• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Call All To Support Impeachments And Class Action Lawsuits

"Call All To Support Impeachments And Class Action Lawsuits"

"Prove Events Were Criminal Acts"

This thread is not a general topic of proposed crimes which one may seek to establish guilt or innocence.

This thread asks a question, "Did repeal of the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act result in fraud through any violation of civil or criminal law?"

** Back Ground Mound **

The Banking Act of 1933 was a law that established the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) in the United States and introduced banking reforms, some of which were designed to control speculation.[1]

Provisions that prohibit a bank holding company from owning other financial companies were repealed on November 12, 1999, by the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act. [2][3]


** Mon Key See Mon Key Due **

It is proposed to be proven that the Glass-Steagall Act established a contractual condition that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) exists with a contingency that commercial and investment banking remain separate.

And, if commercial and investment banking become consolidated, then the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation may not exist.

Hence, it is alleged that repeal of dissociation between commercial and investment banking requires a repeal of FDIC protections.

Hence, failure to repeal FDIC protections constitutes fraud.

Financial institutions benefited prejudicially, deceptively, and pretentiously through access to FDIC insured funds.

Whence, here come class action participants in its public and private interests seeking damages incurred by fraud which occurred with the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act.

** Orchestrating A Deep Pocket Heist **

The linch pin to the heist and the true depth of its corruption can be explained by the change in a financial institution's cash on hand.

The proportion of levied cash to cash on hand had been 12:1 for nearly a century, and the /wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act raised the restriction and the worst lenders were leveraged 30:1 or more.

** Pseudonym Characters Caricatures **

A grand jury should be summoned to establish legislative negligence and moral turpitude for maliciously deceiving its public, purposely neglecting informed consent to defraud commercial account holders, for possible representative impeachment.

Commercial banking account holders and the public at large has incurred damages by unlawful actions: if by negligence, if by malice of unethical actors.

Boulderdash affront - /wiki/Gramm–Leach–Bliley_Act
"Pirates Commandeered Deceit"

"Derivatives of Statistic Distribution"

Imagine that lending for housing speculation was based upon total cash reserves.

A reason for gaining access to FDIC funds was to magnify speculation; that implies indirectly that investment offerings were accessing FDIC funds.

** Determine Nation Facts **

Investment banking access and utilization of FDIC funds occurred through unlawful means.

Investment banking access to FDIC insured funds nullified a founding contract contingency.

Repeal of Glass-Steagall with a failure to remove FDIC coverage constitutes deceptive trade that is fraud.

** Localized Effect Non Local**

Had housing remained bound to investment banking, economic effects would have been isolated to an economic sector.

With access to FDIC funds, the vacuum of exploitation could pervade into all cash resources!

When the bottom fell out, there was not money to be found.

** Wiped Clean Buy Printed Money **

First, the public trust of federal treasuries was burgeoned with magnanimous toxic debt.

Then, TARP funds were provided to allow lending to businesses that were suffering from cash liquidity.

When the bottom fell out, there was not money to be found.

** Determine Nation Facts **

Investment banking access and utilization of FDIC funds was provided unlawfully, fraudulently, and without the permission of commercial banking account holders.

Access and utilization of FDIC funds provided unfair advantages and unfair financial gains to investment banking that constitutes embezzlement.

Investment banking access and utilization of FDIC funds established an unfair economic burden against public order.

** Over A Gain **

Investment banking violated public decency trust by securing financial gain, by unlawful use, and by unauthorized leverage of private assets.

There are purposes to justify constraints on over speculation, and purposes to justify consequences for circumventing laws.
Top Bottom