The Brooke Amendment And Section 8 Housing: Revisited

7 05 2019

 By Timothy D. Naegele[1]

This is the title of my newest law review article[2] that discusses the landmark laws enacted by Congress: the “Brooke Amendment” with respect to public housing, and the “Section 8” housing program that was intended to extend the benefits of the Brooke Amendment to housing wherever it is located. Put succinctly, the Brooke Amendment capped the payment of rent at twenty-five percent of a person’s income, with the federal government paying the difference; and it provided funds to improve public housing, and to assure the safety of its residents.

Section 8 was envisioned as giving “vouchers” to those who qualified for public housing, and permitting them to find housing anywhere, with the federal government subsidizing their rents when the twenty-five-percent-of-income threshold was passed. Taken together, the Brooke Amendment and Section 8 were America’s answer to the needs of decent housing for its poor. Today, there are two million voucher families.[3]

The United States has an unenviable record of providing affordable housing for its poor, much less for the poorest of the poor—America’s homeless. They have lived on the streets and wherever they could find shelter; and they have been shunned as “lepers” and cast aside to fend for themselves. Many have been and are in desperate need of mental health care and treatment; and they are not far removed from the poor of Calcutta, who have been chronicled down through the decades.

This is particularly true of the elderly, disabled and families with young children, who have slipped through the “cracks” and the societal “safety nets,” to the extent that such protections still exist. However, the elderly of the Boston area were singled out for humane, dignified and uplifting treatment and protection in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when work began by Senator Edward W. Brooke and me in the U.S. Congress—through its two banking committees—to address their plight.

Since then, billions of dollars have been expended, and millions of poor Americans have been helped, which tragically has only scratched the surface—as the numbers of chronically poor and those who are unable to afford private rents continue to rise in the United States. The ever-accelerating cost of housing, and the short supply of existing affordable housing units, have priced many Americans with even good jobs out of decent housing across America, in such areas as “Silicon Valley” (or the San Francisco Bay Area).

They have lived in campers, recreational vehicles (“RVs”) or wherever they could find to sleep. The effects on the poorest of the poor—those farther down the economic totem pole—have been catastrophic, especially in those areas of the United States where inclement weather is a major factor. Many have died, or been victimized, as homeless shelters have been inadequate or closed entirely for various reasons (e.g., funding and/or staffing shortages) in areas where they are needed the most.

Yesterday’s problems are compounded by staggering mental health issues relating to America’s poor and homeless; violent gang activities such as MS-13; dilapidated public housing projects, which may not be helped by the infusion of more federal funds; Social Security retirement benefits that have not kept pace with the costs of food, housing and the medical needs of America’s elderly poor; the influx of illegal immigrants from other countries, who have few discernible skills and nowhere to live; the shortage of qualified professional staff members who can deal effectively with such problems and challenges, and truly make a positive difference; and the increasing demand by most Americans for affordable housing, which has outstripped the available supply.

One size does not fit all. What works in one community may not work in another. And simply throwing money at the staggering problems might not be any solution at all. U.S. taxpayers may say “enough is enough,” and they might be right—at least with respect to their own self-interests. Money cannot be wasted if federal housing programs are to enjoy broad support from the American people. The tasks today are daunting, but the United States and Americans have risen to the challenges of the past, and may be expected to do so in the future.

 

Ed Brooke

[Senator Edward W. Brooke (1919-2015)]

 

© 2019, Timothy D. Naegele


[1]  Timothy D. Naegele was counsel to the United States Senate’s Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and chief of staff to Presidential Medal of Freedom and Congressional Gold Medal recipient and former U.S. Senator Edward W. Brooke (R-Mass). He and his firm, Timothy D. Naegele & Associates, specialize in Banking and Financial Institutions Law, Internet Law, Litigation and other matters (see www.naegele.com and Timothy D. Naegele Resume-19-4-29). He has an undergraduate degree in economics from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), as well as two law degrees from the School of Law (Boalt Hall), University of California, Berkeley, and from Georgetown University. He served as a Captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency at the Pentagon, where he received the Joint Service Commendation Medal (see, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commendation_Medal#Joint_Service). Mr. Naegele is an Independent politically; and he is listed in Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who in American Law, and Who’s Who in Finance and Business. He has written extensively over the years (see, e.g., www.naegele.com/whats_new.html#articles), and can be contacted directly at tdnaegele.associates@gmail.com

[2]  See Timothy D. Naegele [NOTE: To download The Banking Law Journal article, “The Brooke Amendment And Section 8 Housing: Revisited,” please click on the link to the left of this note]; see also https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2015/01/03/edward-w-brooke-is-dead/ (“Edward W. Brooke Is Dead”) and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Brooke (“Edward Brooke”)

