Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Yup! It has no life... It hides behind a computer posting as a retarded person
Are you scared or something? You sound kind of racist to me. You are not providing any facts...
How's your short position looking like?
I see lots of buys coming in. Are you part of the fraud?
Anyone involved in the illegal sale of those securities should go to jail... It won't surprise me if they tide them up to new cases after a full investigation.
The whole sector is down 80% or more from its high... TRTC is one of the most solid MJ companies and it's fully reporting...
Great stuff!
Thank you, but was that the reason for that shutter?
OTC has been shut down for the past 15 mins or more... Anyone knows what's going on?
Dude, if you did, you are about to lose a lot of money... I hope you learn how to read charts...
I DID DO MY DD! THATS HOW I KNOW YOU HAVENT DONE IT! THE GSEs ARE NOT BANKRUPT! TAKE A MONTH OFF AND DO SOME REAL DD
Well, you lost total credibility by saying bankrupt... Please go back to your hole, check your facts again and come back in maybe a month or so with more credible information... Until then, anything you type is just a waste of your own time... And anyone's time for reading it
Ya ok... Obviously you don't know what's going on with the discovery process... If the Judge would have thought that the government played fair, she would have dismissed the case instead of going through the discovery process.
I do agree with you... Hopefully we will experience the chart pattern "Bullish Abandoned Baby Doji", which has a high reliability of a reversal. Today's volume speaks highly about the possibility for it to happen.
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/bullish-abandoned-baby.asp
http://www.valuewalk.com/2014/09/fannie-mae-attorney-opines-on-potential-future-profits/
"The courts will review this and plaintiff will prevail."
I lived in Vegas for 3 years... Your comment is totally incompetent. That area is not considered the safest but it's not a dangerous area...
I think you need to look again... Maybe a 4 cent jump in the last 10 seconds... Amazing close! Someone wanted to buy cheap shares, and they did
SA Article
The Case For Fannie Mae: Perry's Motion For Supplementation Of Defendant's Administrative Record
12:15 AM ET | by Charlie Harrison | About: FNMA
Summary
Perry Capital, LLC has filed a motion in one of the FNMA suits requesting the court to order the government to add a Blackstone Presentation to the record.
Perry asserts that the omitted Blackstone Presentation supports Perry's motion for summary judgment argument that the government's administrative process for entering into the Sweep Amendment was fatally flawed.
Perry's arguments are damaging, but not a silver bullet to end the case.
In a previous Seeking Alpha article, The Case for Fannie Mae: Unpacking the Motions for Summary Judgment, I gave an analysis of the motions to dismiss and cross motions for summary judgment in one of the consolidated Fannie Mae cases in the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia. A reader alerted me that on Thursday, September 18, 2014, the motion in the title of this article was filed in that litigation and asked what it meant. Hence, this article. Fannie Mae (OTCQB:FNMA) is the common name for the Federal National Mortgage Association.
This article will not cover the background of the litigation or the relevant law except as strictly necessary to understand the Supplementation Motion. Those were covered in the previous article.
On September 18, 2014, Perry Capital, LLC, (Perry) filed a motion in case number 1-13-cv-1025 requesting the Court order both Treasury and FHFA to supplement their records to include all documents considered by Treasury and FHFA in connection with their decision to enter into the Sweep Amendment, including a presentation by Blackstone Partners and Skadden Arps dated June 13, 2011, (Blackstone Presentation), together with other materials referenced by Treasury in internal documents.
Davie Sims, in a Seeking Alpha article dated July 30, 2014, titled Blackstone Plan Proves Value was Taken by Treasury, provides a link to the Blackstone Presentation and copies of the relevant pages. (I ask the reader's indulgence: Davie Sims' article provides the only relevant pages necessary to follow this post. I'm new to online articles; this is only my second. In the future, I'll provide more comprehensive links.)
The Blackstone Presentation purports to be a presentation dated June 13, 2011, by Blackstone and Skadden Arps, as a marketing piece to provide corporate reorganization services. The only indication of the recipient of the Blackstone Presentation is Treasury's seal on the face page and a slide caption on page 4: "We are pleased to have the opportunity to meet with the Department of the Treasury ("Treasury") to discuss our qualifications and potential strategic alternatives regarding FNMA and FMCC."
Background: Federal agencies are required to maintain a record of all documents considered by them in decision making. Treasury has submitted a record to the court. FHFA says it did not compile a record but for purpose of the litigation did submit a "document compilation." Perry argues in its motions for summary judgment that Treasury and FHFA actions in entering into the Sweep Amendment were arbitrary and capricious based on various failures in Treasury and FHFA decision making and failures in complying the record. If an agency action is found by a court to be arbitrary and capricious, that agency action can be invalidated by the court.
Perry alleges that the Blackstone Presentation was not included in either of the Treasury Record or FHFA document compilation but should have been since the Blackstone Presentation was a document before Treasury and FHFA at the time of the decision to enter into the Sweep Amendment. Perry then alleges that the Blackstone Presentation undermines four of Treasury and FHFA's summary judgment arguments. As set out in the Motion, Perry argues:
First: Treasury and FHFA have maintained that they never considered the deferred tax assets held by Fannie in considering Fannie's profitability even though they were recognized immediately after the Sweep Amendment was signed and resulted in a $50B dividend to Treasury. Yet, the Blackstone Presentation suggested that Fannie could increase its equity by ""ncreased capitalization of tax attributes." Thus, Treasury and FHFA knew the value of the deferred tax assets.
Second: Treasury and FHFA argued in their motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgment that the Sweep Amendment was necessary to halt the "downward spiral" of Fannie borrowing from Treasury to pay Treasury a quarterly dividend equally to 10% of advanced bailout funds, increasing the amount of future dividend payments. Perry argues that the Blackstone Presentation, which indicates that Fannie was "showing improved financial performance and stabilized loss reserves" and "Treasury funding for [Fannie] continues to slow" proves that Treasury and FHFA knew that Fannie was recovering financially and that there was no downward spiral.
Third: Treasury and FHFA argued that there were no reasonable alternatives to the Sweep Amendment. Perry argues that the Blackstone Presentation "proposed a variety of methods to restructure … [Fannie] which would not require additional Treasury funding." Moreover, Treasury and FHFA failed to consider any of the Blackstone Presentation suggestions.
Fourth: Perry has argued that FHFA improperly acted at Treasury's direction when entering into the Sweep Amendment. Here, Perry notes that the Blackstone Presentation was only addressed to Treasury, whereas the agency purportedly running Fannie, FHFA was "nowhere to be found." Perry argues this supports its position that FHFA was only acting at Treasury's direction and did not independently analyze the Sweep Amendment, in violation of FHFA's duty as a conservator.
Perry also points out that Treasury and FHFA have been ordered to engage in discovery in the related Fairholme litigation in the Federal Court of Claims. Perry argued in its motion for summary judgment that Treasury's Record had glaring gaps and, in this Supplementation motion, requests the court to order Treasury and FHFA to supplement the Record with the additional documents produced in that litigation. Since the documents are already being produced in the related case, requiring Treasury and FHFA to include them in the record in this litigation will not create a new and undue burden.
Author's View: There are really two issues here: the failure to include the Blackstone Presentation in the record and the impact of the Blackstone Presentation on the government's position.
On the failure to include argument: This does not look good for the government. Judges take a dim view of public servants playing fast and loose with the obligation to compile a record because it undermines the entire process of public accountability. Here, Treasury and FHFA will have to convince a judge that they did not consider a presentation by two premier firms, Blackstone Partners and Skadden Arps, delivered a year before the Sweep Amendment. Not a fun argument to make. Unless the judge buys that argument, Treasury and FHFA must then convince the judge that failure to include the Blackstone Presentation was inadvertent and not deliberate. Again, judges take a very dim view of a failure to produce documents required by law because it undermines the credibility of the system.
On the impact of the Blackstone Presentation on the government's position: Perry's arguments about the impact of the Blackstone Presentation are damaging but not dispositive. The Blackstone Presentation mentions "increased capitalization of tax attributes" on one line of a 52-page PowerPoint deck without any further discussion. The government will argue it was overlooked or forgotten.
The Blackstone Presentation slides, which indicate that Fannie was "showing improved financial performance and stabilized loss reserves" and "Treasury funding for [Fannie] continues to slow" also reflect that while the situation was getting better, Fannie was still at that time showing a loss. In any event, the government will argue these are tiny isolated fragments of information presented a full year before the Sweep Amendment was executed in August 2012, taken out of context in the hundreds of thousands of pages before the government. They were easy to overlook, easy to forget and were not a material part of the decision making process a year later.
All in all, though, I'd prefer to argue Perry's position.
From a litigation resolution perspective, the downside of this motion is that briefing and deciding the motion, and if the court so orders, complying by adding documents produced in related litigation to the record in this case, will delay the ruling on the motions to dismiss and motion for summary judgment now pending. On the upside, if Perry wins this supplementation motion, it makes the eventual motions to dismiss and summary judgment motions more likely to be decided in Perry's favor. This assumes, as does Perry, that new documents will support Perry's contention that the government's administrative decision-making process was fatally flawed.
Scheduling: Under the local rules for the DC Federal District Courts, unless otherwise ordered by the court, a government response in due in 4 days (October 2, 2014), and Perry's reply in 7 days after that (October 9, 2014).
Let me know if there's an interest in a review of the remainder of the briefs.
I am long Fannie common.
Disclosure: The author is long FNMA. The author wrote this article themselves, and it expresses their own opinions. The author is not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). The author has no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/2526565?source=iphoneportfolioapp
Tomorrow could confirm a possible reversal
Good news indeed are coming. Whales been loading this past few days. The price didn't drop because of panic selling, it was walked down because a large player needed to load at prime. JPMS has been one of them.
Someone at JP Morgan Securities is loading heavily...
I am buying everything I can at this level...
Bounce time! Thanks for the cheapies
500K buy, few 150k buys... No big deal
Thank you! I believe this might behave like FN$MA did today. Same hammer candle pattern with huge volume... Shorts should be covering
Hammer time! With huge volume!
Pppplease... I love your post history! I just did my dd and all I can say this is a baby ready to take off... At least a bounce is coming.
A hammer candle will get everyone to sh&t their pants... Watch out
You are right, if I am you I'll be careful with what I say. There is a pretty good chance you are being investigated at the moment. Seriously, now that the SEC is following the OTC market very close, they are probably taking notes at your slander comments. My last post, so I won't be able to respond you back... But good luck, the SEC might know who you are , where you live, what you smoke, who pays you.
Please read again. You might answer your own question. Also, the SEC investigated this promoters months before they got shut down, I'm pretty sure they knew about HEMP as well. What makes you think they will shut them down now when clearly they had more time to do it before?
Lol! Watch this bounce 25% on Monday. Here are the news people were expecting to hear.
http://online.wsj.com/article/PR-CO-20140808-912147.html
Hope I can get some shares before this goes over .05 on Monday morning
I think this is actually good for the industry. The SEC is nabbing stock manipulation and some of those characters were involved with couple popular companies including HEMP. That's not the companies fault though.
Promoters and short promoters should be scared right now if they have manipulated certain stocks. Slandering could be punishable as well. This investigation has been going on for a while now and I heard Nadia was nabbed as well.
I feel this will bring more trust and stability in the OTC market. Legit companies that have been pinned down will be able to thrive, scam companies will die off.
HEMP seems to be legit, but who knows.
Thank you. But that doesn't mean this is not a company with potential. Pump and dumps. com is also a promotional site for shorts. I don't like seeing people losing money, hopefully this will bounce soon. Gl
Can you post the link? Thanks
ETRF is retail and cannot short penny stocks. It doesn't mean BCAP won't go higher, in fact seems like it will revisit 52 week high within the next few days.
BCAP
BCAP just had amazing news out. This should have a very nice pop on the next few days... Congrats to everyone one that held or bought in.
:) enjoy your 4th! Thanks for all the strength you have provided to this board.
Look at the chart... It says it all. The major dumpage occurred the day after trading resumed, perhaps they still were more buys on the ask than sells on the bid. Before yesterday it was a similar scenario except the candle was much smaller, still more buys in the ask than sells on the bid. Yesterday with over 50% shorts, still it closed even, it hit a higher low, smaller candle, less volume, more buys on the ask than sells on the bid... Sign of accumulation in three days of trading. MACD weekly chart is turning around. I believe the company is done diluting for now. Check it out! Short covering should push this up.
I doubt a reversal will occur yet, but it's prime for a bounce at this level. I wouldn't want to be short when this occurs. Good luck.
Bounce coming today, at the latest tomorrow. Buckle up!
NEWL