Home

LAWLESSNESS ABOUNDS: SHADES OF THE SANCTUARY STATE

1 Comment

Author,
Chuck Frank

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

(photo: Sweden on fire)

It wasn’t very long ago when President Obama created an agenda to usher in thousands upon thousands of immigrants from various war torn countries, of which many thousands were Muslims, yet only around 6% were Christians. While the horrors of war and terrorism ravaged Syria, the one-sidedness of refugee admissions and favoritism was allowed, all the while the main stream news(MSM), once again looked the other way and interestingly enough, so did Congress. But why? With that much spread between two very different religions, it is more than likely that there was an ulterior motive. Just start by connecting the dots.

As one delves deeper into the agenda, a person finds that various organizations in the U.S. have participated through the years with the influx of migrants.  Refugee status and admission to any country is presently determined by the United Nations. Most persons who enter the U.S.

refugee admissions program are identified and referred for resettlement in the U.S. by the U.N. refugee agency (UNHCR), or a U.S. embassy, or an approved humanitarian aid organization.

Christian charities that are part of the program also profit from Muslim refugee resettlements which also makes them largely responsible for the kind of program that was used during the Obama administration. Catholic Charities, Lutheran Social Services, and several other Christian organizations are profiting from lucrative contracts. Thus there is a huge incentive by charities to help place refugees into various cities across the U.S.  even when the refugees are not vetted properly. Mayors of various cities, through the years, were anxious to cater to these refugees as those city governments would be receiving state and/or federal money for the resettlements that would take place in their communities. More

Advertisements

An Open Letter to Minnesota AG:LPS/Black Knight consent judgement and to demand answers why LPS is not in compliance with the judgement

Leave a comment

Editor’s note:  In reference to the letter below

Black Knight Financial Services is an American corporation that provides integrated technology, services, data and analytics solutions to the mortgage and real estate industries. On January 3, 2014, Fidelity National Financial acquired Lender Processing Services “LPS”, renaming it Black Knight. Wikipedia

11/30/17

MN Attorney General Lori Swanson

445 Minnesota Street
Suite 1400
St. Paul, MN 55101-2131

Hello:

Under the Minnesota Data Practices Act § 13.01 et seq., I am requesting an opportunity to inspect or obtain copies of public records in order to obtain information about the LPS/Black Knight consent judgement and to demand answers why LPS is not in compliance with the judgement.

As you know, LPS/Black Knight was ordered to remediate forgeries and assignments and to notify people affected by the robo-signing of documents.  There is no indication this has been done.  There are approximately 2 million fraudulent documents in the public record that don’t appear to have been remediated by LPS.  Although LPS was to issue corrective assignments- there is no proof this was done.

If there are any fees for searching or copying these records, please inform me if the cost will exceed $_20.00. However, I would also like to request a waiver of all fees in that the disclosure of the requested information is in the public interest and will contribute significantly to the public’s understanding of the MN Attorney General’s public support in combating the still prevalent overabundance of mortgage servicing, foreclosure and securitization fraud. This information is not being sought for commercial purposes.

I am looking specifically for these answers:

  1. Has your office been receiving quarterly compliance reports as required in the consent judgement?
  2. How many people in the state were impacted by LPS’s illegal practices to include fabricated notes and assignments, forged documents or unreliable documents created for the purpose of foreclosing?
  3. What percentage of the funds the state received from the consent judgement have been used to help citizens of the state? Please provide a distribution report of the allocation of these funds.
  4. Will future homebuyers be vulnerable if they discover their title is clouded by a prior fraudulent note, assignment, endorsement or allonge that was not remediated? Plans to remediate? How?
  5. How did the individual servicers comply with the consent judgement? What were their duties to comply?
  6. If you accepted money from the settlement, why was no follow-up done on the consent judgement to confirm that servicers and their attorneys were in compliance?
  7. Why are these fabricated documents still polluting the public records of this state?
  8. I hereby request copies of all quarterly reports and correspondence.

I would request a prompt response to this request.  If you expect a significant delay in responding to or in fulfilling this request, please contact me with information about when I might expect copies or the ability to inspect the requested records.

If you deny any or all of this request, please site each specific exemption you feel justifies the refusal to release the information and notify me of the appeal procedures available to me under the law.

Thank you in advance.

Sincerely,

Tom Kibler

U.S. Marshals in Hot Pursuit of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki

11 Comments

Michael Volpe

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The US Marshals have an operation to bring in Sandra Grazzini-Rucki.

Grazzini-Rucki, who is currently in hiding in an undisclosed location, revealed she recently learned details of the operation.

She said she’s been told the US Marshals are treating her as a dangerous fugitive.

Grazzini-Rucki currently has no warrant for her arrest and is not a fugitive.

As such, any operation to bring her in by the US Marshals- which among its mandates tracks fugitives- would be illegal.

This would not be the first time that the US Marshals have inserted themselves in her case and both times previously it was also illegal. More

Though the court has ruled Sandra Grazzini-Rucki too poor to pay for her own filings, her ex-husband’s attorney thinks she should pay for his.

4 Comments

Michael Volpe

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Lisa Elliott, the long-time attorney for David Rucki, filed a notice for a taxation of costs- meaning she wants the other side to pay for the costs of filing- with the appeals court.

