Predatory Mortgages Predatory Foreclosures
THE MONEY LAUNDRY
SEE The Dirty Dirty Illegal Mortgages and Money Laundering of The Deutsche Bank / JP Morgan Subprime Predatory MAFIA
JUST HOW UNDERHANDED IS DEUTSCHE BANK , Lets See
Several Internal Bank Auditors claimed VERY UNDERHANDED ( Tammy McFadden )
dozens of politically exposed clients
of the private-banking division shielded from scrutiny
Former Deutsche Bank co-CEO included in cum ex probe …
Deutsche Bank’s Running Tab of Investigations
Money Laundering Defined … JBW
To take money that is from illegal sources and use and commingle it with a legal and legitimate enterprise so as to clean the money to appear that proceeds are from a valid enterprise. RICO The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act of 1970. ADVANCE v. LEGAL TENDER Valid and acceptable money; legal tender.
Real Estate and Money Laundering 101
The DIRTY MONEY is directly Traceable to the PREDATORY MORTGAGES …. AKA laundering Money through Real Estate Mortgages WORLDWIDE. JBW
The Great American Laundromat
Real Estate and Money Laundering 101
-
Deutsche Bank Accused Of Massive Mortgage Fraud By U.S …
-
Deutsche Bank agrees to $7.2b settlement over mortgage …
-
U.S. sues Deutsche Bank, alleging mortgage fraud – The …
-
Shocker: U.S. sues former Deutsche Bank head subprime …
-
Feds sue Deutsche Bank, alleging mortgage fraud – The Salt …
-
Massive new fraud coverup: How banks are pillaging homes …
-
Deutsche Bank Agrees to Pay $7.2 Billion for Misleading …
-
Deutsche Bank’s $10-Billion Scandal | The New Yorker
Head of Anti-Money Laundering Agency Tells Senate Hearing He Hasn’t Read the Times Bombshell on Trump, Kushner and Deutsche Bank
By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: May 22, 2019 ~
Reading the New York Times is apparently now seen as being disloyal to the President of the United States if you’re a Federal employee. Just holding the newspaper in one’s hands might be enough to become an early pensioner in the Trump administration. Yesterday it became crystal clear at a Senate Banking hearing just how terrified people are in the Federal government of getting on the wrong side of the President and ending up being publicly bashed on his Twitter page.
The Senate Banking hearing on Tuesday was called to get answers from the witness panel on how to combat money laundering in the United States by shell companies that keep their real owners a secret. But it quickly became a hearing also about the bombshell report from the New York Times on Sunday. That article, by David Enrich, describes how a Deutsche Bank whistleblower, Tammy McFadden, and four of her colleagues had their efforts blocked by the bank when they tried to file suspicious activity reports on bank accounts affiliated with Jared Kushner and Donald Trump. Those reports should have gone to the Federal agency that oversees potential money laundering activity, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network or FinCEN, but they were quashed by a unit of the bank that manages money for the super wealthy.
The Director of FinCEN, Kenneth Blanco, was on the witness panel for the hearing. When Blanco was asked by Senator Bob Menendez if he had read the article in the New York Times, Blanco said that he had not, adding that he had simply been “briefed” on it. This statement appeared to be little more than an effort to appease the anger of Trump toward the New York Times (the President regularly calls it “Fake News”) since it would be negligence on the part of the Director of FinCEN not to read a whistleblower’s account of what went on inside Deutsche Bank – especially given Deutsche Bank’s 2017 fine of $630 million for laundering $10 billion out of Russia.
Blanco also refused to answer any questions as to whether he was or was not opening an investigation as a result of the report in the Times. That elicited a stern statement to Blanco from Senator Chris Van Hollen, who told him that “If FinCen has not already been in touch with that whistleblower, in my view, that’s gross negligence.”
Senator Sherrod Brown, the ranking member of the Committee, also addressed the issue in his opening statement, commenting as follows:
“This weekend we got a reminder of how important these issues are, courtesy of reporting by The New York Times that money laundering specialists working for Deutsche Bank had repeatedly recommended the filing of suspicious activity reports on transactions by President Trump’s and Jared Kushner’s organizations, including transactions with actors overseas.
“But those experts were over-ruled by senior Private Wealth Division officials. Even state regulators or House Financial Services Committee subpoenas to Deutsche Bank can’t get at suspicious activity reports that are never filed – that are effectively quashed within the bank and never conveyed to the experts at FinCEN in the Treasury Department and the financial watchdogs that are supposed to assess these transactions.
