Lisa cook mortgage fraud

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She lacks integrity.

So does Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, but he’s still in his position. He’s done a series of unethical things that would’ve had him fired long ago if he were anyone else.

[Anonymous]

Ruh Roh

Pulte: "We have just received video proof that Lisa Cook's declared “PRIMARY RESIDENCE” is being rented out to tenants"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She lacks integrity.

So does Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, but he’s still in his position. He’s done a series of unethical things that would’ve had him fired long ago if he were anyone else.

Yes, but cook is not Clarence Thomas and the fed is not the Supreme Court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you look at the arguments Abbe Lowell put forth in court, they make a lot of sense. He is addressing the inappropriateness of Trump using the fraud allegations as a means of asserting back-door control over the the Federal Reserve -- in this case, getting governors who wil give Trump the lower interest rates that he wishes for.

He is right to make this argument -- it needs to be made! This defense is in all our interests for the good of the system.

Meanwhile, there are reasons why someone can have two primary residences -- like if they buy a house for their parent. I have no idea if this is the situation for Lisa Cook. It does seem sketchy that she has made such data available if it exists. But Abbe Lowell is right that the most important issue here is the malicious nature of the allegations.

Then you can declare it as a second home (not main residence) and pay a higher mortgage rate. She didn’t. You cannot have two main residences. Only one.

Who knows the situation. Maybe she bought the house and her life situation changed and she bought the second house as primary. Maybe it was primary for a family member.

It can go to trial, and when all the evidence is presented, it can be adjudicated and THEN she can be fired for cause.

She is under no legal obligation to declare why she stated primary on both mortgages until it goes to trial. She is not an elected official. I’m sure these mortgage documents were available before her confirmation, and yet it was never brought up by a senator — likely because they have all done similar arrangements in their own portfolio of homes; one week DC is primary, the next week Alabama…

I don’t imagine we will have a trial and judgment before Powell term is up, so it really won’t buy Trump anything unless he can ramrod it through the court AND get the verdict he wants. I’m sure Judge Cobb will block the dismissal and say it will depend upon the cases in Georgia and Michigan US district courts.

If that were the case, she could declare that and then that’s the end of the story. She didn’t . Moreover she is quiet. Why she didn’t respond that the allegations are incorrect. Agree with you that needs a due process and then she can be fire for fraud. The question is. If you were the employer and the employee had this situation venting in the media, and that affects the reputation of your company. Would you keep that enployee. An employee was even fired for hugging a woman in a concert. So yes, mortgage fraud is a justification for firing a person.

The Fed is not just some employer. The law says fired only for cause. Allegations but the FHFA head, especially with political undertones, will not standup in court as cause.

She has likely been advised to stay silent until actually in court. There is no upside for “explanation” in public opinion, she is not an elected official.

You are worried about the reputation of the “company” when the whole goal of this exercise is to install patsys? I admire your gall.

Yes, let’s keep things like they are. Now the fed is Very credible financial supervisor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you look at the arguments Abbe Lowell put forth in court, they make a lot of sense. He is addressing the inappropriateness of Trump using the fraud allegations as a means of asserting back-door control over the the Federal Reserve -- in this case, getting governors who wil give Trump the lower interest rates that he wishes for.

He is right to make this argument -- it needs to be made! This defense is in all our interests for the good of the system.

Meanwhile, there are reasons why someone can have two primary residences -- like if they buy a house for their parent. I have no idea if this is the situation for Lisa Cook. It does seem sketchy that she has made such data available if it exists. But Abbe Lowell is right that the most important issue here is the malicious nature of the allegations.

Then you can declare it as a second home (not main residence) and pay a higher mortgage rate. She didn’t. You cannot have two main residences. Only one.

Who knows the situation. Maybe she bought the house and her life situation changed and she bought the second house as primary. Maybe it was primary for a family member.

It can go to trial, and when all the evidence is presented, it can be adjudicated and THEN she can be fired for cause.

She is under no legal obligation to declare why she stated primary on both mortgages until it goes to trial. She is not an elected official. I’m sure these mortgage documents were available before her confirmation, and yet it was never brought up by a senator — likely because they have all done similar arrangements in their own portfolio of homes; one week DC is primary, the next week Alabama…

I don’t imagine we will have a trial and judgment before Powell term is up, so it really won’t buy Trump anything unless he can ramrod it through the court AND get the verdict he wants. I’m sure Judge Cobb will block the dismissal and say it will depend upon the cases in Georgia and Michigan US district courts.

If that were the case, she could declare that and then that’s the end of the story. She didn’t . Moreover she is quiet. Why she didn’t respond that the allegations are incorrect. Agree with you that needs a due process and then she can be fire for fraud. The question is. If you were the employer and the employee had this situation venting in the media, and that affects the reputation of your company. Would you keep that enployee. An employee was even fired for hugging a woman in a concert. So yes, mortgage fraud is a justification for firing a person.

DP. If she has a lawyer, which she’d be a fool not to, there’s no way they would let her respond when there’s an active lawsuit about this. Not saying she didn’t do something inappropriate but present silence doesn’t mean anything about past guilt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ruh Roh

Pulte: "We have just received video proof that Lisa Cook's declared “PRIMARY RESIDENCE” is being rented out to tenants"

The cover up is always worse than the crime

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you look at the arguments Abbe Lowell put forth in court, they make a lot of sense. He is addressing the inappropriateness of Trump using the fraud allegations as a means of asserting back-door control over the the Federal Reserve -- in this case, getting governors who wil give Trump the lower interest rates that he wishes for.