In her response, Grazzini-Rucki’s attorney, Michelle MacDonald explained to the court that her client is a pauper.

“Appellant, Sandra Sue Grazzini-Rucki, hereby objects to the taxation of costs and disbursements dated September 1, 2017,” MacDonald said in her response, “on the ground that: Appellant was granted informa pauperis status and is a pauper.”

By granting Grazzini-Rucki informa pauperis status the court has deemed Grazzini-Rucki too poor to afford to pay for her own filing fees and they are thereby waived; but that hasn’t stopped Elliott from demanding she pay for her client’s filing fees.

MacDonald, after receiving a $5,000 retainer in early 2013, has been working on Grazzini-Rucki’s custody case pro-bono; she was once forced to conduct part of a custody trial while handcuffed to a wheelchair.

The latest filing follows a similar filing by Elliott in late August asking the court which handled her client’s divorce to order Grazzini-Rucki to pay for all the filing fees- in excess of $3,000- she accrued in that court.

The series of events defy logic. More

Sandra Grazzini-Rucki maybe homeless, jobless, and penniless but that doesn’t mean should not be paying child support to her multi-millionaire ex-husband.

9 Comments

Michael Volpe

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“The court acknowledged that Sandra Grazzini-Rucki is currently earns no money but used the concept of imputed income to justify its ruling.

Imputed income allows judges to base child support based on an income level the judge deems is reasonable even if the party is not currently earning that living.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

That was the peculiar ruling from the Minnesota Court of Appeals authored by Judge Jill Flaskamp Halbrooks.

Judge Halbrooks upheld a decision by Judge Maria Pastoor of the Minnesota’s First Judicial District who ordered Grazzini-Rucki to pay her ex-husband, David Rucki, $975 per month in child support.

David Rucki is a multi-millionaire who received 100% of the marital estate along with sole custody of their five children in an even more bizarre ruling by Judge David Knutson.

Pastoor’s original ruling was even more bizarre because she made the ruling while Grazzini-Rucki was incarcerated for helping to hide her two oldest daughters after David Knutson forced them into the custody of her ex-husband’s sister, who the two girls insisted was abusive to them.

“Grazzini-Rucki argues that the CSM erred by imputing potential income to her because the CSM (1) disregarded her actual income, (2) failed to make a proper statutory analysis, and (3) improperly adopted a level of income determined by the district court in a prior order. A CSM must calculate a parent’s income based on her potential income.” Judge Halbrooks stated in the order, justifying how a homeless woman can be forced to pay child support. More

Minnesota taxpayer rights are under assault./Bag the Ban

Leave a comment

Minnesota taxpayer rights are under assault.

In what will be a precedent-setting move for the entire state, Minneapolis is scheduled to pass an illegal tax this Friday that blatantly violates the spirit of Minnesota’s taxpayer protection laws. If they succeed, there will be a domino effect and other cities will use the same playbook to impose higher taxes and institute corporate welfare without giving taxpayers a say in the matter.

It’s not supposed to be easy to raise taxes on the people of Minnesota. State law goes so far as to require a vote of the people before any new sales taxes can be passed. But Minneapolis is going out of its way to dodge similar accountability.

By calling their 5-cent grocery bag tax a “pass-through charge,” and funneling the money straight to corporate retailers instead of a public purpose, Minneapolis City Councilmembers think they can avoid triggering state taxpayer protections.

We cannot let this happen. That’s why we’ve put together a petition to alert Minnesota elected officials to what’s going on in Minneapolis and to urge them to stop this outrageous policy before taxpayer protections are eroded throughout our state.

Minneapolis does not need more taxes and government control. What our state needs is more accountability to taxpayers.

Click here to sign the petition and fight back against higher taxes and corporate giveaways.

Thanks,
Bag the Ban

Bag the Ban is brought to you by the people of NOVOLEX

 

Briefs Reveal More Shocking Behavior in Rucki Case.

2 Comments

Michael Volpe

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In separate response briefs to pro se attorneys, the Dakota County Prosecutor’s Office has acknowledged jury tampering, misdirected an allegation of witness tampering, and refused to respond to address all allegations of judicial misconduct in the Rucki case.

The briefs from Dakota County Prosecutor James Backstrom were in response to briefs filed by Dede Evavold and Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, both representing themselves.

Evavold has been representing herself after the state ruled her too well off to receive an attorney while Grazzini-Rucki was represented but was so disgusted by her attorney’s brief that she filed one on her own.

Her attorney, Steven Russett, who was provided by the Minnesota Appellate Public Defender’s Office, did not respond to an email and voicemail for comment.

In the most startling admission, the prosecutors acknowledge- responding to Grazzini-Rucki- that a reporter approached the jury while they were in a common area during a lunch break and asked if any wanted to be interviewed when the trial ended.

The reporter’s name is Laura Adelmann, who works for the Sun Current, the hometown newspaper of Lakeville, Minnesota, where the Rucki’s live. “There was one occasion during trial in which it was it was reported to Judge Asphaug that a reporter (I.E. Laura Adelmann) had approached the jurors while they were eating in the common area of the courthouse and asked if she could interview them after the trial was over.” Backstrom’s brief stated.

This incident occurred on Friday July 18, 2016, while the trial was ongoing, and on Monday July 21, 2016, Judge Asphaug issued this statement to the court gallery. More

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: