SovCit Financial Frauds & Related Shenanigans (HATJ & RKB)

User avatar
LightinDarkness
Posts: 956
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2014 10:23 pm

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#626

Post by LightinDarkness »

Question about the whole Federal Reserve routing number: For ACH, can't you really just use the routing number of any bank? The initial approvals/confirmations are just checking the routing number, right? The sovcits are using Federal Reserve numbers because it plays into their mythos, but you could use any real routing number (which is public information) with a fake account number.
User avatar
voxpopuluxe
Posts: 989
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2016 12:18 pm

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#627

Post by voxpopuluxe »

NotaPerson wrote:Incidentally, Porsha has now raised over $1,300 in her fundraiser for the pretend credit union
"Give me your money, Ima start a bank" is the most hilarible scam I've ever heard of.
“It was the worst of times, it was the worst of times.”
—Ali Smith, Autumn
User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 14095
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#628

Post by Notorial Dissent »

Unfortunately, I think the only really illegal thing that Heather did during the first round was file those nonsense UCC documents, and while that is usually a misdemeanor in most states, if she had pressed it against the US gov't it could have gotten her in big trouble. She didn't do that and stayed out of the courts altogether as near as I could tell. It was her followers who did all the really stupid and self destructive things.

This time around it looks like she overstepped the limits and may get some jail time out of it, although no where near what she deserves, although nothing in comparison to some of her followers/victims. I think Beane is looking at some serious jail time, and there will be others to follow. This time it didn't go so well.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
User avatar
JohnPCapitalist
Posts: 1553
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 10:29 pm
Location: Wall Street
Occupation: Investment management in the financial industry. Deep knowledge of stocks, tech and economics.

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#629

Post by JohnPCapitalist »

LtDansLegs wrote:
JohnPCapitalist wrote:Interesting that three card accounts would be closed on account of one unsuccessful attempt at a fraudulent payment on each account. It's possible that she may have the three cards from one company, so one policy governs all of them. But it would be interesting if this is a new response by multiple card issuers at one time to move to a zero-tolerance policy of fraudulent payments... It takes a while for card issuers to move against a new fraud, but as usual, the reaction will be pretty brutal.
Yeah, this definitely stuck me as rather extreme when I first read it. Then again, the concept of universal default became pretty SOP a while back, jacking up ALL your cards interest rates if you were behind on even one, so maybe not.
To be clear, I wasn't thinking about "universal default" and was not suggesting that other card issuers closed her accounts when they detected that one of them had. They probably would not have found out that she had had an account closed in real time, only some months hence when pulling her credit report.

I was intrigued at the possibility that three separate issuers had independently presumably tightened their standards sufficiently quickly that when each received a fraudulent payment, they were able to detect that it was fraudulent because of the FRB routing number and to come to the underwriting decision that the first attempt at a fraudulent payment was sufficient justification to close the account. I guessed that they would not necessarily have been maintaining a list of FRB routing numbers to determine fraud, though it's possible that they did in the wake of the last round of this scam that went around the better part of a decade ago.

It may be entirely possible that the remedy for a fraudulent transaction was always a zero-tolerance policy to close the account, but I would have guessed that most issuers would allow one mistake before dropping the hammer.
User avatar
JohnPCapitalist
Posts: 1553
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 10:29 pm
Location: Wall Street
Occupation: Investment management in the financial industry. Deep knowledge of stocks, tech and economics.

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#630

Post by JohnPCapitalist »

LightinDarkness wrote:Question about the whole Federal Reserve routing number: For ACH, can't you really just use the routing number of any bank? The initial approvals/confirmations are just checking the routing number, right? The sovcits are using Federal Reserve numbers because it plays into their mythos, but you could use any real routing number (which is public information) with a fake account number.
That appears to be what many of them are doing, when they refer to their "lesser bank." They apparently figure that since all the Fed routing numbers are no longer working, might as well try any bank with "US" or "America" in the name to make it happen. Though I haven't seen any specific comments about this, that's probably because they think that the Fed somehow actually owns those banks through yet another shadowy conspiracy.

It's possibly a little harder to prevent fraud up front because the bank can't just block any transaction from that routing number as they could from a Fed routing number, but ultimately the same result: the transaction gets reversed and the person creating the transaction is potentially liable for fraud. There's a small chance that someone stumbles on a working account number by random chance, but I'd bet that the odds are small.