[3]  But see https://crosscut.com/2019/04/despite-new-law-landlords-continue-turn-away-applicants-section-8-vouchers (“Despite new law, landlords continue to turn away applicants with Section 8 vouchers”) and https://laist.com/2019/04/10/la_wants_to_stop_landlords_from_rejecting_low-income_housing_vouchers.php (“LA Wants To Stop Landlords From Rejecting Section 8 Vouchers”) and https://www.scpr.org/news/2019/04/12/89035/la-considers-prohibiting-landlords-from-rejecting/https://www.scpr.org/news/2019/04/12/89035/la-considers-prohibiting-landlords-from-rejecting/ (“LA considers prohibiting landlords from rejecting housing assistance vouchers”—”Nearly half of the people getting a Section 8 voucher in L.A. will end up losing it because they can’t find any landlords who will rent to them”) and https://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-section-8-discrimination-law-homeless-20190419-story.html (“End Section 8 housing discrimination”—”[A]t a time when cities and counties are increasingly relying on vouchers to help reduce homelessness, many landlords won’t even consider leasing to tenants whose rent would be paid, in whole or in part, by the government. The problem is particularly acute in cities with high rents and low vacancies. In Los Angeles, nearly half the people trying to use a Section 8 voucher had it expire in 2017 before they could find a place to live, up from 18% in 2011. Several cities, including San Diego, San Jose and San Francisco, have already banned discrimination against tenants with Section 8 and other housing vouchers.  . . . But California can’t end housing discrimination on a city-by-city basis. State lawmakers need to go further and pass Senate Bill 329, which would enact the ban statewide.  . . . Landlords argue that high denial rates aren’t driven by discrimination but by the paperwork, inspections and restrictions that come with rental subsidy programs. For example, it’s hard to raise the rent, even modestly, on voucher tenants. Plus, they note, the supposed “market rent” the federal government is willing to cover is often too low in California’s overheated markets, where the bigger problem is a lack of affordable housing units”) and https://www.bostonherald.com/2019/04/25/boston-receives-1000-housing-vouchers-for-homeless/ (“Boston receives 1,000 housing vouchers for homeless”) and https://wpdh.com/ny-landlords-cant-discriminate-against-section-8-anymore/ (“NY Landlords Can’t Discriminate Against Section 8 Anymore”) and https://www.wbez.org/shows/wbez-news/more-section-8-vouchers-in-chicagos-black-neighborhoods-than-a-decade-ago/e461cdf4-22d1-45bd-9522-e0983c2d1c08 (“Chicago’s Section 8 Vouchers Increasing In Black Communities, Declining In White Neighborhoods”) and https://dc.curbed.com/2019/5/9/18538152/dc-nonprofit-fair-housing-law-online-course (“D.C. nonprofit offers online fair housing course designed to prevent discrimination by landlords”)





A New Catholic Manifesto?

13 04 2019

 By Timothy D. Naegele[1]

A recent survey found that there are as many Americans who claim no religion, as there are evangelicals and Catholics:

For the first time “No Religion” has topped a survey of Americans’ religious identity. . . . The non-religious edged out Catholics and evangelicals. . . .[2]

Also, it has been noted that “a growing number of Americans reject organized religion,” and that “‘No Religion’ will be the largest group outright in four to six years.”[3]  These conclusions do not surprise many if not most “believers”—which is the path less traveled.

Some of us “experienced” God at one time or another in our lives[4]; and without that, it is likely that we too would not only reject organized religion, but any belief in a “Higher Power” altogether.  We might look at the cruelties, injustices and sadness in Life, and wonder how a loving God could allow this.  It seems to fly in the face of logic and rational belief systems.[5]

Indeed, to “push” our belief systems on others, or even to mention the life-changing moment we experienced, seems arrogant and pious.  Each and every human being, or animal, is a child of God . . . or so many of us believe.  We are not special because of what happened to us, but we were privileged—and yes, blessed—to have it happen.  With that comes a sense of responsibility, to help others.

Often, evangelicals proselytize, quite vigorously, which turns off others.  If the “targets” were willing to be open-minded, having religion “shoved down their throats” can be threatening and repulsive.  However well-intentioned such evangelicals may be, they can have the opposite effect, of turning away the “candidate” from any religion, which is human nature.  Each of us is on a unique path to God, or so I believe, which is not shared by anyone else.

We fall, and get up again and move on.  We are not heroes or saints or anything else except another human being.  We are no more or less than our fellow human beings.  Each day we seem to struggle with our beliefs and faith.  As I have written:

I had essentially a “near-death” experience some years ago, similar to what others have described, during which I experienced God . . . as an intense bright light at the end of a tunnel, and as Infinite Intelligence of which our own intelligence is merely a part. God was neither masculine nor feminine. My mother had died months before it happened, and I felt her presence and I knew she was with God.

From that moment forward, I have never doubted that God exists, or that God created everything—heaven and earth and everything in between. However, I continually seek to understand how God operates in my life, on a day-to-day basis. The closest I have come is my belief that God acts through us as faith, inspiration, prayer, miracles, and perhaps most of all, love. I believe that in expressing love, each of us is God in expression.[6]

Christianity is the largest religion in the world today[7]; and the Catholic Church, or the “Mother Church,” is the largest Christian denomination.[8]  In the case of some, our ancestors have been Catholics for centuries—and at least two hundred years.  We may not be “official Catholics” today, but we are drawn to the Church for a variety of reasons.  One of the most important is the Church’s stand on abortions, and its unwavering pro-life and anti-Infanticide policies.[9]

Jesus’ teachings were simple; and they are set forth in the New Testament, for anyone to read.  Was He the Messiah and Son of God?  I believe so.  In many ways, His messages were clear: to help the poorest of poor (e.g., homeless) and the downtrodden; and not to worship material things or “creature comforts.”  We come into this world with nothing, and we leave with nothing, just like the Pharaohs or monarchs of ancient Egypt.[10]

How and where has the Catholic Church gone astray, and diverged from the teachings of Jesus?[11]  How can it be brought back “on track,” so it is true to Jesus’ teachings?  For some non-believers, there is probably nothing that the Church could do that would “redeem its sins.”  Some are determined to destroy the Church, and organized religions altogether; and seemingly, nothing will change their minds or alter their paths.

Pedophilia has ripped the Church apart around the world, and in places like Ireland where the Church used to be so strong.  What can be done about this, at least with respect to those who are “open-minded” and not bent on destruction?  First, the Church needs to “clean house,” and rid its ranks of pedophiles who prey on others, and those who engage in human trafficking and slavery.  Second, there must not be more cover-ups.  Third, I believe there should be no more vows of celibacy or chastity, which are unnatural.  Fourth, the priesthood should be open and welcoming to women.