“And compliance officials described a pattern at Deutsche of efforts like that to reject SAR filings for lucrative clients. We need to get to the bottom of what happened here. Everyone has to follow anti-money laundering laws and rules – you don’t get an exemption if you have a rich and powerful client. And we have to hold financial institutions accountable if they break the rules. I’ve written to Deutsche Bank’s CEO making that clear, and demanding answers.”
Brown and Van Hollen earlier had released a letter they had sent to Christian Sewing, the CEO of Deutsche Bank, on the matter of the report in the Times. Among the numerous questions it demanded answers to was this: “Who were the Private Wealth Management or other bank decision makers involved in these decisions?”
David Enrich, the author of the most recent article at the New York Times, had written an article in March of this year identifying Rosemary Vrablic as the Private Banker at Deutsche Bank to both Trump and Kushner. She is considered one of the most powerful Private Bankers in New York City. Clearly, the Senators wanted to know if a Private Banker could kill a Federally-mandated suspicious activity report for a politically-connected client.
The Trump bullying effect appears to be causing yet another disfigurement of government: Members of Congress seem to be afraid to show up and do their job at the Congressional Committees on which they sit out of fear of saying something that will earn the wrath of the President.
Money laundering through global banks, including those on Wall Street, is one of the greatest threats to the national security of the United States since it can be used to finance all sorts of illicit activity from bribes to public officials, drug dealing, terrorist financing and the like. Despite the critical nature of this hearing on Tuesday, 11 of the 12 Republican members who sit on the Senate Banking panel didn’t show up for the hearing. Senator Mike Crapo, the Republican Chairman of the Committee, and Senator Patrick Toomey, were the only two Republicans to attend. The following Republican Senators who sit on the Committee were missing in action: Richard Shelby, Tim Scott, Ben Sasse, Tom Cotton, Mike Rounds, David Purdue, Thom Tillis, John Kennedy, Martha McSally, Jerry Moran and Kevin Cramer.
That lack of turnout by Republicans contrasted against the Democratic Senators on the Committee who did show up to ask engaging questions of the panel’s witnesses: Sherrod Brown, Jack Reed, Mark Warner, Chris Van Hollen, Doug Jones and Kyrsten Sinema.
The other two witnesses who testified at Tuesday’s hearing were Steven D’Antuono, Section Chief, Financial Crimes Section of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Grovetta Gardineer, Senior Deputy Comptroller for Bank Supervision Policy at the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. (Their testimony is available here and here, respectively.)
When the history books finally look back on this era from an enlightened perspective, they will surely expend an enormous amount of ink examining how so few within the Republican Party had the courage and love of their country to speak out when faced with an insurmountable mountain of evidence of corruption.
The RAT SLOBS of the USA Inc. https://youtu.be/x1-faDxj5D4
Deutsche Bank’s U.S. Exit
September 10, 2018
In April 2018, The New York Times reported that Deutsche Bank would shift its focus from Wall Street to Europe. A month later, Deutsche Bank confirmed that it was laying off 10,000 U.S. employees. Deutsche Bank leaves a trail of destruction in cities and towns across the U.S. In the last 15 years, Deutsche Bank committed widespread foreclosure fraud, securities fraud, tax fraud and rate-rigging. The bank paid out over $10 billion in settlements with the government and over a billion more to settle lawsuits by pension funds, investment groups, cities and states. Billions in liability remain as securities lawsuits and rate fixing lawsuits work their way through the courts.
During the foreclosure crisis and beyond, Deutsche Bank was the poster child for bad banking and unethical practices. Deutsche Bank was known for its rush to foreclose, and was widely referred to as “America’s Foreclosure King.” Deutsche Bank’s primary tactic was to simply overpower its homeowner opponents. Deutsche Bank relied on the economic reality that most homeowners in foreclosure would default when facing court action. Unable to afford an attorney and unwilling to face a court on their own, the majority of homeowners walked away, abandoning their homes after being served with court documents. Deutsche Bank often employed the shadiest of lawyers, those who would eventually be suspended or disbarred and sanctioned.[1]
In tens of thousands of cases, Deutsche Bank claimed the right to foreclose even though it could not produce the documents that supported its claim. Deutsche Bank claimed that the documents had been “lost, stolen or destroyed.” In the cases where a homeowner did attempt to respond, Deutsche Bank often simply dismissed the action it had filed, then came back a few months later, when the homeowner’s economic situation had become even more desperate.
When Deutsche Bank won in court, most neighborhoods lost. Deutsche Bank often abandoned the homes they had successfully claimed and left them to deteriorate. In 2008 and 2009, Deutsche Bank often owned more homes than any property owner in many counties. In three counties in South Florida in 2011, Deutsche Bank owned more than 1,400 homes.[2] Neighbors posted signs in front of houses owned by Deutsche Bank: “Rats in there, Bank don’t care.” Cities and counties regularly sent crews to houses owned by Deutsche Bank, to board up the smashed windows, cut the overgrown grass and weeds, and post “No Trespassing” signs. The cities filed liens against the properties for the expense of these maintenance efforts, and the liens piled up along with the debris.
In 2011, the City of Los Angeles, the second largest U.S. city, sued Deutsche Bank, the world’s 4thlargest bank, calling the bank a slumlord.[3] The city claimed that Deutsche Bank took title to more than 2,000 residential properties, but then allowed those vacant properties to turn into nuisances. According to the city, Deutsche Bank failed to maintain occupied properties, and illegally evicted tenants when a sale finally became possible. Deutsche Bank blamed the loan servicers, but eventually settled with the city for $10 million.
In 2018, the National Fair Housing Alliance (“NFHA”) and 19 Civil Rights Groups sued Deutsche Bank for race discrimination in 30 metropolitan U.S. areas, claiming that Deutsche Bank purposely failed to maintain its foreclosed bank-owned homes in middle and working class African American and Latino neighborhoods, while properly maintaining similar bank-owned homes in white neighborhoods. The lawsuit[4] included photographic evidence showing a pattern of discriminatory conduct in the maintenance of foreclosed homes. According to the NFHA:
The NFHA conducted an investigation of Deutsche Bank’s practices and examined 1,1,41 properties owned by Deutsche Bank after foreclosure collected evidence on 39 objective aspects of the routine exterior maintenance of each property investigated, and accumulated over 29,900 photographs of the pertinent conditions, such as unsecured doors, damage to steps, handrails, windows and fences, graffiti, the accumulation of trash and mail, and overgrown grass and shrubbery. Plaintiffs’investigation also documented marketing deficiencies, such as the failure to post or maintain appropriate “For Sale” signage, permitting negative signage and warnings to deter prospective buyers (e.g. “Bank-owned,” “Auction” or “Foreclosed” signs), failure to identify a real estate agent/broker or point of contact, failure to adequately display property listings on Realtor/Multiple Listing Services or other web sites, and displaying on-line or other auction sites in different states in lieu of utilizing a local real estate agent/company familiar with the neighborhood. Plaintiffs’ investigation revealed that there are highly significant disparities in the routine exterior maintenance and marketing of the Deutsche Bank-owned homes in communities of color as compared to white communities.
In a listing in a low income neighborhood in West Palm Beach, FL, current as of September 1, 2018, the listing described the Deutsche Bank owned home as follows: “Roof Needs to be Replaced; Ceiling Falling Through the House and Floor Has Structural Problems…The House Should be Demolished and Sold as a Vacant Lot.”[5] Deutsche Bank got a Final Foreclosure Judgment on this property in February 2018 for $288,603. The charges included $19,640 for property preservation. [6]
Deutsche Bank frequently kept foreclosed houses off the market for three to five years after it obtained a foreclosure judgment to delay reporting large losses to investors. Because of the poor maintenance, and resulting deterioration, the houses often sold for less than half of the foreclosure judgments. In many foreclosures resulting in judgments of $1 million or more, Deutsche Bank subsequently sold the homes for less than $500,000, often losing $500,000 to $1.1 million on each resale. These large losses were indicators that the lenders were unrealistic about home values. The homes that backed the loans sold to the trusts were over-valued. The securities companies that formed and sold the trusts ignored their due diligence obligations. Securities companies made money by “shorting” or betting against the products they were marketing to investors.
In the majority of the foreclosure cases, Deutsche Bank itself lost no money because it was acting as trustee of a mortgage-backed trust. Deutsche Bank itself originated over $20 billion in mortgage loans through subsidiaries which it sold to trusts. The subsidiaries included Chapel Funding LLC, DB Products, and MortgageIT, Inc. Deutsche Bank also sponsored trusts through its affiliate, DB Products. From 2004 to 2008, DB Products sponsored 128 RMBS trusts under the names ACE, DBALT, and DMSI, securitizing over $100 billion in mortgage loans.