In many cases, the last digit of the account number is a "check digit" which is derived from the other digits via a simple algorithm and which serves to tell immediately if an account number is mis-keyed. There isn't a standard that requires this, as US account numbers can be any length up to 17 digits. If the last digit is a check digit, there's no better than a 10% chance that a random account number will work.

But the real odds of hitting a valid account number by random guess is quite a bit lower than that. I checked a couple of my checking account numbers and they're all 10 digits. So if one is a check digit, each routing number can be responsible for up to 1 billion checking accounts. If a large bank like Chase has even 5 million accounts per routing number (most of the big guys have tons of routing numbers), the the odds of hitting a valid account number with a random guess are 1 in 2,000. Not a lot better than winning the lottery, but even a few random guesses could ruin a couple of people's days.
User avatar
Mary Quite Contrary
Posts: 539
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 11:17 am

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#631

Post by Mary Quite Contrary »

Oh no. They are trying to pay each account multiple times before it is shut (closed). Some have accrued quite the amount of fees too before the account is closed.

Some even think if the account is closed that they no longer have to pay the balance. These people are crushing their credit. When they finally see the truth (hopefully without being arrested first) they are in a world of hurt.
"My greatest hope is for inclusion and love for all humanity in 2017 and beyond." -Pharrell Williams
User avatar
RoadScholar
Posts: 8955
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:25 am
Location: Baltimore
Occupation: Historic Restoration Woodworker
Contact:

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#632

Post by RoadScholar »

neeneko wrote:
NotaPerson wrote:This could be interesting...

conference call.JPG
It really seems like there should be some topics between (1) and (2), including things like 'learn how to start a bank' and 'start a bank', which should both come before teaching consumers how to use your new service.
These people are the Underpants Gnomes of high finance. 8-)
The bitterest truth is healthier than the sweetest lie.
X3
User avatar
mmmirele
Posts: 2464
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 12:17 pm
Location: Xenu's Red Mountain Trap

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#633

Post by mmmirele »

RoadScholar wrote:
neeneko wrote:
NotaPerson wrote:This could be interesting...

conference call.JPG
It really seems like there should be some topics between (1) and (2), including things like 'learn how to start a bank' and 'start a bank', which should both come before teaching consumers how to use your new service.
These people are the Underpants Gnomes of high finance. 8-)
THIS!!! Seriously, this is the Underpants Gnomes. Just as a reminder, this is what the Underpants Gnomes has as their plan:
1. Collect underpants
2. ?
3. Profit
These people have been scrambling around collecting routing numbers and trying to figure out their account numbers and now they hope to profit. Which isn't happening, obviously.
User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 14095
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#634

Post by Notorial Dissent »

JohnPCapitalist wrote:
LightinDarkness wrote:Question about the whole Federal Reserve routing number: For ACH, can't you really just use the routing number of any bank? The initial approvals/confirmations are just checking the routing number, right? The sovcits are using Federal Reserve numbers because it plays into their mythos, but you could use any real routing number (which is public information) with a fake account number.
That appears to be what many of them are doing, when they refer to their "lesser bank." They apparently figure that since all the Fed routing numbers are no longer working, might as well try any bank with "US" or "America" in the name to make it happen. Though I haven't seen any specific comments about this, that's probably because they think that the Fed somehow actually owns those banks through yet another shadowy conspiracy.

It's possibly a little harder to prevent fraud up front because the bank can't just block any transaction from that routing number as they could from a Fed routing number, but ultimately the same result: the transaction gets reversed and the person creating the transaction is potentially liable for fraud. There's a small chance that someone stumbles on a working account number by random chance, but I'd bet that the odds are small.

In many cases, the last digit of the account number is a "check digit" which is derived from the other digits via a simple algorithm and which serves to tell immediately if an account number is mis-keyed. There isn't a standard that requires this, as US account numbers can be any length up to 17 digits. If the last digit is a check digit, there's no better than a 10% chance that a random account number will work.