Lastly, why should I care?  Why should I or anyone else waste time writing an article like this or trying to make changes, which may be unlikely to move the Church or its adherents one single inch?  Indeed, few people may read this article, much less be moved by it.  And some may be repulsed and/or angry about what I have written.  Yet, I want to see Jesus’ wonderful teachings flourish, and for the Catholic Church to continue to promulgate such teachings far and wide—and yes, to serve God in the process.

The Church has helped millions of human beings worldwide, and it continues to do so.  This is its future.

 

 

© 2019, Timothy D. Naegele


[1]  Timothy D. Naegele was counsel to the United States Senate’s Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and chief of staff to Presidential Medal of Freedom and Congressional Gold Medal recipient and former U.S. Senator Edward W. Brooke (R-Mass). He and his firm, Timothy D. Naegele & Associates, specialize in Banking and Financial Institutions Law, Internet Law, Litigation and other matters (see www.naegele.com and Timothy D. Naegele Resume). He has an undergraduate degree in economics from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), as well as two law degrees from the School of Law (Boalt Hall), University of California, Berkeley, and from Georgetown University. He served as a Captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency at the Pentagon, where he received the Joint Service Commendation Medal (see, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commendation_Medal#Joint_Service). Mr. Naegele is an Independent politically; and he is listed in Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who in American Law, and Who’s Who in Finance and Business. He has written extensively over the years (see, e.g., www.naegele.com/whats_new.html#articles), and can be contacted directly at tdnaegele.associates@gmail.com

[2]  See https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/13/us/no-religion-largest-group-first-time-usa-trnd/index.html (“There are now as many Americans who claim no religion as there are evangelicals and Catholics, a survey finds”)

[3]  Id.

[4]  See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2010/05/12/what-and-where-is-god/ (“What And Where Is God?”)

[5]  See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2010/05/12/what-and-where-is-god/#comment-426 (“For A Lovely Woman Named Cynthia Whose Faith In God Will Help Her”)

[6]  See infra n.4.

[7]  See, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_religious_groups#Largest_religious_groups (“Largest religious groups”)

[8]  See, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church (“Catholic Church”)

[9]  See, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide (“Infanticide”)

As I have written:

An abortion is a criminal act: infanticide. Each of the mothers and the doctors and others who have participated—or participate in the future—in the taking of human lives should be arrested, tried, convicted and . . .

Abortion is the taking of a life!

. . .

IF any exceptions are to be made, they should only occur in the case of rape, incest or where the life of the mother is at risk.

See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/abortions-and-autos-kill-more-in-america-than-guns/#comment-3298 (“55 Million American Babies Killed Since Roe v. Wade“)

[10]  See, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharaoh (“Pharaoh”)

[11]  See, e.g., https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2010/04/05/the-catholic-church-at-a-crossroads/ (“The Catholic Church At A Crossroads”)

 





Standby Letters of Credit And Other Bank Guaranties: Revisited

1 04 2019

 By Timothy D. Naegele[1]

The United States has experienced periods of boom and bust since its rich history began.  Such is the basic nature of economic cycles, and of our capitalist system that governs global economic activity.  Like the laws of gravity, certainties exist in economics too.  What goes up, comes down—sometimes with a resounding thud.

When crises arise, as they will, public policymakers in America and other countries must be prepared to deal with them in a responsible and effective manner, and have tools at their disposal to do so.  One area of economic activity that few Americans know about, much less comprehend, involves the staggering amounts and extensive uses of guaranties—issued globally by banks, other financial institutions, businesses, governmental agencies[2], and individuals themselves.

According to the latest figures published by the Fed, the aggregate amount of “Financial standby letters of credit and foreign office guarantees” in the fourth quarter of 2018 stood at more than a half-trillion dollars—$566.8 billion, to be exact—which seems exceptionally low.[3]  My newest law review article deals with standby letters of credit and other bank guaranties, and with their counterparts in other areas of domestic and international commerce.[4]

The article builds on an earlier discussion of such issues, before the U.S. Senate more than 40 years ago.[5]  Since then, crises have come and gone; and the issue today is what public policymakers have learned in the interim about how to anticipate and address them.  As I have written:

Guaranties have been used in commercial transactions for centuries, in various contexts and in various parts of the world.  Banks have not been alone in their willingness to engage in such undertakings, and have sought new methods of characterizing guaranty transactions in recent years, in an effort to circumvent legal bars as to these practices.

. . .

A guaranty is a promise by one party to answer for the payment of some debt, or the performance of some obligation, in case of the default of another party, who is in the first instance liable for such payment or performance.  A standby letter of credit is merely one form of a guaranty which has been subject to increased usage by banks in this country during recent years.  There are a variety of reasons why the use of standby letters of credit has increased.  The primary reason from a legal standpoint is that our courts have held that national banks are not permitted to guarantee the obligations of another party.

The national banks involved have been imaginative enough, in responding to this situation, to fashion an instrument which they contend is not an illegal guaranty but is akin to a traditional letter of credit, as a means of avoiding any legal or regulatory constraints. . . .

[T]he standby letter of credit is a means by which a bank permits its customer to make use of the bank’s credit standing and goodwill in the customer’s business.  . . .  [T]he bank is in effect “selling off” its credit to others. . . .

. . .

Quite obviously, instead of “lending” its credit[] in certain transactions, the bank itself could provide funds directly to its customer.  At the time the customer seeks such funds, however, the bank may not . . . wish to lend such monies.

. . .

[T]he use of such instruments abroad has been sanctioned owing to the fact that the laws of several countries authorize banking institutions chartered thereunder to engage in such undertakings.  Accordingly, it has been determined that American banks would be at a severe competitive disadvantage if their foreign counterparts were permitted to guarantee certain transactions, while American banks competing for the same business were prohibited from doing so.  It is questionable, however, whether there has ever been a conscious assessment of the risks which attend foreign transactions of this nature vis-a-vis the benefits derived therefrom.