Deutsche Bank acted as trustee for several thousand trusts holding trillions of dollars in home loans. Lawsuits by the government and by investors followed. In 2011, the Federal Housing Administration, the world’s largest mortgage insurer, sued Deutsche Bank and MortgageIT, alleging that the MortgageIT loans never qualified for federal insurance.[7] At the time of the filing, HUD had paid more than $386 million in claims on more than 3,100 of its FHA-guaranteed mortgages defaulted. More than two-thirds of those mortgages defaulted within two years of origination. When the lawsuit was filed, Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara said that Deutsche Bank and MortgageiT “indulged in the worst of the industry’s reckless lending practices.”[8] The complaint sought treble damages on $386 million in claims as well as punitive damages and fines. Deutsche Bank settled the claim for $202 million in 2012.
One month after filing the MortgageIT lawsuit, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (”FHFA”), as Conservator for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, filed a lawsuit against Deutsche Bank alleging violations of federal and state securities laws in connection with securities sold to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.[9] The case settled in December 2013 for $1.9 billion, with Deutsche Bank paying $1.63 billion to Freddie Mac and $300 million to Fannie Mae.
The largest settlement by Deutsche Bank of a lawsuit brought by the government came in January 2017 when Deutsche Bank agreed to pay $7.2 billion for misleading investors in the sale of mortgage-backed securities. Deutsche Bank agreed to pay a $3.1 billion civil penalty under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement act and $4.1 billion in relief to homeowners, distressed borrowers and affected communities. As a part of the settlement, Deutsche Bank admitted that it made false representations and omitted material information from disclosures to investors about the loans included in RMBS securities sold by the Bank.
In one of the largest private entity lawsuits, giant investment firms BlackRock, Inc. and Pacific Investment Management Company (“PIMCO”) sued Deutsche Bank in June 2014. BlackRock and PIMCO also included 564 trusts with over $568.2 billion in original loan balances as defendants. The lawsuit alleged that Deutsche Bank ignored pervasive deficiencies in the loan pools from 2004-2008 and failed to enforce repurchase agreements that were supposed to protect investors from defective loans.[10] Investors claimed that they had lost nearly $90 billion and were likely to incur substantial more losses.
According to the complaint, the loan originators ignored prudent underwriting standards and identified eight originators in particular who together originated over $333.7 billion in loans for the trusts named in the lawsuit: IndyMac Bank FSB, New Century Financial Corporation, Argent, American Home Mortgage Corporation, Impac Funding Corporation, Option One Mortgage Corporation, Fremont Investment and Loan and Wells Fargo. The complaint also alleged that five sponsors in particular were liable for selling the loans to investors: Morgan Stanley, RBS Greenwich, First Franklin, Barclays and Goldman Sachs and that Deutsche Bank knew that the trusts were filled with defective loans and knew of pervasive violations by the loan servicers. Three entities serviced over $283.1 billion in loans: Wells Fargo, IndyMac and Countrywide.
Pension funds were among the first to sue Deutsche Bank in claims related to mortgage-backed securities. The Massachusetts Bricklayers and Masons Trust Funds filed a class action lawsuit[11] alleging the securities that they bought were riskier than represented. The case settled for $32.5 million. In another case including Deutsche Bank as a defendant, The New Jersey Carpenters Health Fund, as lead plaintiff, and the Iowa Public Employees’ Retirement System, a class representative, were among many pension funds that recovered $165 million in March 2017 in connection with losses from securities issued by NovaStar Mortgage.[12] A similar lawsuit involving losses from RALI mortgage-backed securities bought by the New Jersey Carpenters Health Fund settled for $335 million in July 2015.[13]
Commerzbank AG sued Deutsche Bank and fur other banks in December 2015 alleging that Deutsche Bank breached its duties regarding the delivery of the mortgage files to the trusts and its duties regarding providing notice of defaults to investors.[14] According to the suit, Deutsche Bank failed to act prudently when defaults occurred and failed to act when the servicers breached their duties as well. The Commerzbank lawsuits were still working their way through the courts in 2018. Similar suits were filed by the FDIC, and by the National Credit Union Administration Board,[15] Phoenix Light SF Limited and Blue Heron Funding,[16] Royal Park Investments[17] and other investors.
