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.
Hopefully, he's not doing it on his work computer or the current POTUS might be able to fire him! I wonder if he's spoken with legal counsel to see if he's NOT FIREABLE AT WILL, post Collins, under the theory that his term is determined by the statute in effect at the time he was confirmed and NOT the AMENDED HERA Statute as REWRITTEN BY SCOTUS IN COLLINS!
I want to be paid monthly to stay home and paint landscapes! That would benefit society as my creative juices may begin to flow!
"Much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good.". Thomas Sowell, American Economist, Stanford University.
We'll have to see how the final chapters unfold, BUT I THINK THE JIG IS UP FOR DA GUBMINT! Haven't heard a peep from MC (or his cat Charlie!), what do you think he's up to?
That was 05/24/13, the Net Worth Swipe will be 8 years old this August 2021! The breadth of the theft, the hiding the facts by the government via National Security and Executive Privilege, the 100% fighting of EVERY lawsuit of shareholder recovery, the indifference of more than 3 US Treasury Secretaries, the inability of the press to investigate, the "may" versus "shall" bulls hit arguments by da gubmint! There's more...
Who would have thunk it!
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thestreet.com/.amp/investing/stocks/ralph-nader-wounded-shareholder-of-fannie-mae-freddie-mac-11933525
I don't know if he's moved on or not!
Found this article for you, I know you're a big fan of socialized housing, leave a comment, I did!
https://sanjosespotlight.com/san-jose-lawmaker-proposes-revolutionary-social-housing-policy/?unapproved=38156&moderation-hash=c04c512385a45afa40a0ddc889b1d5e3#comment-38156
Hilarious! Seems like FOREVER! I miss Sonny doing the local broadcasts! I think Sonny finally moved to Florida, I keep in touch with one of Sonny's sons, super nice guy he's a big Nats fan!
No worries, IT'S WITH THE PEOPLE THAT PRINT THE MONEY!
I enjoy it, thanks! Justice Thomas wanted to use the Bulldozer approach in Seila Law, AS WELL AS THIS CASE, WHICH ALLOWS MILLIONS OF AMERICANS TO LEGALLY BET ON THE BRADY V. MAHOMES GAME TODAY: "Justice Clarence Thomas filed a concurring opinion in which he focused not on the substance of the court’s ruling but instead on a fairly abstract legal question: the viability of the court’s current severability doctrine. Thomas made clear that he joined the majority’s decision striking down all of PASPA because “it gives us the best answer it can to this question, and no party has asked us to apply a different test.” But he suggested that the court should, at some point in the future, reconsider its severability doctrine, which he characterized as “dubious.” First, he observed, the doctrine is contrary to the tools that courts normally use to interpret laws because it requires a “‘nebulous inquiry into hypothetical congressional intent,’” instructing judges to try to figure out what Congress would have wanted to do if part of a law violated the Constitution, when “it seems unlikely that the enacting Congress had any intent on this question.”"
ENJOY THE GAME!
https://www.scotusblog.com/2018/05/opinion-analysis-justices-strike-down-federal-sports-gambling-law/
Who ever heard of two profitable companies, making billions in profits per year and sending them to their "conservator"? The whole thing is as bizarre as I have ever seen! I think the SCOTUS gets it, let's see if they can craft a meaningful remedy.
Sending ALL their earnings to the US Treasury via the Net Worth Swipe, instead of allowing them to have any capital to absorb possible losses on $6.7 TRILLION IN MBS, JUST SHOWS THE SHEER STUPIDITY, ABSURDITY, INCOMPOTENTENCY, AND ABUSIVE AND COERCIVE USE OF FEDERAL GOVERNMENTAL POWER! I think the Supremes have figured this out, let's see if they do anything about it!
I don't think they are going to get away with it, do you? If this isn't the exact opposite of conserve and preserve, I don't know what is, do you?
EXACTLY! IT IS AFTER ALL A GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE BY THE PEOPLE! These Federal Agencies (e.g., FHFA) are in essence mini governments (sometimes referred to as the 4th Branch of government) with rule making authority (e.g., the 4+% cap rule) over limited parts of the Economy (e.g., the gses and fhlbb) JUST LIKE THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH! EXECUTIVE BRANCH authority in the form of policing the rules and usually some type of Judicial Branch authority, like the review boards in the Railroad Retirement Board case. Here, there is no judicial branch embedded in HERA! Why? Because the US Congress thought a Conservatorship or Receivership was not suppose to drag out for 12+ YEARS! As we can see from SM's 4th Amendment, the government NEVER wants to let go of this cash cow via their expropriation of the gses. They have total control over these previously private entities SO LONG AS THEY REMAIN IN CONSERVATORSHIP! HERA says no judicial review of the FHFA's decisions during the conservatorship, but the Administrative Procedures Act allows parties access to the courts. Why? You hit the nail on the head, "A government that tries to prevent or circumvent judicial review stinks to high heaven!". All of us here know that the government (and ONLY through 6+ years of expensive litigation, with the government throwing up every conceivable roadblock) that the government has perpetuated the "conservatorship" with unclean hands! I'm looking forward to the ruling in Collins!