But the real odds of hitting a valid account number by random guess is quite a bit lower than that. I checked a couple of my checking account numbers and they're all 10 digits. So if one is a check digit, each routing number can be responsible for up to 1 billion checking accounts. If a large bank like Chase has even 5 million accounts per routing number (most of the big guys have tons of routing numbers), the the odds of hitting a valid account number with a random guess are 1 in 2,000. Not a lot better than winning the lottery, but even a few random guesses could ruin a couple of people's days.
While what you say may be true, I am more inclined to disbelieve most, if not all, of what these shocked and confused "victims" are claiming. I am more inclined to put them in the same category as the poots, that while what they are claiming may bear some slight perceptible resemblance to what happened, they conveniently leave out a lot of important little details, like how far behind they were and how often something like this has happened. The other possibility is that by now ALL the financial institution should be aware of this. They may very well and reasonably have made a corporate decision that if ANYONE does this and the transaction comes back DNK, that they are gone, no second chances. Realistically this is valid, if someone is going to try and use a FED RTN, then they are committing fraud and are not a customer you want to have to deal with, and whether they are too stupid to walk and chew gum at the same time is irrleevant, particularly on the chance they might actually get away with something. I see the closures as a reasonable reaction from loss prevention.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
User avatar
mmmirele
Posts: 2464
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 12:17 pm
Location: Xenu's Red Mountain Trap

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#635

Post by mmmirele »

NotaPerson wrote:These notices (with that very statement) have been shared in the Facebook groups. People simply do not believe them. They encourage each other with sentiments like "There are millions of us and they can't stop us!" and "This is a fear tactic. Don't give in to the fear!"

What I want so much to see, and what really needs to happen I think, is a big media story showing the arrest of a dozen or more people at once for wire fraud. Until that happens, this could drag on for weeks or months.
I was actually hoping the Heather Ann Tucci-Jarraf thing would catch fire. I mean, we've got a dude with a half-million dollars basically stolen from his bank, it's burning a hole in his pocket and he turns around and buys a fully-loaded RV. And then, when questions start arising because the wire is based on money stolen from his bank via the CD purchase and cash-out mechanism he was using, he get wootastic ex-attorney Heather Ann Tucci-Jarraf, with the crazy backstory (including Morocco) to try and bully the RV dealership and the bank in Louisiana to accept his payment. And HATJ is continuing to stick with her notion that she's foreclosed on the government. It's crazy enough, and there's tons of documentation, and I just wish a journalist would take this up. I've been collecting and posting information here in hopes that some journalist would come upon it and see a goldmine. Please.

BZ Riger had a conversation with HATJ today.



Transcript here: http://i-uv.com/hatj-focus-on-the-expansive-outcome/

Apparently HATJ is upset that some portion of whatever she said in court, something that included "praeterea, preterea," was not included in the transcript. I'm not going to look back at the transcript to see if that's true. What I do know is that anything surrounding "praeterea, preterea" is likely gibberish and has nothing to do with an identity hearing.
User avatar
Whip
Posts: 4093
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 12:31 pm

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#636

Post by Whip »

mmmirele wrote:
Apparently HATJ is upset that some portion of whatever she said in court, something that included "praeterea, preterea," was not included in the transcript. I'm not going to look back at the transcript to see if that's true. What I do know is that anything surrounding "praeterea, preterea" is likely gibberish and has nothing to do with an identity hearing.

boots
Posts: 3402
Joined: Sat May 16, 2015 5:23 pm

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#637

Post by boots »

RoadScholar wrote:
neeneko wrote:
NotaPerson wrote:This could be interesting...

conference call.JPG
It really seems like there should be some topics between (1) and (2), including things like 'learn how to start a bank' and 'start a bank', which should both come before teaching consumers how to use your new service.
These people are the Underpants Gnomes of high finance. 8-)
Step one - Start a bank
Step 2 - ?
Step 3 - $$$$ :thumbs:
User avatar
ArthurWankspittle
Posts: 1877
Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 12:38 pm

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#638

Post by ArthurWankspittle »

Foggy wrote:I had a client who was picked up on a warrant in far northern California. He had the same name as the guy in the warrant, except he was 10 years younger and 25 lbs. lighter and 5" shorter than the guy who the warrant described. No matter, the name was the same, so he was handcuffed and put in a van and it took them 9 days to get him down to SoCal, staying in different jails every night.

When I got him, he was released immediately. Actually, they release you at 3 am, so there's no bus or taxi service. But the DA agreed to release him immediately; the rest is just processing the paperwork. Amazingly enough, he was the wrong guy, so they let him go.