While courts frequently rejected class certification in securities cases, a judge granted class certification in an ERISAcase brought by a large group of Deutsche Bank employees.[18] The employees alleged that Deutsche Bank and others violated their fiduciary duties by including in the company 401(k) plan high-cost investments that profited the bank. Deutsche Bank settled the case in August 2018 for $22 million.
In addition to the many securities lawsuits, Deutsche Bank also faced a lawsuit by the U.S. accusing it of tax fraud.[19] The U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York alleged that Deutsche Bank used “a web of shell companies and calculated transactions” to evade paying tens of millions of dollars in taxes.[20] In 2010, Deutsche Bank reached a non-prosecution agreement while admitting it committed criminal wrong-doing by creating fraudulent tax shelters known as Flip, Blips, Cards and Cobra. Deutsche Bank paid $554 million in penalties.
Deutsche Bank also agreed to pay millions to settle Libor (London Interbank Offered Rate) rigging lawsuits. In April 2015, the Justice Department announced that DB Group Services agreed to plead guilty to wire fraud regarding rate manipulation. Deutsche Bank was allowed to enter into a deferred prosecution agreement. Deutsche Bank agreed to pay $2.5 billion to settle the wire fraud charges including $800 million to the U.S. Commodities Futures Trading Commission; $775 million to the Justice Department; and $600 million to the New York Department of Financial Services. Investigators produced emails and online chats showing Deutsche Bank employees requesting changes in the rate to increase their own profitability.[21] The New York Department of Financial Services ordered Deutsche Bank to terminate several high-ranking employees involved in the scheme.
In January 2017, Deutsche Bank was fined $630 million by authorities in the U.S. and the U.K. who alleged that Russia used Deutsche Bank to move $10 billion out of the country because of Deutsche Bank’s failure to control money laundering. According to the U.K.’s Financial Conduct Authority, Deutsche Bank’s anti-money laundering controls were not strong enough to prevent $10 billion from being transferred out of Russia to offshore accounts.
In August 2018, Deutsche Bank settled a case brought by a former executive, Nizar Al-Bassam who was fired after an investigation into the bank’s hiring practices in Russia and whether the bank breached anti-bribery rules by hiring the children of Russian officials to secure new business. Deutsche Bank agreed to pay Al-Bassam his $4.7 million deferred compensation package which it had withheld.
In June 2018, Deutsche Bank agreed to pay $205 million to settle an investigation by New York’s banking superintendent of foreign exchange trading violations by Deutsche Bank. The Superintendent alleged that employees at Deutsche Bank participated in chatrooms where they shared confidential client information, and discussed the manipulation of foreign exchange prices. Traders also were accused of misleading customers by deliberately “underfilling” customers trade orders in order to keep part of a profitable trade for the bank’s own account.
In the investigations of banks and securities companies that sold bad loan pools to investors, a few Deutsche Bank employees became famous. The role of Greg Lippmann, a trader for Deutsche Bank, was analyzed in the Senate Committee Report on the causes of the financial crisis. The committee examined whether certain insiders knew that the mortgage-backed securities market was on the verge of collapse as early as 2005. The Committee obtained Lippmann’s emails in which he made statements abut the poor quality of the underlying loans including “This bond blows” regarding an RMBS security issued by Long Beach. Lippman also said “half of these are crap” regarding another loan pool. Lippmann bragged “I can probably short this name to some CDO fool,” and “I don’t care what some trained seal bull market research person says this stuff has a real chance of massively blowing up.”
In addition to disparaging the market, Lippmann and Deutsche Bank acquired a $10 billion short against the subprime market. When the market collapsed, those funds that suffered some of the biggest losses used Lippmann’s comments to show that Deutsche Bank had knowledge of the risks in the subprime mortgage market, but failed to disclose these risks to investors.
On September 11, 2017, the U.S. filed a civil fraud complaint against Paul Mangione, the former head of subprime trading for Deutsche Bank.[22] The United States alleged that Mangione engaged in a fraudulent scheme to misrepresent the characteristics of loans backing two RMBS trusts that Deutsche Bank sold to investors, resulting in hundreds of millions of dollars in losses. The lawsuit was brought pursuant to the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA).