Wow! Did you get tickets? Will the GOAT win or will that youngster Mahomes be MVP again?
"The chief justice has written several important opinions in cases applying that presumption to reject agencies’ attempts to preclude judicial review, including: U.S. Army Board of Engineers v. Hawkes Co. (featured prominently in the majority opinion here); Department of Commerce v. New York (halting the addition of a citizenship question to the census); and Free Enterprise Fund v. PCAOB (remembered primarily for its separation-of-powers holding, but also resolving important questions about reviewability). Nor do the chief’s opinions favoring review stand alone: With few exceptions, the court in recent years has generally interpreted judicial-review statutes to hold agencies accountable by permitting courts to review their decisions. Wednesday’s ruling in Salinas’ favor continues the trend."
https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/02/divided-court-favors-judicial-review-of-agency-decision-on-railroad-worker-benefits/
Last Wednesday, the SCOTUS (5-4): "The ruling represents another in a string of recent decisions rebuffing agencies’ efforts to shield their decisions from judicial review."
Nice article from our friends over at the SCOTUS BLOG: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/02/divided-court-favors-judicial-review-of-agency-decision-on-railroad-worker-benefits/
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-199_o7jq.pdf
It's a shame that hard working Americans like you, me, and tens of thousands of others, are slapped with the label, "greedy hedge fund guys"!
The nationalization of these two blue chip Fortune 50 corporations has significantly impacted retirees, 401K's, IRA'S, almost every pension fund, small and medium sized community banks, and a host of others over the past 12+ years!
For the highest court in the land to put a rubber stamp of approval on this would put a dark shadow over the ownership of all private corporations and not likely to take place.
HERA is pretty clear about what a conservator is suppose to do, conserve and preserve the assets of its wards, NOT DISSIPATE AND TAKE THEM FOR ITSELF!
I think the USSCT gets it, and the days of the nws are numbered. The facts relating to governmental coercion and abuse is as strong as a mortise and tenon joint. Good luck to us all!
Given the 100's of billions of dollars at stake, it always seemed like a final ruling by the last possible appeals court (i.e., the SCOTUS) was inevitable!
Spineless Steve and his predecessors, MC and all his predecessors, AND the US Congress over the last 12+ years demonstrate that the political branches are incapable of doing what should have been done since HERA was enacted!
We will know shortly what the SCOTUS is thinking, stay long and strong, and if you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen.
There's also the law, that says the General Counsel of the NLRB, gets to serve out his term, regardless of politics. So why wait for the SCOTUS to rule MC is removable at will, when the Government decides the rule of law is optional?
I don't think they will INVALIDATE HERA either, but why should the SCOTUS be improperly tasked with REWRITING STATUTES, CLEARLY THE DOMAIN OF THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH! WHAT'S TO PREVENT THE US CONGRESS FROM WRITING UNCONSTITUTIONAL STATUTES THAT INFRINGE ON THE CITIZENS LIBERTY AND PROPERTY, VIOLATE THE SEPERATION OF POWERS, AND EXPERIMENTING WITH NOVEL FORMS OF CREATING A 4TH BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT? THE US CONGRESS KNOWS THAT SINCE THE SCOTUS WILL FIX THEIR LITTLE EXPERIMENTS, WHY NOT TRY NEW AND BOLDER STRUCTURES WHEN CREATING FEDERAL AGENCIES?
He just fired Peter Robb, general counsel over at NLRB, PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION OF HIS STATUTORILY DEFINED TERM! I'm sure it's all part of his "Unity" political statements! I wouldn't be surprised at all if someone inside the current administration sent MC a note, STRONGLY SUGGESTING THAT HE STEP DOWN, maybe that's why MC hasn't said a peep publicly since the 4th Amendment! Time will tell...
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/biden-delivers-a-norm-busting-favor-to-big-labor/ar-BB1deRGT
I know, but I don't see the SCOTUS kicking to the curb, hundreds of federal employees, that's why I'm asking, would they just be put under HUD/OFHEO in the event that the Justices rule HERA is Unconstitutional in its entirety?
I think the Peter Robb firing (an alleged union buster), general counsel to the NLRB, PRIOR TO HIS STAUTORILY MANDATED TERM, is RIPE for litigation!
Problem is what government employee has the financial resources to sue the federal government, with their almost unlimited resources? Pacific Legal Fund?
Maybe that's why a lot of politicians view the hedge fund guys with disdain and disrespect, BECAUSE THEY ARE THE VERY FEW WHO HAVE THE RESOURCES TO FIGHT INJUSTICES PERPETRATED BY DA GUBMINT!
IF the SCOTUS uses the bulldozer approach and finds the entire HERA UNCONSTITUTIONAL, would that mean that the entire FHFA no longer exists, or would OFHEO kick in and their $300 million annual budget revert to HUD and OFHEO?
I think David Thompson, said invalidation of the 3rd Amendment was the Collins Plantiffs Preferred Remedy, however, he opened the door to more relief with this exchange from Justice Kagan: "JUSTICE KAGAN: Does that mean,
Mr. Thompson, that we have to do a great deal
more than invalidate the -- the -- the Third
Amendment and everything that follows from it?