. . .

Banks are special institutions subject to rules designed to assure their soundness for the benefit of depositors and to maintain public confidence in the banking system.  The potential bank liability on a standby letter of credit, and consequent risk of loss to the depositors and shareholders of the bank, is just as real as if the transaction had been a typical lending transaction by the bank.

. . .

It is appropriate to focus on the use of guaranties in the standby letter of credit context because banks are reluctant to disclose fully or describe the various types of guaranty transactions, and because it presents a useful illustration of a high risk situation once one is able to cut through the complexities of the transactions involved.

. . .

A fee of from one-quarter of one percent to one percent, or as much as $1 million on a $100 million standby letter of credit financing, is collected by the bank for its services; and the bank is not required to commit any funds of its own, unless a default occurs.[6]

No one should deny the opportunity for U.S. banks and other financial institutions to make a profit and serve their customers, as long as they act responsibly and legally, and their solvency and stability are not put at risk.  However, aggregating more than a half-trillion dollars today on the part of American banks and other financial institutions alone, standby letters of credit and other bank guaranties present enormous potential risks to the U.S. and global economies.

 

Capitol and flag

 

© 2019, Timothy D. Naegele


[1]  Timothy D. Naegele was counsel to the United States Senate’s Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and chief of staff to Presidential Medal of Freedom and Congressional Gold Medal recipient and former U.S. Senator Edward W. Brooke (R-Mass). He and his firm, Timothy D. Naegele & Associates, specialize in Banking and Financial Institutions Law, Internet Law, Litigation and other matters (see www.naegele.com and Timothy D. Naegele Resume). He has an undergraduate degree in economics from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), as well as two law degrees from the School of Law (Boalt Hall), University of California, Berkeley, and from Georgetown University. He served as a Captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency at the Pentagon, where he received the Joint Service Commendation Medal (see, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commendation_Medal#Joint_Service). Mr. Naegele is an Independent politically; and he is listed in Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who in American Law, and Who’s Who in Finance and Business. He has written extensively over the years (see, e.g., www.naegele.com/whats_new.html#articles), and can be contacted directly at tdnaegele.associates@gmail.com

[2]  For example, in a lawsuit where a judgment of more than $4 million was rendered against a bank, the bank’s federal regulator was permitted to issue a letter of credit (or guaranty) on behalf of the bank, which allowed it to appeal the verdict.

See Timothy D. Naegele, The Bank Holding Company Act’s Anti-Tying Provision: Almost 50 Years Later—Part I, 135 BANKING L. J. 315, 336-338 (June 2018) (Naegele 2018, Part I) [Timothy D. Naegele-Part I] (discussing Lucken et al. v. Heritage Bank National Association et al., U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa, Case # 5:16-cv-04005, PACER Docket Sheet entry 197, paragraphs 6-8 (“Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62(d), if an appeal is taken, the appellant may obtain a stay by supersedeas bond.  . . . Defendants have obtained . . . a Letter of Credit in favor of Plaintiffs for an aggregate amount not to exceed $5,000,000.00, available through Federal Home Loan Bank of Des Moines, Des Moines, Iowa.  . . . In addition, Plaintiffs and Defendants have executed an agreement setting forth the events of default which would trigger calling upon the letter of credit”)) [PACER Docket Sheet entry 197]; see also https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2018/08/25/the-bank-holding-company-acts-anti-tying-provision-almost-50-years-later/ (“The Bank Holding Company Act’s Anti-Tying Provision: Almost 50 Years Later”)

[3]  See off-balance-sheet-items

[4]  See Timothy D. Naegele Standby Letters of Credit

[5]  See Timothy D. Naegele, Standby Letters of Credit And Other Bank Guaranties, Compendium Of Major Issues In Bank Regulation, Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, United States Senate 621 (May 1975) [Naegele-Standby Letters of Credit And Other Bank Guaranties].

This Senate submission and its attachments constitute a useful starting point for the discussion of this subject, and they will be referred to throughout this article.  The author respectfully suggests that it might be useful for the reader to review them.

[6]  See id. at 626-629, 633, 634, 635.





Will Kavanaugh Prove Disastrous For The Democrats?

6 10 2018

 By Timothy D. Naegele[1]

The confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh as the newest Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court has sent shock waves through America[2]; and its effects may be most pronounced for the Democrats—who lost.  And yes, lots of us began as Democrats, but will never vote for one again.

Something similar may be true of the Left’s stalwarts who demonstrated across this country, first for Bernie Sander’s candidacy as the Democrats’ nominee for president in 2016—which was co-opted and “buried” by Hillary Clinton and her thugs—and then to defeat Kavanaugh’s confirmation.  They may feel that they were cheated and sold down the river by the Democrats, who failed to deliver . . . again.

The wind may go out of their sails, while the Republicans—and especially the Trump “faithful”—may be energized almost like never before.  “How sweet it is” (they may say or think) that their efforts proved successful, as they did in the 2016 election.  With the U.S. economy seemingly purring along[3], they may be convinced of their righteousness and of the certitude of their actions, which may propel them on to other and even greater victories.

In retrospect, Kavanaugh may have been a flawed candidate, and perhaps even more of a flawed Justice.[4]  What his elevation to the Court may mean—along with Neil Gorsuch before him, and soon the feeble Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s replacement—is that Donald Trump’s political and legal flanks will be protected against the Democrats’ efforts to remove him from the presidency.  If so, then the elevation of a flawed Kavanaugh to the Court will have served its purpose and satisfied Trump’s faithful.[5]

Aside from possibly defusing the Left’s zeal, the Kavanaugh confirmation fight has exposed its underbelly for all Americans to see.  Dianne Feinstein of California was shown to be an ineffectual, lying senator, who had kept a Chinese spy on her staff for approximately 20 years, despite the fact that she was entrusted with the nation’s most sensitive secrets.[6]  Richard Blumenthal from Connecticut was tarnished again for lying about his military service in Vietnam[7]; and the list goes on and on[8].

