Just to be clear: "robo-signing" is technically called "lying under oath"

[MannyGoldstein]

The documents that were signed were sworn statements to be presented to the court. Signers, many of whom were lawyers, were swearing to the court that the information that they were presenting was known to be true, whereas in reality they had no idea, and didn't care. Many perjuries occurred, and now the Obama administration is sweeping them under a rug to protect their cherished banker class.

From http://www.dailyfinance.com/2010/10/13/did-robo-signing... /

What made the attorneys so nervous? Well, Kapusta testified that the law firm manufactured documents as needed, backdated documents, signed more than 2,000 documents daily without reading them, switched signature pages among documents, and had three people sign the same name. She swore the firm knowingly created and gave courts documents with key information listed incorrectly, such as how much the debtor owed or which bank was foreclosing. (In these cases, the COO used her judgment to make "business decision" about what to do.)

Kapusta testified that probably 50% of the time the firm failed to give homeowners notice that a bank was foreclosing on them, while simultaneously and grotesquely padding bills for the "service" by naming John and Jane Does to be served, even if they didn't exist. To keep everything going, the firm maintained a "bible" that explained how each judge scrutinized the submitted documents, so that the firm could make the documents pass muster in each court. No wonder the attorneys at David J. Stern worried about their licenses.

I guess it only affected the 99%, so no harm's done, eh?

Well, fuck 'em. It's dishonest and it's a fraud upon the American People. I guess it's only "liberty and justice for some" in America today.