'Course, that didn't mean they apologized and gave him bus fare to get home again. They just released him. At 3 am. In a bad neighborhood :|
Was he black? The match was nearer than this one:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... 0b02cbf49c
Trump appoints Incitatus to lead corona virus response.
#KingDonaldsPlague
User avatar
Sam the Centipede
Posts: 7751
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:25 pm

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#639

Post by Sam the Centipede »

ArthurWankspittle wrote:
Foggy wrote:I had a client who was picked up on a warrant in far northern California. He had the same name as the guy in the warrant, except he was 10 years younger and 25 lbs. lighter and 5" shorter than the guy who the warrant described. No matter, the name was the same, so he was handcuffed and put in a van and it took them 9 days to get him down to SoCal, staying in different jails every night.

When I got him, he was released immediately. Actually, they release you at 3 am, so there's no bus or taxi service. But the DA agreed to release him immediately; the rest is just processing the paperwork. Amazingly enough, he was the wrong guy, so they let him go.

'Course, that didn't mean they apologized and gave him bus fare to get home again. They just released him. At 3 am. In a bad neighborhood :|
Was he black? The match was nearer than this one:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... 0b02cbf49c
This part of the WaPo report amused me (but not in a good way):
Washington Post reporter Amy B. Wang wrote:A Bakersfield police spokesman told The Washington Post he would not comment further on the case but confirmed that the department had determined that the officers had exercised appropriate use of force on Hargrove.
Yes, it's an "appropriate use of force" when a bunch of cops decide to assault and terrorize a 120 pound 5' 2" 19 year old girl with black hair because they think she might be a 170 pound 5'10" 170 pound bald-headed man in his late 20s. I think it's fair to interpret "appropriate use of force" in this case as meaning "she is black so it's ok". Many, many cops are great, but some are lying, vicious, racist bastards. Clearly Bakersfield enjoys employing those in the latter category.
User avatar
Turtle
Posts: 4117
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 5:27 pm
Occupation: SPACE FORCE COMMANDER

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#640

Post by Turtle »

Kolyin wrote:Oh, man. The last rep he talks to:

"Exactly, that's crazy... Please don't do this again, someone will catch you."

This is very similar to what people were doing during the OPPT scam. With OPPT, they were basically printing up these official looking bond documents with dollar amounts in the 9 figures (supposedly whatever they were worth after HATJ foreclosed on reality), then going into the bank with them saying they want to open a new account. Instead of the FRB, they were fixated on Wells Fargo, because Wells Fargo had caught onto them quickly and adopted a refined "back away slowly" policy that pushed these people into a manager's office instead of shutting them down at the teller level. Because of this, people believed there was some legitimacy to it. They were recording phone calls and even face to face meetings, and because they weren't being told to GTFO, it just reinforced whatever rationale they had glommed onto that week. Of course people were posting their experiences, which were all super positive, they were quitting their jobs and stopped paying their bills. So naturally things started to sour over time, when they were getting repo'd and being evicted. People like HATJ were telling people to go back into the Wells Fargo and demand their money be credited to their accounts. All the while, she and her group of grifters were going on the magic bus sex tour, where they would stop in any place they could get a group of people to gather and give them gas money for their water-powered RV. It's kinda poetic when she finally got busted, it was over a RV.

Also the Morocco thing failed due to lack of funding, but there was constant sex and drug induced drama, and were wearing out their welcome with the locals who found it offensive. There was always the possibility of getting jammed up in the legal system over there, which is very much different than the way things are done in the USA.
User avatar
Turtle
Posts: 4117
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 5:27 pm
Occupation: SPACE FORCE COMMANDER

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#641

Post by Turtle »

voxpopuluxe wrote:
NotaPerson wrote:Incidentally, Porsha has now raised over $1,300 in her fundraiser for the pretend credit union
"Give me your money, Ima start a bank" is the most hilarible scam I've ever heard of.

This was essentially how they started their I-UV site. Give them your paper money and they will convert it to energy units that can be stored in perpetuity, nunc pro trunc praeteria pratera, and you can use them to buy absolutely nothing in the real world. But you will feel much better because paper money is bad energy, they are replacing it with good energy.
Jeffrey
Posts: 2059
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#642

Post by Jeffrey »

Turtle wrote: they were fixated on Wells Fargo, because Wells Fargo had caught onto them quickly and adopted a refined "back away slowly" policy
Actually I believe the fixation with Wells Fargo is that Heather had a mortgage with them, stopped paying and got foreclosed then evicted by them.
User avatar
Northland10
Posts: 10012
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#643

Post by Northland10 »

Jeffrey wrote:
Turtle wrote: they were fixated on Wells Fargo, because Wells Fargo had caught onto them quickly and adopted a refined "back away slowly" policy
Actually I believe the fixation with Wells Fargo is that Heather had a mortgage with them, stopped paying and got foreclosed then evicted by them.
They just think Wells Fargo brings them cool stuff like rocking, maple sugar, band instruments and bank accounts.

