it.

UN - BE - LEE - VABLE

[tsetsefly]

Re: He's Baack ... and spot on

That is FRIGHTENING, truly disgusting.

The banks knew long ago they were violating the law.

They had enough lead time that they were able to plan out a strategy to

donate money
influence legislators
write language into legislation to LEGALIZE their crimes before it even became well known they were criminals

And they almost got away with it.

UN - BE - LEE - VABLE

Not really, its happened with many different bills. Go read how the bill to create the Federal Reserve was created...

[don]

Re: He's Baack ... and spot on

It could happen, we should know soon.

[bagginz]

Re: He's Baack ... and spot on

LOL!!!!

Spot on indeed. I've seen a few of those but that is the funniest so far.

cheers,
bagginz

[don]

Re: He's Baack ... and spot on

This is from Zero Hedge, so evaluate accordingly....


Perhaps the ruling Fed dictators can just go for a trifecta on November 3, and in addition to determining who wins the mid-term elections and announcing QE2, they can formalize TARP 2 as well. The reason is that starting tomorrow, 36 attorney's general are expect to launch a joint probe into "charges some banks used fraudulent paperwork to kick struggling borrowers out of their homes." Which of course means that Dick Bove is about to start appearing on CNBC every 10 minutes, providing instanalysis how banks have gone from overcapitalized to non-capitalized in the span of a weekend, under very "mysterious" circumstances. More from Reuters: "The source, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the deadline for attorneys general to sign on to the investigation effort led by Iowa's Tom Miller was at the end of the day Monday, so a formal announcement could be made Tuesday." Whether or not that call will also include demands for a moratorium remains to be seen.
There's more:

At least half a dozen attorneys general have already announced individual investigations into the foreclosure mess.

The total number of attorneys general calling for an investigation is not precisely known but it is expected to be at least three dozen and possibly more.

At this stage, the joint effort is not expected to include a call for a moratorium, the source said, though some attorneys general have already done so in their individual states.

Many, including Miller, are running for re-election or election to other offices.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said last week the Justice Department is looking into the widespread reports of bogus paperwork. It is not clear if the matter is under the jurisdiction of the states or the federal government but federal officials are looking into the matter, the source said.

President Barack Obama, however, opposes a national foreclosure moratorium, though he wants a quick resolution to any foreclosures that might have questionable paperwork, top White House adviser David Axelrod signaled on Sunday.

"I'm not sure about a national moratorium," Axelrod told CBS television. "Our hope is that this moves rapidly and that this gets unwound very, very quickly."

Banks are expected to take over a record 1.2 million homes this year, up from about 1 million last year and just 100,000 as recently as 2005, real estate data company RealtyTrac Inc. said last month.

There are many question marks around what will happen as a result of ForeclosureGate. One thing is certain: injecting fresh trillions of liquidity into a market, in which deleveraging courtesy of an immiennt plunge in home prices as prospective homebuyers decide to step away from the plate in a scandal in which nobody knows just who the titleowner is, will bring such waves of volatility to an already jittery market, that only the biggest and baddest will survive. As always, we recommend that everyone else quietly step aside and let the big boys cannibalize each other's income statement. After all, everyone already knows theit balance sheets are pure magic.

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/thr...signing-monday

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: He's Baack ... and spot on

Is it true? I found it in the comments section:

Obama did not veto-he only failed to sign ...and a bill left unsigned for ten days while congress is officially still in session, AUTOMATICALLY becomes law.

That concern is apparently misguided. HR 3808 is vetoed.

On October 7, 2010, the White House announced:

Today, the White House announced that President Obama will not sign H.R. 3808, the Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act of 2010, and will return the bill to the House of Representatives.

(Emphasis mine)

The site BusinessInsider provides us (via a quote from Fox News) with the relevant Constitutional language:

Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution requires the president to sign every bill to make it law. If the president opposes the legislation, the Constitution says "he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated."

But that same portion of the Constitution indicates that "any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same Shall be Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be Law."

As explained at FireDogLake:

But there’s other language in this statement that’s important. Pfeiffer says that the White House will “not sign” and “return the bill to the House of Representatives.” That’s crucial.

The White House itself confirms this veto, with an update on October 8, 2010:

To leave no doubt that the bill is being vetoed, in addition to withholding my signature, I am returning H.R. 3808 to the Clerk of the House of Representatives, along with this Memorandum of Disapproval.

HR 3808 was vetoed - she's dead Captain.

[Spartacus]

Re: He's Baack ... and spot on

As I understood it the "Creature from Jekyll Island" stuff was last minute but it was not done to cover up already-committed, known CRIMES.

Stuff for which people could be jailed (as Chris Whalen called for in his kingworldnews interview).

Not really, its happened with many different bills. Go read how the bill to create the Federal Reserve was created...

[don]

Re: He's Baack ... and spot on

It could happen, we should know soon.

Obama Clarifies Pocket Veto Of Controversial Bill Related To Foreclosures

First Posted: 10- 9-10 11:35 AM | Updated: 10- 9-10 03:07 PM

The White House issued a statement Friday clarifying President Obama's "pocket veto" of legislation that consumer advocates worried would have made it more difficult for homeowners to fight fraudulent foreclosures.

Some have been skeptical that a pocket veto, which allows the president to kill legislation simply by not signing it when Congress is not in session, was available because the Senate has, in fact, been holding pro-forma sessions.

So instead of just not signing the bill, Obama is also sending it back to the House, making it a "protective return" veto.

"To leave no doubt that the bill is being vetoed," said Obama in a statement, "in addition to withholding my signature, I am returning H.R. 3808 to the Clerk of the House of Representatives, along with this Memorandum of Disapproval."

H.R. 3808, the Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act, passed the Senate with no public debate on Sept. 27 after Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and ranking member Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) discharged it from the committee. The bill would require courts to recognize out-of-state notarizations and electronic notarizations. It had been passed by the House three times since 2007 but died quietly in the committee the first two times. It took everybody by surprise when it passed this time.

Many consumer advocates considered the timing suspicious, as bogus notarizations of fraudulent paperwork are at the heart of a growing scandal that has halted banks' foreclosures across the country. Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner told HuffPost it almost seemed as if the bill was intended to serve as a "trap door" for banks to escape the crisis. ()

Leahy's office explained that they moved the bill because of lobbying by the National Notary Association, which was effective because of Leahy's apparent soft spot for Notaries Public. In August, Leahy spoke at an association event honoring Calvin Coolidge, the 30th president of the United States, who happened to have been a Notary Public and who happened to have been from Vermont. ()

Michael Robinson, the director of the Notary Association, told HuffPost on Friday that he'd only been hoping for a swift review by the Judiciary Committee. "Quite honestly it took us by surprise at the end of September when we got word it had been introduced on the floor of the Senate and was headed to the White House."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/1..._n_756873.html