New Hampshire Superior Court Judge Marguerite Wageling Aids And Abets Fraudulent Foreclosure

Why hasn’t New Hampshire Superior Court Judge Marguerite Wageling been impeached?

NationStar Fraudlent Foreclosure: NH Judiciary Panel considers Impeachment.

“New Hampshire Superior Court Judge Marguerite Wageling may face Impeachment as a result of her actions in the fraudulent foreclosure case of NationStar v. Marie Miller. She ignored a prior Court Order compelling production of the original wet ink note and mortgage.

Several NH Judges ignore all principles of common sense, law and specific court orders when it comes to holder in due course and standing to sue for foreclosure, writ of possession, etc.

Then AG and current U.S. Senator Kelly Ayotte was aware of the facts in this case and sat on her hands, the same way she ignored the forgery of a title insurance producer’s name to a mortgage, and was soundly blasted at a Town Hall meeting last month where she stammered in responding to a simple OWS question.

And the same way she ignored the indicators for the FRM Ponzi scam that was the deadliest consumer fraud case in NH History. Just the facts.…

It is a game changer. Not many states have a Judicial redress panel like NH and I’m certain that many bad judges would love to get rid of it. Wageling was a no-show, having nothing to say for herself.

Now we shall see what the Legislature has to say.”

This petition was heard, but what action did the NH legislature take on the frauds perpetrated to steal peoples’ homes? This case is still ongoing.

Why wasn’t this petition ever heard?

Related: N.H. Democrats Want To Remove The Redress of Grievances Committee

On Thursday, December 20, 2012, a public hearing on the removal of the Redress of Grievances Committee was held.

Would someone in NH give us an update on this public hearing?

Published in: on December 25, 2012 at 11:46 pm  Comments (5)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

RSS feed for comments on this post.

5 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. The corruption is never ending and as deep as it can get.
    What everyone calls a government, in reality is a corporate fascist regime with control right down to the local empires people call counties. What the hell do we have a legislature for anyway?

  2. The newly appointed Rules Committee met on Thursday December 20, 2012 to work on the rules for the upcoming 2013-2014 session. Standing committees are specified by Rule #30, which is almost as long as the other rules put together.

    The most contentious issue of the day was, needless to say, guns in the House chamber. (They will, presumably, be banned again.) But the abolition of two committees came close. The Redress Committee is on its way out, as is the Constitutional Review & Statutory Recodification Committee.

    There were actually two rules changes related to the Petitions & Redress: aside from abolishing the committee, there was a technical change related to who reads the titles of the petition on the House floor; and subpoenas now how have to be approved by the full House.

    A new rule was enacted in 2012 which let the Rules Committee approve subpoenas. Except when there is an impeachment trial going on, and those are extremely rare, the Redress Committee would have been the only committee which would ever need to subpoena anyone. The one attempt to actually use that rule was unanimously shot down by the old edition of the Rules Committee.

    The full House votes on the new rules on Wednesday January 2nd, 2013, probably along party lines.

  3. Hi!

    What we are actually “under” is a statutory state and not the constitutional state of Maine. This is the underlying problem at all levels.

    Examine the definition of “state” in the Maine revised statutes.

    It says that “state” “is a territory of the United States.”

    How can this be?

    In the Constitution of the State of Maine it continues to say “a free and independent state.”

    This is all a fraud, of course.

    So under Article IV in the Constitution of the United States is where Congress derives all of its “powers” in the “territories” including the statutory STATE OF MAINE, a territory of the United States.

    This is where the state and federal income tax laws come from plus the “territorial” United States District Courts whereby the so-called judges in those territorial courts do NOT possess any “judicial powers” of the United States at all. ONLY Article III judges possess the “judicial powers” of the United States. See Article III in the Constitution of the United States.

    Also, examine the ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT in the Maine revised statutes. I think it is in Title V. Not sure though.

    Find it and read it.

    What in God’s name is this about?

    Answer: It is all administrative. All of it. No wonder that the so-called judges in Maine do NOT possess a commission which, in turn, none of them possesses any judicial powers whatsoever.

    Furthermore, examine Article 1, Section 8 in the Constitution of the United States to see that ONLY “10 miles square” can be had by the “general” government when “it” enters a state, and land MUST be purchased with the consent of the legislature of Maine. Remember, ONLY “10 miles square” is allowed.

    Our Founding Fathers weren’t stupid. They knew the consequences if they allowed the general government to enter a state without mentioning the “10 miles square.”

    What do we see today? The federal government (corporate) has overtaken the whole state (the statutory one), and we now hear that federal laws supercede state laws.

    Why is this?

    Circular reasoning, of course. It goes right back to the statutory state.

    This is fraud at its best.

    In order to comprehend this matrix, one must learn how to “connect” the dots otherwise one will got lost easily. I did for a while.

    I have been studying this for years and years and years.

    I finally “get it.”

    I am in the process of writing my book on this fraud in order to educate the masses.

    One has to understand how the game is played out and, still, there are no guarantees that one will win in these fraudulent courts but one has at least some chance, even slight, of winning if they know the “how” of all this fraud.

    I now know the “how” but that wasn’t always the case.

    Thank you!