He is right to make this argument -- it needs to be made! This defense is in all our interests for the good of the system.

Meanwhile, there are reasons why someone can have two primary residences -- like if they buy a house for their parent. I have no idea if this is the situation for Lisa Cook. It does seem sketchy that she has made such data available if it exists. But Abbe Lowell is right that the most important issue here is the malicious nature of the allegations.

Then you can declare it as a second home (not main residence) and pay a higher mortgage rate. She didn’t. You cannot have two main residences. Only one.

Who knows the situation. Maybe she bought the house and her life situation changed and she bought the second house as primary. Maybe it was primary for a family member.

It can go to trial, and when all the evidence is presented, it can be adjudicated and THEN she can be fired for cause.

She is under no legal obligation to declare why she stated primary on both mortgages until it goes to trial. She is not an elected official. I’m sure these mortgage documents were available before her confirmation, and yet it was never brought up by a senator — likely because they have all done similar arrangements in their own portfolio of homes; one week DC is primary, the next week Alabama…

I don’t imagine we will have a trial and judgment before Powell term is up, so it really won’t buy Trump anything unless he can ramrod it through the court AND get the verdict he wants. I’m sure Judge Cobb will block the dismissal and say it will depend upon the cases in Georgia and Michigan US district courts.

If that were the case, she could declare that and then that’s the end of the story. She didn’t . Moreover she is quiet. Why she didn’t respond that the allegations are incorrect. Agree with you that needs a due process and then she can be fire for fraud. The question is. If you were the employer and the employee had this situation venting in the media, and that affects the reputation of your company. Would you keep that enployee. An employee was even fired for hugging a woman in a concert. So yes, mortgage fraud is a justification for firing a person.

DP. If she has a lawyer, which she’d be a fool not to, there’s no way they would let her respond when there’s an active lawsuit about this. Not saying she didn’t do something inappropriate but present silence doesn’t mean anything about past guilt.

When you are guilty, it is always better to remain silent and go to trial to try to cut the losses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ruh Roh

Pulte: "We have just received video proof that Lisa Cook's declared “PRIMARY RESIDENCE” is being rented out to tenants"

The cover up is always worse than the crime

Stalking someone’s house is not “journalism”.

He’s claiming she made the claim to the US government, which means he’s seen her TAX RETURNS, where she would have to claim it as her primary residence.

Plate should not have access to her tax returns, so clearly there is a conspiracy underway to remove her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ruh Roh

Pulte: "We have just received video proof that Lisa Cook's declared “PRIMARY RESIDENCE” is being rented out to tenants"

The cover up is always worse than the crime

Omg the video is so amateur hour. “Lisa cook is cooked”. I guess putting a clown face over propaganda….

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ruh Roh

Pulte: "We have just received video proof that Lisa Cook's declared “PRIMARY RESIDENCE” is being rented out to tenants"

Pulitzer winner Charlie LeDuff’s reporting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ruh Roh

Pulte: "We have just received video proof that Lisa Cook's declared “PRIMARY RESIDENCE” is being rented out to tenants"

The cover up is always worse than the crime

Omg the video is so amateur hour. “Lisa cook is cooked”. I guess putting a clown face over propaganda….

It’s called old school shoe leather reporting. It’s a lot better than the coordinated slop on the left and right tweeted out by dorks in their pajamas 1,000 miles away from the action.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ruh Roh

Pulte: "We have just received video proof that Lisa Cook's declared “PRIMARY RESIDENCE” is being rented out to tenants"

The cover up is always worse than the crime

Omg the video is so amateur hour. “Lisa cook is cooked”. I guess putting a clown face over propaganda….

It’s called old school shoe leather reporting. It’s a lot better than the coordinated slop on the left and right tweeted out by dorks in their pajamas 1,000 miles away from the action.

Ohhh… walking up to a suburban house and bothering the residents. How edgy. And legally inadmissible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ruh Roh

Pulte: "We have just received video proof that Lisa Cook's declared “PRIMARY RESIDENCE” is being rented out to tenants"

The cover up is always worse than the crime

It’s 2025, no one answers their door anymore.

Notice the door never opened; I’ll bet the conversation was fabricated and dubbed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ruh Roh

Pulte: "We have just received video proof that Lisa Cook's declared “PRIMARY RESIDENCE” is being rented out to tenants"

The cover up is always worse than the crime

This doesn't prove fraud. The refinance was taken out in 2021. She can have a tenant living there in 2025. You don't need to refinance as an investment property when you rent out your primary home.

The real question - was a non-familial tenant living there in 2021? If so, that is closer to fraud.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ruh Roh

Pulte: "We have just received video proof that Lisa Cook's declared “PRIMARY RESIDENCE” is being rented out to tenants"

The cover up is always worse than the crime

This doesn't prove fraud. The refinance was taken out in 2021. She can have a tenant living there in 2025. You don't need to refinance as an investment property when you rent out your primary home.

The real question - was a non-familial tenant living there in 2021? If so, that is closer to fraud.

Unmarried so no in-laws and from Georgia, so it seems pretty unlikely family has ever lived in a rather ritzy Ann Arbor, Mich. SFH.