Matt Taibbi is a lying piece of shit (link)

[hfojvt]

141. the article did not describe a forgery

it describes a stream-lined process at an over-worked bank.

So the signer did not spend much time reviewing what they signed. So what? Presumably other people were reviewing it, and then bringing it to that higher official to sign.

Thus

"This means that if the affidavit a bank submits is false -- as any affidavit completed by a robo-signer would be -- the foreclosure should not go through."

that is not true. Because the affadavit was completed by somebody else, a low level employee, inspector #5, and only signed by a bank officer.

As for why the banks made a settlement, well that is simply a fact of our "justice" (or legal) system. If X sues Company Y, whether they have a legitimate case or not, whether truth and justice are on their side or not, it costs lots of money for Company Y to defend themself. Further, they cannot be sure of not getting an unsympathetic judge or jury. They could get a bunch of people on the jury who hate banks, and further, who are sucked in by a bunch of anti-bank nonsense which is presented by the plaintiff. The plaintiff, of course is a grandmother and a veteran who owns puppies and bakes cookies.

Then there is the "rule of law".

Well, wouldn't you know, that I cannot find my copy of "Doorways in the Sand" that I wanted to quote. So never mind. You probably have not read that book anyway, and are a purist about "rule of law" (probably only when it suits you). So, never mind. We probably disagree about the facts of life.