The complaint alleged that Mangione engaged in a fraudulent scheme to sell ACE 2007-HE4 and ACE 2007-HE5 by misleading investors about the quality of the loans backing the securitizations and that Mangione misled investors about the origination practices of Deutsche Bank’s wholly-owned subsidiary, DB Home Lending, the primary originator of loans included in the deals. Mangione approved offering documents for these trusts even though he knew they misrepresented key characteristics of the loans, including compliance with lending guidelines, borrowers’ ability to pay, borrowers’ fraud and appraisal accuracy.
According to the government, the HE4 and HE5 offering documents also falsely represented that DB Home Lending had “developed internal underwriting guidelines that it believe[d] generated quality loans” and that DB Home had instituted a quality control process that “monitor[ed] loan production with the overall goal of improving the quality of loan production.” These representations were designed to instill trust in DB Home’s underwriting processes. According to the complaint, Mangione knew that these statements were false and his conduct was deliberately fraudulent. The complaint was still pending as of September 1, 2018.
In February 2018, Benjamin Solomon, the head trader for Deutsche Bank’s Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities agreed to pay $165,000 and to serve a 12-month suspension from the securities industry. Deutsche Bank agreed to pay a $750,000 penalty in the case and repay $3.7 million to customers. According to the SEC’s order, customers overpaid for CMBS securities because the bank misrepresented the price the bank paid for the securities. The SEC found supervisory failures by Solomon who allegedly failed to take appropriate action after he became aware of false statements made to customers by Deutsche Bank traders.
No Deutsche Bank officers, or other big bank officers, were criminally prosecuted by the U.S. Department of Justice. The reasons for the failure to prosecute have been analyzed. In February 2011, Matt Taibi wrote “Why Isn’t Wall Street in Jail” for Rolling Stone. In 2013, Frontlineran a segment called, “The Untouchables.” Ted Kaufman wrote “Why DOJ Deemed Bank Execs Too Big to Jail” for Forbes in July 2013. David Dayen wrote “Eric Holder Didn’t Send a Single Banker to Jail for the Mortgage Crisis. Is This Justice?” for The Guardian in September 2014. William D. Cohan examined for the Atlantic “How Wall Street’s Bankers Stayed Outof Jail,” in September 2015 and for The New York Times, “A Clue to the Scarcity of Financial CrisisProsecutions,” in July 2016. Patrick Radden Keefe wrote “Why Corrupt Bankers Avoid Jail,” for The New Yorker in July 2017. Brandon Garrett wrote “Too Big to Jail: How Prosecutors Compromise with Corporations,” Harvard University Press, November 2014, and Jesse Eisenger wrote “The Chickenshit Club,” Simon & Schuster, July 2017.
Lanny Breuer, the assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice and his boss, former Attorney General Eric Holder, have returned to Covington & Burling, LLP and are considered elite attorneys, among the top 100 attorneys in the country. Eric Holder said he will decide about a 2020 presidential bid early next year.
[1]In 2012, the New York Attorney General settled with the law firm Steven J. Baum P.C. requiring Baum and his firm to pay $4 million in penalties, costs and fees. The Baum firm was the largest foreclosure firm in New York State, filing over 100,000 foreclosure cases between 2007 and 2010, often representing Deutsche Bank. In 2014, the Florida Supreme Court disbarred David J Stern. The Stern law firm handled more than 200,000 foreclosure cases statewide, employed over 1,500 employees and was one of the primary firms used by Deutsche Bank to foreclose in Florida. The ABA Journal reported (January 13, 2014) that the Stern firm grossed $260 million annually. The Law Offices of Marshall Watson, another firm frequently used by Deutsche Bank in Florida, agreed to pay $2 million to settle foreclosure fraud charges. Three attorneys from the firm were suspended.
[2]Megan O’Matz, “German Bank Under Fire in Florida and at Home,” Sun Sentinel, July 15, 2012. The three counties were Broward, Miami-Dade and Palm Beach.
[3]The People of the State of California and the City of Los Angeles v. Deutsche Bank NationalTrust Company et al., Superior Court, State of California, BC 460878.
[4]National Fair Housing Alliance et al. v. Deutsche Bank, et al.,Case 1:18-cv-00839, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois, February 1, 2018.
[5]Listing on Zillow for 717 37thSt., West Palm Beach, FL.
[6]Case 2017-CA-007056, Palm Beach County, FL.
[7]USA v. Deutsche Bank, et al., 11-02976, (S.D.N.Y. August 2011).
[8]Jonathan Stempel, “U.S. Sues Deutsche Bank in Mortgage Fraud Case,” Reuters, May 3, 3011.
[9]Federal Housing Finance Agency v. Deutsche Bank AG et al.,11:06919 (S.D.N.Y. September, 2011).
[10]BlackRock Balanced Capital Portfolio, et al. v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, et al.,Case 1:14-cv-09367-JMF-SN, Southern District of New York.
[11]Massachusetts Bricklayers and Mason Trust Funds, et al. v. Deutsche Alt-A Securities, Inc., et al., 08:03178 (E.DN.Y. April 2010).
[12]New Jersey Carpenters Health Fund, et al. v. Royal Bank of Scotland, PLC, et al.,No. o8-cv-5310 (S.D.N.Y. March 2010).
[13]New Jersey Carpenters Health Fund, et al. v. Residential Capital, LLC, et al., No. 09-8781 (S.D.N.Y.).
[14]Commerzbank AG v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, 15:10031 (S.D.N.Y. December 2015).
[15]National Credit Union Administration Board, et al. v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, et al.,14:08919 (S.D.N.Y. November 2014).
[16]Phoenix Light SF Limited et al. v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company(14:10103, S.D.N.Y. December 2014).
[17]Royal Park Investments SA/NV et al. v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company(14:04394, S.D.N.Y June 2014).
[18]Ramon Moreno, et al. v. Deutsche Bank Americas Holding Corp., et al.(1:15-cv-09936 E.D.N.Y).
[19]United States of America v. Deutsche Bank A.G., et al.,(14-cv-9669 S.D.N.Y December 2014).
[20]See Press Release, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of New York, January 4, 2017.
[21]Ben Rooney, “Deutsche Bank in $2.5 Billion Settlement Over Interest Rate Manipulation,” CNN Money, April 23, 2015.
[22]United States of America v. Paul Mangione, Case 2017-CV-5305 (E.D.N.Y. September 2017).
The Fed’s $16 Trillion Bailouts Under-Reported – Forbes
How money laundering works in real estate – Washington Post
Bank Rolling the Swamp – Financing the Deep State
The VANISHING OF TRILLIONS ….. The BANKSTERS and Lawyers RAPE Planet Earth
FOLLOW THE MONEY
The Looting of TRILLIONS
Deutsche Bank shares slip amid $50 billion Russian money-laundering allegations
NS using Dirt flipping Real Estate Scams and Shams YES like the CLINTONS …… DIRT DEALING
About Business Crime Solutions – What Is Money Laundering?
The House Intelligence and House Financial Services Committees TAKEN TO SCHOOL
Deutsche Bank , JP Morgan Chase MONEY LAUNDERING … 2:19-CV-005 Birchfield Vs JP MORGAN CHASE, Deutsche Bank Etc Et Al ….. The EXTREMELY Notorious BANKSTERS …. TRILLIONS OF SWINDLES Imagine That
|
2:36 PM (1 minute ago) |
|||
|
Six years after the crisis that cratered the global economy, it’s not exactly news that the country’s biggest banks stole on a grand scale. That’s why the more important part of Fleischmann’s story is in the pains Chase and the Justice Department took to silence her. <—–<<<<
She was blocked at every turn: by asleep-on-the-job regulators like the Securities and Exchange Commission, by a court system that allowed Chase to use its billions to bury her evidence, and, finally, by officials like outgoing Attorney General Eric Holder, the chief architect of the crazily elaborate government policy of surrender, secrecy and cover-up. “Every time I had a chance to talk, something always got in the way,” Fleischmann says.
This past year she watched as Holder’s Justice Department struck a series of historic settlement deals with Chase, Citigroup and Bank of America. The root bargain in these deals was cash for secrecy. The banks paid big fines, without trials or even judges – only secret negotiations that typically ended with the public shown nothing but vague, quasi-official papers called “statements of facts,” which were conveniently devoid of anything like actual facts.
House committees issue subpoenas to Deutsche Bank, JP Morgan Cha
House Democrats subpoena Deutsche Bank in Trump investigation …
2 days ago – Lawmakers also subpoenaed other banks — including JPMorgan Chase, … and Citigroup — seeking information on Russian money laundering.
Mixing Clean and Dirty Money
THIS IS HOW IT’s DONE
TIME TO OPEN ALL THE RECORDS
PAY VERY VERY VERY Close Attention