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.
You are confusing me and Rick. NP.
Do not bother replying, I am done.
Which, if you read carefully, I said SP goes to 3.50.
You do not read very carefully for a lawyer.
Plaintiffs need bargaining chips, they will push to en banc and SCOTUS -- they need all the leverage they can get
State what you like -- I, like Ackman, think a settlement is the only plausible route to a fast conclusion favoring Trump's allies
The Appeals decision is either going to enbacn review or SCOTUS -- why you think otherwise?
If you think we are going to settlement talks, then NWS will be a bargaining counter. Not suspending, changing or dissolving NWS for nothing back.
Agreed on most of that... FnF would be under the administrations control.
Need to start talking about those docs and what is in them! Tweet that stuff...
Rick, I think they will suspend the PAYMENT, rather than NWS...
So still up in the air about whether the NWS goes or what shareholder shave to give up for Mnuchin to suspend the NWS - and he will want something.
I actually rather see us go to the Supreme Court, with Gorsuch installed, since IMHO we will see an opinion just like the Appeals minority opinion. The right-leaning judges will spit blood when they see the crap that Judge Ginsburg tried to pull and more blood when they reason through the precedents that ill-judged opinion sets on al kinds of fronts.
Rick, agree about the two options. Also agree about drop to $2.35.
If the payment is suspended, then I think we might see $3.50.
My suspicion more and more is that the Supreme Court is going to decide this in our favor - so 2018 is my ETA.
Hope some other court (maybe en banc review in Appeals), or Mnuchin, gets us there sooner, but it appears few judges have the guts to make substantive decisions -- guess that is what the Supreme Court is for.
BUT someone needs to start pushing the real story of Obama admin malefeasance... Wish Trump would get on this while he still has anyone left listening to him...
I think he is on the spectrum
He also posts about what is narrowly legal when people are discussing what is politically likely
Basically, there is a kind of lawyer companies hire to give narrow readings of the law BUT those people are NEVER the ones who make decisions since they cannot grasp the wider situation/world
Rosner was outstanding -- concise and clear
Need to start seeing that message coming through multiple channels from multiple people -- including government surrogates and appointees
"Not likely"... so why mention it?
Very interesting, thanks.
I think Judge Brown's arguments are pretty overwhelming.
But I also think the majority opinion is based upon, or relies for its rationale upon, a factual narrative undercut by recent document releases - so as more docs come out, and get more media play, I think the majority view get pressured still further
Navy, and as Berkowitz highlighted, it is also really worth reading Judge's Brown's dissenting opinion that "respectfully", but surgically, demolishes the majority rejection of the other claims.
Judge Brown gives lucid, compelling and to my mind overwhelming reasons why FHFA acted in an ultra vives fashion -- in an en banc review or with a right-leaning Supreme Court appeal I think Judge Brown will find many friends on the bench
Rick forgot what account he was in lol
I also like the guy saying "we are back to $5 today" -- when we were at $5 - 2012? Back to $4 is coherent at least...
Rek, you are a little pedantic, no?
The dissent lays out a road-map for one line of argument supporting an appeal. It would not exhaust all the arguments, nor would those arguments be based on the mere fact of a dissent existing.
The point is that:
(a) there is a very clear, powerful and compelling basis for appeal EVEN OF THE CLAIMS THE MAJORITY REJECTED
(b) that line of appeal will appeal greatly to right-leaning judges -- who will soon form a majority on the Supreme Court to which any such appeal will go
Your lack of any "principle of charity" in engaging others really is odd.
Please state the obvious some more... The point is that on appeal to the Supreme court, that dissenting judgement gets read alongside the majority opinion, no?
In that context, it will be rather substantial imho
Some of them were contorting those readings to protect certain administrations and Presidents with some wild semantic moves, really wild stuff IMHO...
In contrast, our Reagan appointee wrote the dissenting opinion linking clearly to existing law, and HERA, without such semantic games, to give a damning dissent
Who do you think the right-leaning Supreme Court, with Gorsuch added, will suport? My strong guess is Brown and the dissenting judgement
Judge Brown nails it -- FHFA engaged in ultra vires actions.
Brown's dissent, p.4:
FHFA pole vaulted over those boundaries, disregarding the plain text of its authorizing statute and engaging in ultra vires conduct.
But the dissent opinion of Judge Brown is both clear and powerful, so there is an obvious appeal of even the elements the majority denied.
I assume the plaintiffs will appeal the elements the majority denied.
Desperade, first 100 pages are majority -- next 30 pages are Judge Brown's dissent.
Brown kills Millet and Ginsberg's pedantic semantics on the words "may". Brown notes settled laws on concervator/receiver powers, and other elements of HERA. Brown's dissent really demolishes the majority opinion -- kills it.
We have the appeals arguments all lined up in the dissent -- very nice indeed.
God bless Judge Brown.
Judge Brown eviscerates this majority opinion -- completely and utterly destroys it IMHO. The dissenting opinion has great ammo for Supreme court appeal.
Another snippet from dissent -- Brown slams ignoring settled distinction between receiver and conservator. Calls majority moves "pernicious" -- beautiful and obviously true.
o
3.00...
I so want to be gone from OTC
And God Bless Judge Brown for having the courage to back the law
That is the dissenting opinion -- and God Bless Judge Brown for that -- but it is not the majority opinion
Millet and Ginsberg to their undying shame basically said congress could empower FHFA to do anything and courts cannot reviw -- now how on earth could that be consistent with the constitution? Surely one needs to review to see if FHFA has acted unconstitutionally? They did not want to give plaintiffs a victory for political reasons.
I would love to see what a Right wing supreme court does with this crap... I think Judge Brown will be affirmed.
These MM's here -- I assume people had various stop loss and they took em all
Who else was selling?
Moving up fast
Back to 2.70, here we go... smart money coming
now 2.62
FNMA just hit $3.47, got my sub $3.50 order filled
See where we go now.. dropping fast -- 3.41 now
Also got Sweeney deadline on whether Government pays discovery costs... but really who cares?
The Appeals court ruling on whether to reverse Lamberth's ruling
Do not stake Rick in Vegas! Oh my Lord, I won't be able to sleep now... Nightmare.
Though, who knows, maybe he can count cards?
Conan the Barbarian owns the common I believe
Strongest of strong
I am getting cash together for any buying opportunities when weak hands get shaken out again - settlement talks are often rough, low balling, strong arming etc
And Cohn told us he was working on a plan...
Did I say different... you asked for scenarios. I gave you one. If... then...
IF we ever have a trial, and then WE WIN, then you could see that those valuations as a result of a very favorable judgement
Just saying
Very nice work - thanks for sharing
Market closed Monday - you are a very knowledgeable investor obviously lol
Better to hold FnF because you never really know when explosive positive news will hit -- used to be Courts could hit Tuesday or Friday, but now Mnuchin could announce any day of the week
But please sell
Did Appeals get new docs yet? I do not think so...
Only reasonable understanding of delay is Appeals judges were waiting for those docs - so no judgement till they do the imho
So nothing Tuesday is my guess. But I also think we do get a judgement in next two months for this reason...
Then we off to the races lol
Good for you! Have a great time.
I get to go to Kansas City lol
But maybe I get some good BBQ. (Btw anyone got tips from on good BBQ downtown or a short cab ride away?)
Hi Stinkie, that is why I think it is pretty good to be hard-nosed about stuff and not get sucked into pie-in-the-sky crap
Share price does not move till we see something substantive: court ruling, settlement talks
Share price does not REALLY start to move till we have something substantive that shows commons are not getting the shaft: rumors about ongoing settlement talks, court case finally starts on NWS, some action by Mnuchin or Watt
The big money that will speculate is already in the stock and the rest of the big money waits to get in until they know we have a positive result for commons
So, I think we wait for a few months here, probably track down a little -- I will buy a little more if we go under 3.5
BUT I think we have a long line-up of potential positive catalysts now: Appeals court ruling; Sweeney doc releases; Sweeney ruling on jurisdiction; settlement talks... and potential settlement.
All very positive for SP -- Ackman's $23-47 for common still looks plausible to me.