North-land: of the family 10.5

UCC 1-106 Plural is Singular, Singular is Plural.
User avatar
LightinDarkness
Posts: 956
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2014 10:23 pm

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#644

Post by LightinDarkness »

Did anyone notice that the FBI agent said, during the identity hearing, that they caught Heather due her videos:
Page 31
Yes, ma'am. We had made an arrest of Mr. Randall Bean, and then at the scene there were two other individuals, and they gave me a piece of paper with the phone number and a name "Heather" on it.

Subsequent to the arrest, we obtained video an audio evidence that indicated Ms. Tucci-Jarraf had a role in this matter, including evidence showing that she was involved in a call to a RV dealership and a subsequent video where she identifies the scheme online
That video of her calling the RV dealership ultimately will lead to her spending years in jail. The FBI must be very thankful that Heather loves herself so much: she provided all the evidence they need for the case. Its like she presented herself gift wrapped for jail time or something.
Pompeed
Posts: 307
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2016 6:27 pm

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#645

Post by Pompeed »

voxpopuluxe wrote:
NotaPerson wrote:Incidentally, Porsha has now raised over $1,300 in her fundraiser for the pretend credit union
"Give me your money, Ima start a bank" is the most hilarible scam I've ever heard of.


I seem to recall some ditzy woman using the Internet in recent days to start a bank or sell some bonds. I can't recall whether she was a Tucci follower or not.
User avatar
NotaPerson
Posts: 3622
Joined: Mon May 18, 2015 9:33 pm

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#646

Post by NotaPerson »

Pompeed wrote:
voxpopuluxe wrote:
NotaPerson wrote:Incidentally, Porsha has now raised over $1,300 in her fundraiser for the pretend credit union
"Give me your money, Ima start a bank" is the most hilarible scam I've ever heard of.

I seem to recall some ditzy woman using the Internet in recent days to start a bank or sell some bonds. I can't recall whether she was a Tucci follower or not.
You may be thinking of Cindy K. Currier. She put up a very short-lived website purported to be a bank where we could deposit the money from our pretend Federal Reserve accounts. She's not a follower of Heather, as Cindy isn't about to follow anybody. She is definitely following the Heather saga though, and recently addressed her arrest in a video.
Am I being detained?
User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 14095
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#647

Post by Notorial Dissent »

First rule of Cindy, Cindy DON'T SHARE!!!!!
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
Pompeed
Posts: 307
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2016 6:27 pm

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#648

Post by Pompeed »

NotaPerson wrote:You may be thinking of Cindy K. Currier. She put up a very short-lived website purported to be a bank where we could deposit the money from our pretend Federal Reserve accounts. She's not a follower of Heather, as Cindy isn't about to follow anybody. She is definitely following the Heather saga though, and recently addressed her arrest in a video.

Yes! That's the name!

I did not realize that the intention was for depositors to defraud her "bank." :lol:
User avatar
RoadScholar
Posts: 8955
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:25 am
Location: Baltimore
Occupation: Historic Restoration Woodworker
Contact:

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#649

Post by RoadScholar »

OK, let's see if I've got this straight... more than one of these meatheads have tried to start a bank to receive the funds other savvy citizens have sprung from their secret Federal Reserve accounts... and no such money ever ended up in these, their own banks... and yet they still believe these accounts exist?

:dazed:
The bitterest truth is healthier than the sweetest lie.
X3
User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 14095
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Federal Reserve Shenanigans 2017

#650

Post by Notorial Dissent »

RoadScholar wrote:OK, let's see if I've got this straight... more than one of these meatheads have tried to start a bank to receive the funds other savvy citizens have sprung from their secret Federal Reserve accounts... and no such money ever ended up in these, their own banks... and yet they still believe these accounts exist?

:dazed:
Of course they do. Meatheads, really really stupid, they believe this BS to begin with, and did I forget to mention really really stupid and gullible. Con artists couldn't ask for a more useful list of guaranteed bite every time suckers. Pity none of them actually have any money, so no real use.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
Post Reply

Return to “Sovereign Citizens, Private Militias, and Citizen Grand Juries”