The Kavanaugh fight may have served another purpose.  It seems to have strengthened the spine of weak-kneed and often pathetic Republican “Neanderthals.”  They rose to the occasion and defeated the onslaught of the Democrats’ lies and normally-astute political skulduggery, which had been so successful in the past.  The departure of the totally-inept and ineffectual Paul Ryan from the House of Representatives may further this progression.[9]

democrats-are-losers

 

© 2018, Timothy D. Naegele


[1]  Timothy D. Naegele was counsel to the United States Senate’s Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and chief of staff to Presidential Medal of Freedom and Congressional Gold Medal recipient and former U.S. Senator Edward W. Brooke (R-Mass). He and his firm, Timothy D. Naegele & Associates, specialize in Banking and Financial Institutions Law, Internet Law, Litigation and other matters (see www.naegele.com and Timothy D. Naegele Resume). He has an undergraduate degree in economics from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), as well as two law degrees from the School of Law (Boalt Hall), University of California, Berkeley, and from Georgetown University. He served as a Captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency at the Pentagon, where he received the Joint Service Commendation Medal (see, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commendation_Medal#Joint_Service). Mr. Naegele is an Independent politically; and he is listed in Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who in American Law, and Who’s Who in Finance and Business. He has written extensively over the years (see, e.g., www.naegele.com/whats_new.html#articles), and can be contacted directly at tdnaegele.associates@gmail.com

[2]  See https://www.apnews.com/8234f0b8a6194d8b89ff79f9b0c94f35 (“Kavanaugh is confirmed: Senate Oks Supreme Court nominee”); see also https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2017/05/16/americas-newest-civil-war-2017-and-beyond/#comment-14894 (“KAVANAUGH: A DRESS REHEARSAL FOR IMPEACHMENT?”) and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2017/05/16/americas-newest-civil-war-2017-and-beyond/#comment-14821 (“A Hail Mary Pass With 00:07 On The Clock In The Fourth Quarter”)

[3]  See, e.g.https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/05/us-nonfarm-payrolls-september-2018.html (“[U]nemployment rate hits the lowest level since 1969”) and https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/craig-bannister/hispanic-unemployment-rate-hits-lowest-level-record-september (“Hispanic Unemployment Rate Hits Lowest Level on Record in September”) and https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/business/manufacturing-confidence-nears-all-time-high-despite-workforce-shortage (“Manufacturing confidence at all-time high despite workforce shortage”) and https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/federal-government-cut-1000-jobs-september-16000-under-trump (“Federal Government Cut 1,000 Jobs in September; -16,000 Under Trump”) and https://www.marketwatch.com/story/construction-hiring-is-booming-and-there-still-are-plenty-of-available-jobs-2018-10-05 (“Construction hiring is booming — and there still are plenty of available jobs”) and http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/political_updates/prez_track_oct05 (“The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows that 51% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump’s job performance”)

[4]  See, e.g.https://www.yahoo.com/news/sinister-battle-brett-kavanaugh-over-202425923.html (“My sinister battle with Brett Kavanaugh over the truth – by [the international business editor of the UK’s Daily Telegraph] Ambrose Evans-Pritchard”—”[Patrick Knowlton] had been the first person at the Fort Marcy death location [of Vince Foster, next to the Potomac River]. . . . He said the FBI had tried repeatedly to badger him into changing his story on key facts. Each time he refused. . . . Before testifying, he suffered two days of what appeared to be systematic intimidation by a large surveillance team. . . . When Mr Knowlton appeared at the grand jury – thinking he was doing his civic duty – he says he was subjected to two and a half hours of character assassination. . . . There was little attempt to find out what he knew about the Foster death scene. . . . Few people are aware that the US federal prosecutor handling the death investigation at the outset, Miquel Rodriguez, had resigned earlier from the Starr investigation after a bitter dispute. His resignation letter – later leaked [Rodriguez materials] – said he was prevented from pursuing investigative leads, that FBI witness statements did not reflect what witnesses had said, that the suicide verdict was premature, and that his grand jury probe was shut down just as he was beginning to uncover evidence. An informed source told me his work had been sabotaged by his own FBI agents. The nub of the dispute was over compelling evidence of a wound in Foster’s neck, which contradicted the official version that Foster shot himself in the mouth and had essentially been suppressed. The key crime scene photos had vanished and the FBI labs said others were over-exposed and useless. Mr Rodriguez, by then suspicious, slipped them to the Smithsonian Institution and had them enhanced. One showed a black stippled ring like a gunshot wound in the side of Foster’s neck. This remains secret but I have seen it. The photo was pivotal. It confirmed what several people who handled the body had originally stated. I interviewed the first rescue worker on the scene and when I asked him about the mouth wound, he grabbed me, and said with frightening intensity: ‘listen to me buddy, Foster was shot right here,’ jabbing his finger into my neck. He said the FBI had pressured him too into changing his story and that official narrative was a pack of lies”) (see also https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2010/09/24/washington-is-sick-and-the-american-people-know-it/#comment-7185 (“Clinton Fatigue”—”[Was Vince] Foster killed at the Clinton’s behest[, and did Brett Kavanaugh participate in the cover-up]?”))

. . .

Many Americans believe that Chief Justice John Roberts never should have been appointed to the Court; and that he constitutes the second worst decision that former President George W. Bush made, aside from launching our great nation into the tragic Iraq War.  Among other things, he cast the deciding vote with respect to the constitutionality of Obamacare.

