
First dump of Anon BofA Documents is up - count
http://bankofamericasuck.com/
======
rst
Detail on what's being alleged here:
[http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/03/wikileaks-
whistleblow...](http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/03/wikileaks-
whistleblower-charges-bofa-of-engaging-in-large-scale-force-placed-insurance-
scheme-with-cooperation-of-servicers.html)

In outline: banks were supposed to be funneling mortgage payments to holders
of bonds backed by the mortgages. But they were (allegedly) siphoning off some
of that money for themselves or their cronies --- nominally in the form of
ludicrously overpriced premiums for insurance policies against default. This
would be legally actionable if it held up, and there have been consent decrees
in the past.

~~~
jedsmith
Yet by burying that in the middle and near the end, bookended on both sides by
what can be perceived as whining by an ex-employee, "OperationLeakS" has
basically made it cakewalk for Bank of America's PR to deflect this.

I halfway hope that Wikileaks is using Anonymous as a smokescreen and has
given them a little bit of info so that BoA can burn their PR on them, then
the supposed hard drive that is referenced again here actually comes out
later.

------
davidu
Just read though it all. So far, this is unimpressive and not really
indicative of any serious criminal activity.

And here's the torrent: <http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/6241472>

~~~
retrogradeorbit
There is mountains of evidence of serious criminal activity on the public
record without any need to resort to leaks. The problem is not lack of
evidence. The problem is lack of prosecutorial action by the state.

~~~
yummyfajitas
Could you link to some of the public records proving criminal activity?

~~~
anonymoushn
[http://voices.washingtonpost.com/political-
economy/2010/09/a...](http://voices.washingtonpost.com/political-
economy/2010/09/allys_gmac_unit_withdraws_fore.html)

Filing documents containing claims that are false is perjury. Filing 10,000
documents containing false claims is 10,000 instances of perjury. Other
corporations have taken similar actions, filing tens of thousands of documents
in court, withdrawing the documents, and _admitting that they were factually
incorrect_.

Additionally, knowingly originating securities that do not meet the
representations made in their prospectuses is securities fraud. We know
because of FCIC-related testimony that this was done at BofA at the very
least.

[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/20/business/20gret.html?_r=1&...](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/20/business/20gret.html?_r=1&ref=gretchen_morgenson)
(article is related but not about BofA)

I would normally recommend that you read something at market-ticker.org, but
for the most part KD's been light on the evidence lately so I'd be hard
pressed to sift through his recent angry rambling to find something
substantial.

~~~
Kadin
It's not perjury if it's not willful; the issue with what you're describing is
proving that the factual errors were willful misrepresentations and not, as
I'm sure the banks claim, honest mistakes that they made a good-faith effort
to correct once discovered.

I can imagine that filing documents with errors in them would really annoy the
hell out of a judge, but it doesn't seem on its face like it necessarily
crosses into perjury.

The securities fraud seems much stronger, maybe via some sort of breach of
duty claim by the bondholders who got stuck holding the bag? They pretty much
got sold a bill of goods, so they would seem to have the clearest path to
getting their pound of flesh out of the originators.

~~~
anonymoushn
Regarding the perjury, you're right. I find it somewhat upsetting that after a
few years of courts responding to these organizations "accidentally" filing
factually incorrect documents by allowing them to foreclose anyway the most we
can do is prevent them from gaining anything through further "accidents," but
what I think is immaterial to the law.

On the securities fraud side, some action is being taken along those lines. My
impression from what I've read is that a group of bondholders whose combined
share is a large portion of the offering has to be assembled before they can
take any action, so it's moving fairly slowly.

------
jarin
Cached version since it's spotty:

[http://bankofamericasuck.com.nyud.net/03/13/ex-bank-of-
ameic...](http://bankofamericasuck.com.nyud.net/03/13/ex-bank-of-ameica-
employee-can-prove-mortgage-fraud-part-1)

~~~
invertedlambda
My browser is giving me a phishing warning for this link?

~~~
fooandbarify
Because a phishing page is basically just a mirror. No successful phishing can
really occur unless you provide the page with information, though, so as long
as you don't fill in any forms or download any weird applets you should be
okay.

(The linked URL was, when I checked, a legitimate and non-malicious mirror of
the original.)

EDIT: Obviously a phishing page is not a proper mirror - but they both share
the attribute of being very similar to another page, and with "name.tld" as a
sub-domain it makes sense that a browser might incorrectly label a mirror as a
phishing page.

~~~
bl4k
having the words 'bank of america' in the title likely goes towards it being
marked as a possible phish

------
flashingleds
The presentation threw up some suspicion alarms (in a similar way to the
Journal of Cosmology for the recent meteor paper), it reads like some kind of
weird stream-of-consciousness. I guess I'll reserve judgement until somebody
a) I've heard of b) presents it logically.

------
fooandbarify
This is just a disgruntled former employee complaining about the common
(legal) business practices of large corporations. Am I missing something?

~~~
pyre
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2321632>

------
some1else
I guess this explains the frantic "Bank of America Sucks" domain purchases.

[http://www.businessinsider.com/wow-bank-of-america-bought-
su...](http://www.businessinsider.com/wow-bank-of-america-bought-sucks-and-
blows-urls-for-like-everyone-at-the-company-2010-12)

------
wbhart
I thought BoA bought up all these domain names. How does anonymous have it?

How can we verify this is legit?

The primary domain is registered to James somebody, email address
Nope@gmail.com, which doesn't exactly look like valid info.

~~~
shadowpwner
See the reddit link up above. I don't see anything wrong with the email
nope@gmail.com.

