Continue Reading: "Before He Goes On A Rampage"

 And 3.) They must prove to the court that if the court rules in their favor, that will redress their Injury. (Make it all better.)

I have said this 100 times. I have worded it 1,000 ways. I have told you that you have no burden to prove fraud.

They must have Standing. That is the base of all Constitutional Law. Those things above that are numbered 1.) 2.) and 3.) are what the Foreclosing must say and prove.

You must Answer, "Huh, Uh."  I have never been in default with any of these jokers in this case. You already have a sort of Standing only stronger. You have the deed to the property. That is absolute.

You must forget all of the cartoon characters and Off-Broadway stage actors who are trying to get the judge to hand your home to a "Stranger to the Contract".

I no longer will take on a client that cannot get this through their heads.

It is not my strategy. It is the prescribed remedy that the framers put into the Constitutional Doctrine of "Cases and Controversies." 

Without the Foreclosing Party  proving that it, they, them, he, she has a genuine dispute with you then there can be no Standing. Without Standing there can be no Subject Matter Jurisdiction. The judge has no case to hear. Touchdown!!

At the beginning of your comment you said everything that you could possibly say to lose.

Losing hurts. I like winning better.

But, this all has been done the wrong way for so long, that it is a slippery slope to do it the easy way. Using the constitution.

Fraud means someone is lying to you and hiding information. And you choose to fight that? The law does not ask that of you. The Foreclosing party has to prove that they are not committing fraud.

SHEESH!!!

You may now return to our "Regular Programing"