See, e.g.https://dailycaller.com/2012/06/28/in-6-3-decision-supreme-court-rules-obamacare-constitutional/ (“IN 5-4 DECISION, SUPREME COURT RULES OBAMACARE CONSTITUTIONAL”)

[5]  See, e.g.https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6245887/Kavanaugh-U-S-Supreme-Court-sparks-harmony.html (“The GOP dream for decades to come: How Kavanaugh could reshape abortion restrictions, gay rights – and may even rule on whether Trump can be prosecuted when he replaces Scotus swing vote”)

[6]  See, e.g., https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2018/08/01/details-chinese-spy-dianne-feinstein-san-francisco/ (“Details Surface About Sen. Feinstein And The Chinese Spy Who Worked For Her“)

[7]  See, e.g., https://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/18/nyregion/18blumenthal.html (“Richard Blumenthal’s Words on Vietnam Service Differ From History“) and https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/fact-check-trump-says-blumenthal-lied-he-did-bragged-he-n915096 (“Fact check: Trump says Blumenthal [or “Da Nang Dick” as the President calls him] lied (he did)”—”Senator Richard Blumenthal must talk about his fraudulent service in Vietnam, where for 12 years he told the people of Connecticut, as their Attorney General, that he was a great Marine War Hero. Talked about his many battles of near death, but was never in Vietnam. Total Phony!”—”Blumenthal did lead voters to believe he was a Vietnam veteran when, in fact, he was never deployed to Vietnam”)

[8]  See infra n.2.

[9]  See, e.g.https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2018/07/29/it-is-time-for-trump-supporters-to-fight-back/ (“It Is Time For Trump Supporters To Fight Back”)





Has Jeff Sessions Harmed America Irreparably?

17 09 2018

 By Timothy D. Naegele[1]

The United States is being ripped apart today because of one man: former U.S. Senator from Alabama and now U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions.[2]

He seemed to be a harmless, “go-along, get-along” senator from the South; a “good ol’ boy,” whom many of us have seen over and over again on Capitol Hill.  He appeared loyal to Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign, and was an early supporter; and he was rewarded with the coveted cabinet position.

Among his first acts on the job was to recuse himself from what has become the “Russian Hoax” investigation[3], and to turn over his duties to the Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.  Now we know that Rosenstein was knee-deep in the Barack Obama-blessed or initiated “Deep State” efforts to destroy the candidacy of Trump; and failing that, to destroy the presidency of Trump.[4]

The chain of events set into motion by Sessions are almost unprecedented in this great nation’s history, except for the efforts to remove former President Richard Nixon from office, “not two years after he won the greatest landslide in U.S. history.”[5]  Referred to as “Watergate,” some of us lived through that wrenching experience, and never want to see anything like it repeated again.

There is no question that former Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson committed much greater crimes than Nixon ever did—even accepting the very worst that Nixon was accused of doing.[6]  And former President Bill Clinton, and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, have committed almost every crime known to mankind, yet they have not been imprisoned or driven from their offices thus far.[7]

 

Jeff Sessions

 

© 2018, Timothy D. Naegele


[1]  Timothy D. Naegele was counsel to the United States Senate’s Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and chief of staff to Presidential Medal of Freedom and Congressional Gold Medal recipient and former U.S. Senator Edward W. Brooke (R-Mass). He and his firm, Timothy D. Naegele & Associates, specialize in Banking and Financial Institutions Law, Internet Law, Litigation and other matters (see www.naegele.com and Timothy D. Naegele Resume). He has an undergraduate degree in economics from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), as well as two law degrees from the School of Law (Boalt Hall), University of California, Berkeley, and from Georgetown University. He served as a Captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency at the Pentagon, where he received the Joint Service Commendation Medal (see, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commendation_Medal#Joint_Service). Mr. Naegele is an Independent politically; and he is listed in Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who in American Law, and Who’s Who in Finance and Business. He has written extensively over the years (see, e.g., www.naegele.com/whats_new.html#articles), and can be contacted directly at tdnaegele.associates@gmail.com

[2]  See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Sessions (“Jeff Sessions”); see also https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2018/07/29/it-is-time-for-trump-supporters-to-fight-back/#comment-14689 (“Trump Slams Sessions, Says AG Is Hurting GOP In Midterms”) and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2018/03/11/robert-mueller-should-be-executed-for-treason/#comment-14331 (“Jeff Sessions Defends Rosenstein, And Must Be Removed As Attorney General“) and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2018/07/29/it-is-time-for-trump-supporters-to-fight-back/#comment-14809 (“Trump’s Dilemma: Leave Justice Department Control To Sessions, Rosenstein, Wray And The Deep State?”) and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2012/03/21/the-united-states-department-of-injustice/ (“The United States Department of Injustice”)

[3]  See https://www.amazon.com/Russia-Hoax-Illicit-Hillary-Clinton/dp/0062872745/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1529019893&sr=8-1&keywords=Gregg+Jarrett (Gregg Jarrett: “The Russia Hoax: The Illicit Scheme to Clear Hillary Clinton and Frame Donald Trump”)

[4]  See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_Rosenstein (“Rod Rosenstein”); see also https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2018/03/11/robert-mueller-should-be-executed-for-treason/#comment-14336 (“DEMAND IMPEACHMENT OF ROD ROSENSTEIN!“) and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2018/06/15/the-department-of-injustices-inspector-general-is-complicit-in-the-deep-state-cover-up/#comment-14180 (“DOJ’s Rod Rosenstein Is A Traitor“) and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2018/06/15/the-department-of-injustices-inspector-general-is-complicit-in-the-deep-state-cover-up/ (“The Department Of Injustice’s Inspector General Is Complicit In The Deep-State Cover-Up!”) and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2018/05/24/should-barack-obama-be-executed-for-treason/ (“Should Barack Obama Be Executed For Treason?”)

