Is it Possible All Mortgage Contracts Are Void and Foreclosures are Invalid?

The following article should probably be considered forthis." Thus, the lending of the money to Daly in the form
educational or entertainment purposes only. It is rare toof a mortgage did not constitute valid consideration.
find such a knowledgeable judge working forThe bank did not even have the authority to create
government that puts the interest of the individual overmoney out of thin air according to any known law or
the financial interests of the banks and their system ofstatute.
credit and money creation. Homeowners facingThis case has been suppressed far more than argued
foreclosure should absolutely be aware of this caseagainst, and it has not been overturned. What this
and the arguments, but taking any of this as actualmeans to homeowners facing foreclosure is that they
legal advice should be warned against.may not even owe their bank any money, and the
I first stumbled across the very curious case oflender is trying to take the home to pay an illegal
Jerome Daly through an article by Ellen Brown, authorcontract. This case is, quite possibly, a get out of
of the book Web of Debt. It concerns a foreclosuredebt-jail free card.
case in Minnesota in 1968 that has yet to beBut that does not mean that the local judges will allow
overturned, and the issues go straight to the heart ofthese kinds of rational arguments in their courtrooms.
the sleight of hand that the banking system is builtJust because mortgage contracts can be proven
upon. The case also presents an optimistic view ofinvalid and the lending system a scam does not mean
how individuals can take back the power to createthat corrupt judicial systems will allow the truth to be
money from the private banks.told about the equally-corrupt banking system. Political
Jerome Daly was a homeowner living in Minnesotapower and money work hand-in-hand.
who stopped paying his mortgage. The lender, FirstThus, it should not be surprising that people who have
National Bank of Montgomery, of course, sued theused the Daly arguments to protect against
man for foreclosure. Daly presented his argumentforeclosure have not always been successful in finding
before a jury as to why he did not owe the banka court to listen to them. Rubber stamping foreclosure
anything.lawsuits generates good money for lawyers in the
Essentially, he argued that the bank had not providedform of legal fees and for local county courts in the
any consideration for Daly's promise to pay back theform of filing fees. (Of course, neither of these parties
loan. Consideration is one of the requirements for aseem to be aware that the money they are helping to
valid contract, and without it, a contract is void. Dalysteal was created out of thin air itself, and they are
was arguing that the mortgage contract was void andselling out fellow human beings to an illusion.)
did not need to be repaid because the bank had notHomeowners, as I mentioned above, should be aware
actually given him any money. The lender had createdof this argument, because it shows the banking
the money out of thin air in response to the promise tosystem to be the scam that it is. Now that so many
repay the loan.more homeowners were given bad loans and are
This credit, argued Daly, was not real money thatlosing their houses because of them, will more of them
counted as consideration and therefore did not needrely on the argument of a void mortgage contract and
to be paid back. Without valid consideration, thethe unconstitutionality of the monetary system itself?
mortgage contract was null and void and nothing wasThat remains to be seen, but it is a convincing, rational,
owed to the bank. Astoundingly enough, the juryand very interesting argument that Daly put forth. Even
agreed with him and declared that the mortgage wasmore interesting is that the judge and jury agreed with
not a valid contract.him.
The judge and a representative testifying on behalf ofBut, on the less interesting side will always be the
the bank also agreed with Daly's argument, in effect.corrupt judges, lawyers, and others who benefit from
The bank's president, Mr. Morgan, admitted that thethe banking scam. As one of them stated in regards
money did not exist until Daly was given the mortgage,to this issue, "If I let you do that -- you and everyone
and the money was created out of thin air.else -- it would bring the whole system down... I cannot
The judge wrote a supporting decision in the caselet you go behind the bar of the bank... We are not
agreeing with Daly, writing "The money and credit firstgoing behind that curtain!" The "whole system"
came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgansupports the banks and the government -- why should
[the bank's president] admitted that no United Stateswe expect them to help people defend against
Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to dounlawful acts and contracts?