~~~
haribilalic
It's not a valid Gmail address. Gmail usernames are between 6 and 30
characters (excluding periods).

~~~
shadowpwner
I know, but if they were linked to anonymous, wouldn't they want anonymity?

------
aidos
Any idea why most of the images are in the uploads/2011/01 folder and some are
in the uploads/2011/03 folder? Probably nothing of course...

~~~
DCoder
Draft post was written back in January, probably, and the files in /03 were
only added recently. Wordpress can split uploaded files into this folder
structure automatically based on upload time.

~~~
aidos
But that's the bit I find strange. The datestamps in the images would suggest
that the conversation took place recently (march). The wordpress splitting
suggests this is not the case.

~~~
DCoder
Well noticed! I wasn't able to look at the images earlier (at work), but at
least this image [http://bankofamericasuck.com/wp-
content/uploads/2011/01/boa1...](http://bankofamericasuck.com/wp-
content/uploads/2011/01/boa10010.png) is interesting - the email is timed
March 11, but it's in the January folder. Wordpress doesn't let you upload new
versions of the same image, so it can't be that... Which makes it look like a
pre-scheduled hoax?

~~~
aidos
Weird, no? Could be the timestamp on the server wasn't correct when the
content was uploaded or something, but what are the chances of that?

------
bgentry
Nothing to see here. Hopefully this is just setting the stage for what's about
to be released, but nothing in this first batch is in any way shocking or
concerning.

------
ericmsimons
I feel like this wasn't a great time to announce the BofA leaks with Japan in
absolute chaos...they would have had better impact in a few weeks.

~~~
yardie
Why not? It's not like the US SEC is pitching in with JDF and the Red Cross.
Hopefully, they start and investigation now and in a few weeks, or months,
charges will be brought.

I'm fairly certain people can handle more than disaster porn at any given
moment.

~~~
ericmsimons
I'm sure people CAN handle it, but if everyone wasn't flipping out about Japan
(for good reason) there would probably be a lot more emphasis on the BofA
stuff.

Ex: Go to CNN.com. What's splashed all over the front page right now? Can you
find even one link to an article about the BofA leak?

------
tybris
The public already knows banks are evil. If you have evidence, go to court.

------
zaidf
Wait, is this from Anon or Wikileaks?

~~~
georgieporgie
Anon. Edit: Actually, as I understand it, one guy who claims to be associated
with Anonymous.

~~~
burgerbrain
_"one guy who claims to be associated with Anonymous."_

Which in reality could be snipped to "one guy", and not lose any real meaning.

~~~
GHFigs
Specifically, this guy: <http://twitter.com/OperationLeakS>

You can read the whole stream from the 10th to follow how this was put
together. It's not really HACKERS ON STEROIDS material; he was contacted by an
ex-BoA employee because he ran <http://bankofamericasuck.com/>.

Contrast this no-4chan/no-hacking reality with breathless headlines like:
"4chan hackers leak internal Bank of America emails" --
<http://venturebeat.com/2011/03/13/anonymous-bank-of-america/>

------
S_A_P
If the allegations that BOA destroyed this guys life and made him a
"terrorist" are true, then that is sad. However, I dont know that I can trust
the motives of someone who would still be working there if they hadnt
personally attacked him.

Maybe there is a link- I couldnt see all of the screenshots to be sure. But
the emails I saw were a bit paranoid sounding for me.

------
ibejoeb
The trail stops as soon as the internal confrontation begins. If it's real at
all, how are we to know that it didn't end there?

It's just not thorough. This better be just the tip, because I think it's more
damaging to the credibility of this leaker than anything else.

------
phoenix24
The website seems to be already overloaded with traffic.

I get "503 : Service Temporarily Unavailable"

~~~
sixtyby3
Try refreshing the page. I've gotten the images to load by opening it in
multiple tabs. Usually one of those requests will go through.

But it also means overloading an already overloaded server with more requests.

~~~
fooandbarify
I opened the page with the intention of mirroring it, but I decided there was
not any information worth spreading.

------
hollerith
So why screenshots of an email client instead of the emails themselves?

I fear that OperationLeakS probably cannot imagine how screenshots can be
forged, so he believes them to be more authoritative than emails.

------
mixmax
Well, not quite: _"The server is temporarily unable to service your request
due to maintenance downtime or capacity problems. Please try again later."_

~~~
Osiris
Both the main site and the link to the mirror site posted earlier are both
offline.

EDIT: nm, got through on the coral cache site.

------
scottkrager
They need to remove all ads from this domain, otherwise BofA can easily take
the domain for trademark infringement.

------
binarymax
Made it half way though and the server went cold. Is there a text
transcription of the email screenshots anywhere?

------
levigross
The documents may be up but that site keeps on going down.

------
tuhin
503: Service temporary unavailable!

~~~
efnx
Just keep hitting refresh.

~~~
corin_
Yep, that's the best solution when a website is going offline due to high
traffic. Keep kitting refresh.

~~~
josefresco
Don't forget to use multiple machines from different networks. You never know
when it's going to come back online and you want to be fist in line!

------
shareme
Let me explain something:

I used to work as a jr accountant when my 2 year degree in CS and Business was
first granted for a Home Health firm non profit that received funds from the
state and federal governments.

As it was explained to me at the time by a lawyer when I discovered some
financial fraud with those state funds at the firm I was employed by..you
cannot keep it a secret and expect the state not bring a case against you when
they find out as its criminal activity.

This ex BOAf employee is damned if he or she does or not as the state might
bring a case against the ex employee when they discover the criminal activity
or BOAF makes his or her life hell when they are exposed.