[5]  See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2017/05/16/americas-newest-civil-war-2017-and-beyond/#comment-14737 (“Vicious Un-American Efforts To Bring About Regime Change In The United States, And A Civil War”)

[6]  See id.; see also https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2010/10/04/john-f-kennedy-the-most-despicable-president-in-american-history/ (“John F. Kennedy: The Most Despicable President In American History“) (see also the extensive comments beneath the article)

In the case of Johnson, at the very least he was responsible for the senseless Vietnam War:

More than 58,000 Americans died for nothing, including friends of mine. More than 300,000 were wounded, not including the “walking wounded,” many of whom live in the United States today. Both the human and financial costs remain unfathomable: more than 2 million Vietnamese died, and many more were wounded and/or tortured.

See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2018/05/06/what-atrocities-did-robert-mueller-commit-in-vietnam/ (“What Atrocities Did Robert Mueller Commit In Vietnam?”)

[7]  See, e.g., https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2017/10/20/the-real-russian-conspiracy-barack-obama-the-clintons-and-the-sale-of-americas-uranium-to-russias-killer-putin/ (“The Real Russian Conspiracy: Barack Obama, The Clintons, And The Sale Of America’s Uranium To Russia’s Killer Putin”) and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2010/09/24/washington-is-sick-and-the-american-people-know-it/#comment-7185 (“Clinton Fatigue”)





The Bank Holding Company Act’s Anti-Tying Provision: Almost 50 Years Later

25 08 2018

 By Timothy D. Naegele[1]

The way that you bank is about to change, in ways you cannot fathom today.

The title of this article is also the title of a new law review article of mine—the third in a series for the esteemed, almost 130-year-old Banking Law Journal—which discusses the changes that are occurring.[2]  To protect those who deal with banks and other financial institutions, Congress enacted the anti-tying provision of the Bank Holding Company Act in 1970, which I wrote as a young attorney when I was counsel to the U.S. Senate’s Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.  The law established per se illegality for predatory tying on the part of such banks and other financial institutions.[3]

One commentator has noted:

[B]ankers looking at a wealth of new products have their eye on Section 106 of the Bank Holding Company Act Amendments of 1970, otherwise known as the Anti-Tying provision. This law bars a bank from providing or pricing one financial product on the condition that a customer commit to another, unrelated product.  . . .

As banks learn more and more about their customers and begin to build new products and packaged offerings, anti-tying laws will become increasingly dangerous. Institutions that can successfully navigate this law will be able to offer new, data-driven services, making mortgage offers to consumers who’ve just begun looking, or offering financial advice to households that may not even realize they’re in trouble yet.

Banks which are not careful, however, can very easily find themselves offering packaged deals that will bring the [regulators and/or litigators] calling.

Technology is about to change the way retail banking works, as long as they can stay on the right side of the law.[4]

More foreign entities are likely to enter U.S. markets, and do everything imaginable to escape the reach of American laws such as the anti-tying provision. This has been happening already. And at least one prominent U.S. District Court has looked the other way, with respect to (1) a California plaintiff, (2) a bank incorporated under the laws of Australia that maintained representative offices in Houston, (3) where “decisions” were made ostensibly in London.[5]

The anti-tying provision remains an effective tool that provides treble damages and other financial rewards to those who have been injured by the misconduct of banks and other financial institutions.

Capitol and flag

© 2018, Timothy D. Naegele


[1]  Timothy D. Naegele was counsel to the United States Senate’s Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and chief of staff to Presidential Medal of Freedom and Congressional Gold Medal recipient and former U.S. Senator Edward W. Brooke (R-Mass). He and his firm, Timothy D. Naegele & Associates, specialize in Banking and Financial Institutions Law, Internet Law, Litigation and other matters (see www.naegele.com and Timothy D. Naegele Resume). He has an undergraduate degree in economics from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), as well as two law degrees from the School of Law (Boalt Hall), University of California, Berkeley, and from Georgetown University. He served as a Captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency at the Pentagon, where he received the Joint Service Commendation Medal (see, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commendation_Medal#Joint_Service). Mr. Naegele is an Independent politically; and he is listed in Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who in American Law, and Who’s Who in Finance and Business. He has written extensively over the years (see, e.g., www.naegele.com/whats_new.html#articles), and can be contacted directly at tdnaegele.associates@gmail.com

[2]  See Timothy D. Naegele, The Anti-Tying Provision: Its Potential Is Still There, 100 BANKING L. J. 138 (1983) (Naegele 1983) [http://www.naegele.com/articles/antitying.pdf]; Timothy D. Naegele, The Bank Holding Company Act’s Anti-Tying Provision: 35 Years Later, 122 BANKING L. J. 195 (Naegele 2005) [http://www.naegele.com/documents/antitying_3.pdf]; Timothy D. Naegele, The Bank Holding Company Act’s Anti-Tying Provision: Almost 50 Years Later—Part I, 135 BANKING L. J. 315 (June 2018) (Naegele 2018, Part I) [Timothy D. Naegele-Part I]; Timothy D. Naegele, The Bank Holding Company Act’s Anti-Tying Provision: Almost 50 Years Later—Part II, 135 BANKING L. J. 372 (July/August 2018) (Naegele 2018, Part II) [Timothy D. Naegele-Part II] [The combined article, which was printed as Parts I and II, can be read by clicking on this link: Timothy D. Naegele Banking Law Journal]. See also Timothy D. Naegele, Are All Bank Tie-Ins Illegal? 154 BANKERS MAGAZINE 46 (1971) (Naegele 1971) [http://www.naegele.com/articles/banktieins.pdf]; and Naegele 2018, Part I, p. 318 n.3 (“[T]hose within the Federal Reserve System (‘Fed’) tried to weaken [the anti-tying provision] with a proposed ‘interpretation’ [that the Fed never adopted . . . and wisely so]”) (see also OP-1158_56_1 [letter sent by Timothy D. Naegele to each member of the Federal Reserve Board (March 16, 2005), and Timothy D. Naegele, Fed Plan Would Simply Gut Enforcement Of Ban on Tying, AMERICAN BANKER (January 21, 2005)]); and Timothy D. Naegele, Standby Letters of Credit And Other Bank Guaranties, Compendium Of Major Issues In Bank Regulation, Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, United States Senate 621 (May 1975) [Naegele-Standby Letters of Credit And Other Bank Guaranties].