    Lise from Maine

  4. Eastern District Court Judge Carolyn Delaney commits Fraud from bench to help Wells Fargo Bank.
    5, JULY 2013 WRITER
    On May 11, 2010, Lamont Johnson a Sacramento, California picky pay loan victim filed an action against Wachovia Bank FSB and its agents in the Northern District of California. Facing foreclosures and evictions by Wells Fargo Bank Johnson with little cash attempted to become a part of a pending Class Action case filed in the Northern District before Judge Jeremy Fogel (Mandrigues v. World Savings Bank, Inc., et al.) Upon Filing his case, Johnson immediately served Wells Fargo banks, Unlawful Detainer Attorney, Fred Kaiser. Wells Fargo Attorney Kaiser ignored the complaint. Johnson’s case was subsequently transferred from the Northern District to the Eastern District of Sacramento on October 21, 2010 Case NO. 2:10-cv-02839, Johnson vs. Wachovia Bank FSB et al. Johnson initially filed his case Pro Se and later hired Attorney Roxanne Mosley. Mosley represented Johnson for a short period of time eventually abandoning Johnson’s case.
    On or about August 31, 2011 Johnsons case came before newly appointed Eastern District Court Judge Carolyn Delaney. October 6, 2011 Delaney filed an Order to Show Cause. On October 21, 2011 Johnson filed a Substitution of Attorney and a response to the Delaney Order to show Cause. Just entering the case, Johnson had been requesting from Delaney time to restructure and update his claim because there were defects in his First amended complaint and so much more violations that had occurred since Johnson’s original filing. Delaney denied Johnson that opportunity and on April 11, 2012, Document Query 46, Delaney ordered Johnson to Serve on Defendants Wells Fargo Bank Johnsons defective complaint drafted by Johnson’s previous Attorney Mosley. Defendants Wells Fargo Bank after being served immediately filed a Motion to dismiss. Delaney thereafter decided on her own and in violation of her oath, her duty and the law, set Johnsons case on a course to intentionally dismiss his case.
    As Johnson filed his opposition to Defendant Wells Fargo Banks, Motion to dismiss, Johnson attached his proposed Second amended complaints to his answers, despite Delaney’s attempt to stop him from repairing his claims. Johnson added claims of Quiet Title, Racketeering under Rico, Mail Fraud, Wire Fraud, Conspiracy to foreclose using false and fraudulent document and affricatives. Johnson attached documented evidence showing that Wells Fargo Bank employees robo-signed and used forged and false documents to foreclose. Some of Johnsons attached evidence show that documents were notarized but not even signed. Johnson even attached documents that were back dated. To top it off, Johnson showed that defendants made a material alteration on his Deed of Trust for his Yorktown Property. It was changed from its original form and filed with the wrong address. Johnson’s Yorktown property Deed of Trust clearly illegally had an unreferenced attachment to it in an attempt to repair the defect in the legal description. The attachment was done after Johnson signed the contract. What was most difficult for Johnson to deal with was that he was disabled and going through a major depression and stress at the time and seeking counseling. Johnson always informed Delaney in his documents to be patient with him because he was going through this and it will take him more time to complete his Second Amended complaint. Delaney ignored Johnson’s documents.
    On September 12, 2012 Delaney moved forward with defendant Wells Fargo’s Motion to dismiss trail. Transcripts show that District Court Judge Delaney conducted the trial to look procedural, but it was a sham trial. Despite all the evidence of fraud , and serious causes of actions Johnson claimed, Delaney intentionally and in violation of her oath and Duty suppressed all Johnson’s arguments, case law, arguments and evidence and refused at the hearing to allow any allegations of fraud to be put on record. Delaney asked both Johnson and Defendants Wells Fargo one main question. What is your legal theory? Delaney thereafter dismissed Johnson’s unfinished second amended complaint on the spot.
    The mistake that District Court Judge Delaney made was that she drafted, filed and mailed fraudulent Findings and Recommendations conclusion order #65 that dismissed Johnson’s case by intentionally misrepresenting Johnson’s legal theory and by suppressing Johnson’s legal arguments and Fraud evidence that were attached to his complaint. Delaney intentionally drafted her order to construe around case law and evidence Johnson presented as if they did not exist. District Court Judge Delaney knew of Defendant Wells Fargo Banks fraudulent activities. They were common knowledge. Delaney’s employer along with 49 other States Attorney Generals, were part of a nationwide Class Action which identified the same fraudulent conduct by these same defendants. Delaney intentionally suppressed Johnson’s evidence because she did not want a Pro Se Plaintiff (Johnson) to win his case. District Court Judge Delaney knew that if she acknowledged verbally or in writing the fraud that she would be required to leave Defendants Wells Fargo Bank right where they stand without a defense. Delaney refused to allow this to happen as duty required her to do. In fact, in Johnson’s current appeal, he claims that the District Court altered the trial transcripts when it found out he was going to appeal the decision. All allegations are on the online Pacer cite. The Courts suppression of the banks fraud is clear. Johnson’s appeal outlines the Courts legal violations. Johnson is currently awaiting the appeals Court ruling in the ninth Circuit in Sacramento, California. Johnson believes that the appeals Court will help the District Court Judge cover up her fraudulent conduct. Watch for yourself. This will make Johnson a victim again and never hold the banks liable. In California, no person has won a Quiet Title Claim in our Eastern District Court. This can only be intentionally done and created by the District Courts own agenda policy because it is not by law. Johnson filed documents in the Appeal Courts that show that The District Court Judge was acting unlawfully. Johnson showed that the Judge regularly dismisses Pro Se Plaintiffs cases whom showed the Court Fraudulent documents. The Courts are trying to stop the flood of cases being filed by violating the Constitutional right to a trial of the Plaintiffs even when it sees the fraudulent documents. It is not suppose to do this. This is not the Courts job and it is illegal.

  5. I hope this wageling freak dies of cancer or something horrible for her sins on and off the bench this evil woman denied my brother healthcare he needed and two months later he was dead this bitch doesn’t even fear god I wish and pray for death so fuck you wageling die die die u evil fucking demon

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: