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.
SCOTUS is compromised. All logic gone.
Is SCOTUS compromised?
China controlling SM and gang?
There won’t be any inauguration of Biden.
Still hard to exit/raise$ with lawsuits pending. Right?
I recall that discussion even though I don’t recall saying that about filing criminal charges. Thanks for the memories!
Is there any talk or article or lawsuit or comment by a hedge fund or anything at all that you’ve seen that suggests any entity has considered filing criminal charges? And / or using RICO?
If so please point me to it! Your posts are all I’ve seen on the matter. Keep it up!
Can’t realistically issue shares without settlements. Or am I missing something.
FHFA unconstitutional. Will judges reverse FHFA’s actions(conservatorship)?
Now that it is ruled unconstitutional, will any judge dare to reverse the actions or decisions of the FHFA while it was thus illegally structured?
Wouldn’t that mean that the original 2008 conservatorship is now illegal for yet another reason?
And how will this affect the Wash Federal case?
Calabria was a mole when pro-release. Back a few years ago, he was writing about all the wrongdoing of the government etc. we longs loved him.
I now think that he was all along playing a role, and was told by the TBTF to pretend to be anti TBTF, and angle to gain power with pro-release officials. He did. Then once he was in, he started working for his true masters, the TBTF.
Absolutely
Couldn’t judges rule that since shareholders had no rights to challenge the warrants, and since the only entity that did have that right (FHFA) was in cahoots with the entity that held the warrants (Treasury), this is yet another case of self-dealing?
Treasury says ok we’ll take warrants by force / board under duress, and FHFA, you promise to not challenge the warrants.
Not everyone wins. Shareholders get screwed by dilution. By the way, contracts are legally void if one party signed the contract under duress. See Sweeney’s accurate understanding of how the GSEs’ boards were told/ordered to agree to c-ship in the first place.
Starving for yield, many might buy, actually. I agree that logically, it wouldn’t make sense to invest in any new GSE offerings until the lawsuits are settled. But, I worry that with the all the illogical investing being done out there these days, there actually could be a large demand for new GSE offerings, even without all the lawsuits being settled. If the gvt wants to simply get the warrants off its hands and collect some money for them, it might just rush to market even without any resolution to the lawsuits.
Hopefully my worry is unfounded.
But just witness the hype machine / media. It can generate enough hype to push any ticker up if it wants to. I mean, just the algos alone buying GSE shares would push price up, as they read and interpret all the “super positive” headlines the idiotic and complicit media would generate. Algos wouldn’t know the details of all the various lawsuits, for example.
Amazing work, 955! Thanks for collecting all that into one post.
Split msg said: “(FMCC is "In Play") E*TRADE Alert: FMCC, splits for effective . Content provided by Briefing.com”
That’s all.
Anyone else get Split notice from broker? I think one just popped up on my phone on E-trade. “FMCC split for effective”
That’s all it says
Shares trade despite no possible reimbursement of Treasury “injection”. That was my point, though I left out that little detail. That’s what makes it profound that they left the shares to continue trading. So, yes, there have been conservatorships wherein the shares still traded. But has there ever been a conservatorship wherein the shares still traded, and there was no way to ever pay back capital “injections”/loans / lines of credit / lifelines? I don’t think anyone could find an example of that happening in this country. And that’s why their decision to allow the shares to still trade is profound.
Philips: Treasury should exercise warrants. These clowns are all alike, all paid by the TBTF, ultimately.
Let’s all notice how a magician works: by means of distraction. The ENTIRE GSE “narrative” that’s “out there” has been a distraction for the past 11 years. The way policy makers USE distractions is; they build new policies by claiming the information that makes up the distraction is valid and true, then they build new policies BASED on those distractions and narratives. They have NO concern for whether those distractions/narratives are true. And the 2nd main thing they do is control BOTH SIDES of “the debate”. See Philps as “controlled opposition” in this case. And Philips is just another TBTF stooge. One example: he says raising capital is important, but he conveniently leaves out the fact that if Law and Oder were to suddenly prevail, then the entire ‘08 action would be deemed invalid, the common shares would rocket skyward, and that ALONE would provide “additional capital” to the GSEs! Shares ARE capital.
That shares still traded after cship is profound. That little fact reveals almost everything one needs to know when trying to ascertain what was done here. Everything the gvt did would be consistent with NOT having the shares trade anymore after their actions. But leaving the shares to trade is/was KEY in allowing the gvt to continue to push their narrative and achieve their goals on behalf of the TBTF banks. I have explained why, in more detail, in previous posts long ago. And I’ll keep this brief today, so I’ll avoid repeating myself. But suffice to say that leaving the shares to continue trading reveals a ton, and is seriously a profound factor in all of this. Just remember, TBTF plans long term, and this taking over 10 years to resolve is nothing to them.
Good point. Why rush recap? If GSEs have been allowed to remain under capitalized for over 10 years now, why couldn’t a slow recap, accomplished only by retaining earnings, be equally “safe” for our economy and housing sector?
I’m thinking that this push to “re-ipo” the GSEs is just another effort to let TBTF get their chunk for cheap.
#4 yes. Expectations are that gvt won’t break its own laws! That’s all Sweeney needs to know here. Shareholders who bought after the NWS rightfully thought the gvt can’t get away with the NWS for long bc it’s illegal.
Investor vs “speculator” is a pointless distinction anyway. All investors can decide to sell at any time for any reason.
Rights transfer to new shareholders, per established law. How could Sweeney enforce some kind lf exception to those laws in this case?
Did I miss a verdict? None announced yet, correct?
The GSE saga= lesson: trust only OriginalSources, NeverMedia.
Those who’ve followed this saga know by now how it works. “The narrative” is always controlled by the TBTF via their hired people in government and media. So, while the reality of the situation changes whenever court developments happen, the “narrative”-makers move swiftly to steer the “narrative” back to their favor. I BEG ALL OF YOU to realize that the above does not only happen in GSE-land. It is the way the entire gvt/news/media system works. All “news” companies follow a narrative that is heavily manipulated and usually controlled. The interests doing the controlling will be different for some particular stories. But anyway, only trust original/primary sources/documents in the course of coming up with your own opinions on an issue. The “news media” has reached peak propaganda power.
Thanks, 955!
It’d be same if gvt controlled Apple.
If the gvt controlled, say, Apple, we’d see tons of false narratives about Apple. We’d see Apple building software that gives away all its technology info to its competitors. We’d see Apple firing Tim Cook and limiting the salary of its new CEO to $600k, thus attracting only low level applicants who are willing to be puppets of the conservatorship. Apple’s innovation and business decisions would suffer. We’d see lobbyists for the TBTF determining for Apple what level of Capitalization and reserves it needs. We’d see many Apple stores shut down, so as to allow competitors greater access to the cell phone and computer markets once Apple footprint has been diminished. On and on...we’d see elected officials bash Apple in public. We’d see unregulated trading of Apple’s shares, causing enormous volatility. We’d see courts setting aside common sense laws and legal precedents and applying a “wait and see what the regulators do first” mentality to their proceedings and decisions. It’d be “common knowledge” that “Apple caused the tech crash”.
Imagine the gvt taking control of any company. All they’d do under those circumstances is pass around the company’s profits to one crony after another, and they foster / arrange for / construct and promulgate fake narratives to throw justice and eyes off the true nature of what they’re doing. Meanwhile, the cronies get ever richer. In this case, it’s the Treasury and the TBTF (which all too often act as one and the same). The narratives are eagerly promulgated by “useful idiots” such as reporters and editors, who actually don’t even know or understand the law, or what is truly happening. They just want to publish salacious stuff to get clicks online.
That’s why Calabria scheduled it on Sweeney’s day. Make no mistake: the powers that be will stop at nothing, and it’s easy as pie for them to make sure that they can upstage any important court date by simply making their own statements at any half-butted “conference” or interview or publication.
If I were TPTB, or a TBTF bank, I’d be sure to watch court calendars. Then I’d schedule my hired-help (politicians and there ilk) to speak at some event that same day. Then I’d release a PR statement hyping that speech. Easy. This way, Sweeney will never make it to the headline level unless/until she makes a major decision, which she is loathe to do, obviously. And I don’t blame her. She probably is aware of the very personalized flavor of asymmetric response the TBTF are truly capable of arranging.
Sweeney &”standing”. Contract’s right transfer when shares are sold/bought. How and why in the world could a judge sever the transferability of the rights in the contract simply based upon the time that contract (those shares) is bought/sold?
Sweeney =coward, just less so than most judges.
Why won’t courts bow to gvt pressure? It’s reasonable to expect courts will fail to deliver justice, even at the highest level courts. I firmly believe that is a risk we are all taking. Yes, courts are our best hope. But honestly, how surprised would anyone here be if someday we see headlines saying that the highest court sided with the gvt in this GSE thievery? Not one bit surprised would I be. Extremely disappointed, yes. But not surprised. If a high court decided against the gvt, it would be historic, because we’ve just rarely seen that happen. And even when it seems certain to happen, like when John Roberts decided against Obamacare but then reversed his decision at the last minute for some reason (which isn’t too hard to find if you really look for it), thus becoming the only justice we know of to have essentially written both the majority AND minority opinion on the same case, high courts find ways to side with the gvt whenever possible, even if they have to go to extreme lengths or anti-constitutional lengths such as the Kelo decision.
Do we know Corker made $100M? I know he shorted, etc, but were his profits made public at all? Did he have a fund that has to report their holdings or anything? I’d love to find that proof if it exists. Thanks.
Calabria sly like a fox? Intriguing idea. I mean, he has made contradictory statement on the record, and even under oath, right? Release from c-ship he said. Wipe out the shareholders, he said. Well, which is it?
Is he being clever? Is he trying to freeze congress so that he can release from cship via administrative action? Is he clever enough to put himself on record under oath as violating his duty as conservator by saying he’d like to wipe out commons, with the strategy being to anticipate that courts will see that statement as evidence and reason to rule in favor of commons?
I searched waybackMachine internet archive for that report. It’s not there, unfortunately. And I assume you already tried to find it there. Out of 100,000 URLs captured from that domain by the archive, that report is not one of them.
Obit, thanks for answering my question a couple of weeks ago about whether SCOTUS would see the 11k super secret documents.
Sounds like we can safely assume that the only way SCOTUS would see them is if Sweeney gets them entered into her case’s record, and that case is appealed to Scotus, and scotus agrees to hear the case. I consider all those things happening to be a long shot, unfortunately.
Isn’t that news a few weeks old?
Will SCOTUS see the 11k secret documents?
Does anyone here know whether SCOTUS, in their process of deciding whether or not to take up the case, will be able to, or will know about, or will even bother to decide whether they want to see the super secret 11k sealed documents?
Or is that something they would only possibly do after they decide to hear the case?
You’re the preacher. I’m the choir, AceT. If people understood that stuff, we really would have riots. But that’s probably why one can get straight A’s throughout grade school, high school, and college without ever hearing about what the Fed really is, or even what our money really is. Anything to keep us uneducated! Their system would certainly fail if people knew that they lend out money without ever actually sacrificing anything. When normal lending takes place, the lender accepts interest in place of having possession of the principle lended. He has to sacrifice that, in order to earn his interest. But what if he could just conjure up money out of thin air, and lend dollars he never had in the first place? Well, THAT creates the biggest economic distortion ever known to mankind! And we all pay for it every day.
Bove: P’s over par? Interesting. I hadn’t thought of it that way, bc I just assumed they’d screw the P’s out of missed dividends somehow, maybe by dangling some mediocre settlement terms in front of them. But Bove bakes that into his estimate, anyway, and still comes up with over par. But again, which exact P’s will get back-dividends? Unknown, if any.
Negative Interest Rates are worse than that. They create enormous distortions in supply and demand and common sense human behavior and incentives.
They force people to spend money, and to invest their money when, in fact, there might not be much desire to spend and there might not be any good investments worthy of taking that amount of risk on.
Negative interest rates are so perverse that yes, you lend $1k and you get your $900 back after the term, and what did that really to you? It made you think, “wait, i’ll LOSE money if i out it in the bank, so i better go invest it in something. But in what? How about stocks? I guess I’ll do that.” But stocks have WAY more risk than regular bank savings accounts do. Negative rates force savers into riskier investments. And they do that because in a negative rate environment, it means that basically the economy itself is devoid of the kind of productivity that would create reasonable returns for reasonably low risk.
Negative rates are meant to prevent deflation. But deflation is a natural necessity in a free market world where an individual might simply decide not to spend money during dangerous times. But by not spending money, in a negative rate regime dictated by central banks, that person will actually LOSE money. But without negative rates, that person will sit on his cash, while prices do the adjusting that is necessary in a supply-demand driven free market economy, and he will actually GAIN purchasing power as prices fall.
Also, negative rates encourage BAD investments! A business model that would never survive in “normal” times can be said to never deserve to succeed, or that it shouldn’t succeed. But in a negative rate environment, businesses might engage in new business models only because the capital needed to startup is cheap. When rates then normalize, that business goes poof, bc it was a bad investment in the first place.
So, negative rates systematically rob tons of different types of people.
Settlement timing? ElectionYr2020? One would think the administration would prefer to get this settled and fully resolved before 2020 starts, because it would have to be done during an election year if not.
Not that I think the public would even notice what is or is not done with the GSEs, as some here think. But the media would certainly try its best to hammer the admin over whatever is the resolution of the GSE saga.
So, the timing of the resolution and the settlements? One would think it would have to all come together very soon. But this saga is full of unpredictability.