[3]  It is the only American law that was adopted expressly to prevent such predatory tying arrangements by banks and other financial institutions.  The Sherman and Clayton Acts were deemed inadequate to address such problems.  See, e.g., Naegele 2018, Part I, p. 335 (“Tying, of course, is an antitrust violation, but the Sherman and Clayton Acts did not adequately protect borrowers from being required to accept conditions to loans issued by banks. Section 106 was specifically designed to apply to and remedy such bank misconduct”).

[4]  See Eric Reed, “How to Make the Most Money From Your Bank in 2018,” TheStreet (Feb 15, 2018) (emphasis in original) [https://www.thestreet.com/story/14489253/1/how-to-make-the-most-money-from-your-bank-in-2018.html]; see also Naegele 2018, Part I, n.2.

[5]  See Signal Hill Service, Inc. v. Macquarie Bank Limited, 2013 U.S. Dist. WL 12244056 (C.D.Cal. June 12, 2013); see also Naegele 2018, Part II, n.78-95.

 

 





It Is Time For Trump Supporters To Fight Back

29 07 2018

 By Timothy D. Naegele[1]

Enough is enough!

Rudyard Kipling-The Beginnings

“The Beginnings” is a 1917 poem written by Rudyard Kipling.  It is about how the English, “although naturally peaceful, slowly [became] filled with a hate which [would] lead to the advent of a new epoch.  . . .  The context [was] the anti-German sentiment in Britain during World War I.”[2]

Americans of all colors, races, religious beliefs, ethnic backgrounds and origins (including native Americans), and political persuasions elected Donald Trump to change the course of the United States; and yes, to make America great again.  He is in the process of doing just that, yet the Left, the far-Left, the so-called “mainstream media,” and elements within the Republican party seek to destroy him and what he stands for.

Perhaps one of their more vocal “poster children” is the black racist Maxine Waters, who has literally called for the President’s head, and urged violence against his supporters.[3]  Equally despicable are Robert Mueller and his fellow “Deep State” co-conspirators, who sought to destroy the candidacy and the presidency of Donald Trump, and continue their traitorous actions.[4]  They must be vanquished. Nothing less will suffice; there is no other choice.

Lots of us began as Democrats, but will never vote for one again.  Like the British in Kipling’s poem, who rose up to defeat German imperialism and the Nazi hordes in two world wars, Trump supporters must rise up at every opportunity to smite down those who would seek to destroy the Trump presidency and our great nation’s heritage.[5]  We are in the midst of a war—America’s second Civil War—which may get uglier with each day that passes.  The stakes are the future of our great nation and its people.  Abraham Lincoln faced similar challenges.[6]

 

Bald Eagle and American Flag --- Image by © Ocean/Corbis

 

© 2018, Timothy D. Naegele


[1]  Timothy D. Naegele was counsel to the United States Senate’s Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and chief of staff to Presidential Medal of Freedom and Congressional Gold Medal recipient and former U.S. Senator Edward W. Brooke (R-Mass). He and his firm, Timothy D. Naegele & Associates, specialize in Banking and Financial Institutions Law, Internet Law, Litigation and other matters (see www.naegele.com and http://www.naegele.com/documents/TimothyD.NaegeleResume.pdf). He has an undergraduate degree in economics from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), as well as two law degrees from the School of Law (Boalt Hall), University of California, Berkeley, and from Georgetown University. He served as a Captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency at the Pentagon, where he received the Joint Service Commendation Medal (see, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commendation_Medal#Joint_Service). Mr. Naegele is an Independent politically; and he is listed in Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who in American Law, and Who’s Who in Finance and Business. He has written extensively over the years (see, e.g., www.naegele.com/whats_new.html#articles), and can be contacted directly at tdnaegele.associates@gmail.com

[2]  See, e.g.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beginnings (“The Beginnings”) and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudyard_Kipling (“Rudyard Kipling”)

[3]  See, e.g.https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2018/07/20/the-american-lefts-feeding-frenzy/#comment-14355 (“Maxine Waters Must Be Sent To Prison For The Rest Of Her Life”)

[4]  See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2018/06/15/the-department-of-injustices-inspector-general-is-complicit-in-the-deep-state-cover-up/ (“The Department Of Injustice’s Inspector General Is Complicit In The Deep-State Cover-Up!”) (see also all of the articles and comments cited in the footnotes)

[5]  See, e.g., Zechariah 9:4 (King James Bible) (“Behold, the Lord will cast her out, and he will smite her power in the sea. . . .”)

The traitorous “Deep State” co-conspirators include but are not limited to Barack Obama; Hillary Clinton and former President Bill Clinton; and former Attorneys General Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch; Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and former Deputy AG Sally Yates; former FBI Directors Robert Mueller and James Comey; former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper; former CIA Director John Brennan; former National Security Advisor Susan Rice; former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe; Senior Advisor to Obama, Valerie Jarrett; and DOJ/FBI current or former employees such as Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and Andrew Weissmann.

[6]  See, e.g.https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2017/05/16/americas-newest-civil-war-2017-and-beyond/ (“America’s Newest Civil War: 2017 And Beyond”) and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2017/05/16/americas-newest-civil-war-2017-and-beyond/#comment-14348 (“This Is War!”)








%d bloggers like this: