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.
Is J. Lamberth contemplating a Mistrial? Katie is texting away
Given the 4/4 split and some precedential case law, Hamish proposed a Mistrial with no objection from D.
Guess what "the Jurors" can't come to a consensus.. Judge told them to "keep trying".
HeeeeHeeee! It's a nice day in DC, I had a view of the Capitol building while eating lunch and I've meet some cool smart intelligent people (almost ALL JPS folks) . For some reason I' find this bizarre fact pattern and it's impact on business, government, and most importantly our property rights, extremely interesting.
OF COURSE LIKE YOU GUYS, I WANT MY DAMN ECONOMIC RIGHTS BACK!
Everyone is all masked up and I've got one of those little squeeze bottles of hand sanitizer. I've also had like 4 or 5 Cov vaccine shots, the latest one (flu shot left arm, Cov booster right arm) a couple weeks ago!
I was the source in FandF's hearsay statement !
Lamberth said this morning that all the Jurors had been given Cov tests this am and they will be given another next Friday if they are still deliberating.
The Jurors had lunch delivered and if they desire can work through lunch if they want.
This is a breach of contract case, right? I thought the purpose of a breach of contract case was to make the Plaintiffs whole again, but for the breach.
I believe Judge Lamberth in his pretrial rulings has stated that he is only interested in "reasonably certain" damages.
I would imagine that the Judge is thinking that speculative Damages are relatively uncertain.
Don't worry, I'm pretty sure as we begin to eventually win cases against this Nationalization of our Private Corporations we will get further ahead in restoring value to our expropriated property.
But, I've been wrong before !
The Citizens are upstairs working hard for you and me and they will decide with all the evidence that has been allowed in whether or not the Defendants acted arbitrarily and/or unreasonably in implementing the NWS.
How about a government regulator that forces it's regulated corporations to write down $100B+ in Deferred Tax Assets and book overinflated Credit Loss Reserves ONLY TO TURN AROUND AND SWEEP THEM INTO THE US TREASURY,!
"How does that make you feel?" !
Wel,l if the Jury decides that the answer to the first Question is "yes", I believe that their next question is Damages. I haven't seen the FINAL Jury Instructions for Damages that Judge Lamberth has approved.
You and I know that we have been harmed by the governments use of its Incidental Powers in HERA to implement the Nationalization of our Corporations through the Net Worth Sweep, BUT TELL ME (I'LL TELL LAMBERTH IF HE ASKS !) WITH REASONABLE CERTAINTY WHAT THE EXACT DOLLAR DAMAGE IS!
Punitive damages are off the table.
"While HERA authorized FHFA to act in the best interests ofthe GSEs, the FHFA, or the public, FHFA's exercise ofthat statutory authority can still have violated the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing if it exercised that authority in a way that arbitrarily or unreasonably violated plaintiffs' reasonable expectations under the contract. In addition, you should keep in mind that the question is not what any actual shareholder, including any ofthe plaintiffs in this case, subjectively expected. Instead, the question is what an
imaginary or hypothetical "reasonable" shareholder would have expected, based on information known or available to that hypothetical reasonable shareholder."
"As I mentioned before, a plaintiff alleging a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing must prove that the alleged breach caused them financial harm. In this case, plaintiffs argue that FHFA breached the implied covenant by agreeing to the Net Worth Sweep, and they argue that the Net Worth Sweep harmed them by effectively eliminating the dividend rights that came with their shares, thereby eliminating some ofthe value that those shares held before the Net Worth Sweep. Ifyou find by a preponderance ofthe evidence that the alleged breach occurred and it caused the alleged financial harm, you must decide what amount of damages to award to compensate plaintiffs for that harm. You must make that determination separately with respect to each class ofplaintiffs."
"A party that is harmed by a breach ofthe implied covenant ofgood faith and fair dealing is entitled to damages calculated in an amount that would place it in the same position it would have been in had the breach not occurred, sometimes called "expectation damages." In this case, plaintiffs allege that they purchased shares that were supposed to come with dividend rights, and that as a result ofthe Net Worth Sweep, they ended up with shares that effectively did not come with dividend rights and thus were less valuable. Thus, ifyou find that defendants breached the implied covenant, then plaintiffs are entitled to recover damages equal to the loss in the value of their shares that they prove was caused by the Net Worth Sweep. Plaintiffs bear the burden of proving that measure ofdamages with reasonable certainty. That means although plaintiffs do not need to prove the amount of damages with mathematical certainty, they also may not rely on mere speculation, and they must prove that the damages they seek are a reasonable estimate of any actual damages they suffered.
You may not award any punitive damages in this case. That means that you may not base any monetary award on a desire to punish defendants, to prevent their conduct from being repeated in the future, or to warn others not to engage in such conduct. Any monetary award that you make in this case must be calculated solely to provide fair compensation to plaintiffs for any actual injuries that you find they sustained, and on no other basis."
The Jury must decide by a PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE that the D's breached the Shareholder Plaintiffs implied contract with the GSES.
Some people use a football analogy to describe the burden of proof associated with a preponderance of the evidence as just beyond the 50 yard line, whereas beyond a reasonable doubt is much closer to the goal line, deep in the red zone.
Judge Lamberth instructed the Jury this afternoon that they must reach a unanimous decision. Typically if the Jury is deadlocked the Judge will issue a "dynamite charge" to them to get them to make up their minds.
AND THE JURY SAID...,................................
SEE YOU GUYS TOMORROW !
I'm pretty sure that's what is going to happen....
I still haven't seen them yet! Judge Lamberth prior to Lunch told the Jury he would incorporate the agreed changes (yesterday's motions) into the final Jury Instructions and they would have them ready when they get back from lunch.
At 5pm today the court will adjourn for the day and start back up at 10am for as long or as little as is necessary for the Jury to reach a Verdict.
Hamish and his team reiterated the point throughout the 2 week 2 day trial about the "dog that never barked", that is throughout the trial, he would ask the Jurors about why there is NO EMAILS, NO DISCUSSION WHATSOEVER AFTER THE $100 BILLION+ TRANSFERRED TO THE UST IN 2013!
Not even ANY DISCUSSION FROM THE UST NOR FHFA!
Katie and FandF are doing a great job! I ran into another media guy that was here in the beginning, so that may be another source of information on the court proceedings. NY Real estate nees or some publication named something like that. As I recall, they had a piece of two earlier in the trial proceedings.
HeeeeHeeee! Old Uncle Suggy has acted badly here with the NWS, let's hope the Jurors can see through his shenanigans! GLTA!
No punitive damages here, yesterday Professor Thakhor got out the white board and used the mortgage repayment analogy from what I understand in FandF's recap on Twitter from yesterdays proceedings.
Hamish and his team and the P's Expert Witnesses explained the PIK Option in the PSPA, ON NUMEROUS SEPERATE OCCASIONS THROUGHOUT THE TRIAL!
Seems like it destroys D's arguments that the NWS preserved the Treasury commitment as well as the 'circular draw' (aka 'Death Spiral')justification for the NWS.
Lunch time! Jury will begin deliberations after lunch!
D just finished Close, 10 minute break, then P has final word. Government maintains that the NWS was reasonable, stopped the circular draw, soothed the MBS market, and almost cured Cancer !
I think that sounds about right, probably another 1 to 2 hours of Closing Argument tomorrow morning at 10am. Then I believe that Judge Lamberth will read the Jury Instructions to the Jury along with some general instructions then the Jurors will have as long or as little time as they need to determine the Questions presented to them and any possible damages.
Not sure about appeals, but with 4 teams of attorneys/law firms working on this Litigation since what 2013, I'm sure that the billable hours will continue, but perhaps the government will realize their theory of defense is not viable going forward.
Although so long as the government keeps the Litigation going, the longer they get to continue their 15 year + CONservatorship and the annual drain from the GSES of all the FHFA operating expenses and most legal fees.
Court adjourned for today, 10 am tomorrow. D spewing 'Circular Draw', "NWS necessary to protect the Treasury commitment ', and other assorted arguments that P's have largely shown have no real basis in fact.
Sounds like the Jury will get Case tomorrow
Here's more of an academic question (that could remain hidden forever under 'Executive Privilege ' and 'National Security ' Exceptions to Discovery):
Did the UST threaten to implement the NWS unless Ed DeMarco agreed to the massive MORTGAGE PRINCIPAL REDUCTION PLAN UNDER CONSIDERATION?
Just pure speculation on my part....
Least I can do, let's hope for ourselves and our posterity that the federal government doesn't get away unscathed on this horrible federal government overreach.
Nice 1.5 hr Close by Hamish! He and his team and the expert witnesses have done a great job, EXPOSING THE LARGEST THEFT OF PRIVATE PROPERTY IN AMERICAN HISTORY.
Now D gets 1.5 hr close
Been in court most of the morning, looks like some closing argument for today, gotta go back in starts at 145pm
Katie's typing....
Anyone have any idea what the Actual Jury Instructions are?
Yes, that's right I believe, and that should be pretty interesting.
Adjourned till Monday! I believe defense rested although not 100% sure
Cross is going well, dynamite experts and the dude doing cross is unflappable and really effective. The Gubmint lawyers keep objecting and holding up the trial. We'll see what happens tomorrow. GLTA!
P.S. IS THE ARNOLD AND PORTER LAW FIRM BILLING THE FHFA FOR THEIR LEGAL FEES ON THIS 8 YEAR CASE?
ARE THOSE FEES THEN EXTRACTED BY UNCLE SUGGY FROM THE BALANCE SHEET OF FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC?
D's Expert Witness today and P in middle of Cross. Cross tbc tomorrow morning.
Government continues to spew the unbelievable argument that the Treasury commitment is capital! So, the bigger LOC a bank has the more capital it has!
But heads up, I've seen a lot of Judges make a wry somewhat slightly demeaning comment or two before eventually ruling in their favor.
I think above all most Judges want to be seen as fair arbiters of facts and disputes and often do the above to level everything out.
But I have no idea what Judge Lamberth is thinking or whether he has ever done that or what he's going to do, it's his Courtroom and he rules the roost there (with lifetime appointment I might add).
I'm just speculating here, but after P's rested today, they may be thinking "gee, 1.6 is awfully low, why aren't they asking for more?". Of course the Gubmint is just beginning their case and it remains to be seen what happens there.
So, from what I've seen so far (and I missed a couple am sessions) I thought P's did an excellent job on their side of the case.
We'll know in due time what the outcome is.
GLTA!
I was able to make it down there right before lunch Break. The P's Expert Witnesses we're really OUTSTANDING, but it doesn't really matter what I think.
Have no idea what the Jury is thinking, although they may be wondering why damages are capped under lost value theory, but I haven't seen the final JI'S yet, have you?
I don't know what he's thinking, it's hard to ignore the blatant government overreach on this fact pattern. It'd be nice if he allowed the jury some more wiggle room on damages.
IF the Jury finds for P's, they may all be asking themselves why can't we do more than $1.6?
Don Layton is nothing but a tool for the TBTF banks and the FM Watch crowd. I thought that the CFO of Freddie Mac interview/deposition was.pretty clueless, I forgot his name.
Dudes been doing this forever, you think he's going to let you know what he's thinking?
Although today he told one of the D attys, "I'm from Texas and we call that 'beating a dead house", as the D keeps bringing up the same points over and over again.
You know the pcf arguments and that the sec filed 10q 2q12 says that the GSEs are likely to take future draws.
The Expert W's from the P's side destroyed these theories, but WHAT I THINK DOESN'T MATTER HERE, DOES IT?
Judge Lamberth said he's going to "decide some legal matters" on the case. Let everyone go home early.
So, defense showed video testimony of Don Layton interview from I think 2021 and actors did CFO interview with CFO of Freddie Mac.
Well said sir! Will Uncle Suggy get away with this takeover of the twins, thus creating a future blueprint for Uncle Suggy to Nationalize Private Corporations in the future?
Is this the future America you want to pass on to your posterity?
Stay tuned, and watch upcoming episodes of the DAYS OF OUR CONservatorship LIVES!