I mean, why shouldn't we go back to the -- the
-- the -- the -- the First or the Second?
MR. THOMPSON: Well, Your Honor, we
focused on the Third Amendment because that's
the -- the feature of this that rearranged the
capital structure, but, as we made clear to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, we are perfectly
content with all of these arrangements, which,
as we say in the complaint, were a concrete
life-preserver. It's like getting a credit card
with a double-digit interest rate that you can't
repay the debt on. It's not debt, but you can't
pay the money back, and so --
JUSTICE KAGAN: Thank you,
Mr. Thompson.
MR. THOMPSON: -- we would be
perfectly content with it being thrown out.
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Justice
Gorsuch."
Remember, IT'S HARD TO READ THE TEA LEAVES FROM ORAL ARGUMENTS!
Have you heard this joke:
Criminal Defendant as Jury is deliberating his case:
"What do you think the jury will do? Will I be going to jail this afternoon?"
Defense Attorney: "I don't know, but for sure I'll be on the back 9!"
Old Hankie, following through with his quest to Nationalize two privately owned corporations, and hence the 12+ year "Conservatorship", begins:"This clause would come into play within a
matter of weeks. When Secretary Paulson met with
the directors of Fannie and Freddie to inform them of
his intent to take over the Companies, neither met any
of the twelve conditions for conservatorship spelled
out in HERA. See id. § 4617(a)(3). Secretary Paulson
did not seem to view this as an obstacle. As he explains
in On the Brink, Secretary Paulson intended to rely on
“the awesome power of the government and what it
would mean for Ben [Bernanke] and me to sit across
from the boards of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and
tell them what we thought it was necessary for them
to do.” On the Brink 167."
Wow! The Smoking Gun: "In his email message transmitting the paper to
Steel, Thomas wrote: “Attached is the document used
as the sourcing for today’s Barron’s article on the
potential collapse of Fannie Mae. . . . I send it only to
help inform potential internal Treasury discussions
about the potential costs and benefits of
nationalization.” Thomas Email. This message reveals
that the subject of Fannie nationalization had been
raised at Treasury at least as early as March 2008."
Amy Howe does a nice job explaining todays SCOTUS opinion and how the expropriation issue by the German government came into the case.
https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/02/jurisdictional-win-for-germany-in-lawsuit-seeking-to-recover-art-taken-by-nazis/
Like the case released last time, it was a unanimous decision, I imagine at least Justice Kagan will dissent in Collins...
Do you remember where Senator Sherrod Brown endorsed the Utility model, as I don't immediately recollect him stating a position on that?
I pulled this from his website: "TAKING ON WALL STREET AND HOUSING
Wall Street has too much power in this country, and too often puts corporate profits ahead of American workers and families. As the Ranking Member on the Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, I will continue fighting to change the Wall Street business model that puts short-term profits ahead of investing in workers and communities, and to prevent another financial crisis from affecting small businesses and working families on Main Street.
The health of our economy depends on stable, fair, and efficient financial markets. We must lay the groundwork for a financial system that looks after our workers, invests in our small businesses, and strengthens our middle class. And we must ensure that Ohio’s financial institutions can continue to provide affordable credit and insurance to small businesses.
Housing
Stable, affordable housing is critical to ensuring strong neighborhoods, schools, and communities. But for too many Ohioans, an affordable home is out of reach, and the sub-prime lending crisis hit Ohio particularly hard. We also know that many groups, particularly people of color, were systematically excluded from the housing system for too long and denied the opportunity to build wealth through homeownership. I’m working to ensure our housing system works for all communities, rebuild our neighborhoods, and ensure every Ohioan has a place that he or she can call home.
Please see below for my latest actions on Taking on Wall Street and Housing.
LATEST
FEBRUARY 3, 2021
Readout of Incoming Chair Brown’s Meeting with Rohit Chopra Nominee to be Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)
FEBRUARY 3, 2021
Brown Announces Democratic Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Membership for the 117th Congress
JANUARY 28, 2021
Brown: Wall Street Only Cares About Rules When Hedge Funds Get Hurt
DECEMBER 18, 2020
Brown Statement on The Fed Allowing Wall Street Dividends and CEO Bonuses
DECEMBER 11, 2020
Brown Applauds Senate Passage of Defense Bill Which Includes Brown’s Anti-Money Laundering Act and Corporate Transparency Act Legislation
NOVEMBER 24, 2020
Brown, Colleagues Press FHFA to Ensure Access for Low-Income and Minority Borrowers
SEPTEMBER 1, 2020
Brown, Colleagues Demand the Office of Special Counsel Investigate HUD Secretary Ben Carson for Possible Hatch Act Violation
JULY 31, 2020
Warren, Brown Criticize Fed Vice Chair Quarles' "Outrageous and Irresponsible" Lobbying for Regulatory Favors for Big Banks in COVID-19 Relief Package
JULY 29, 2020
At Hearing Brown Pushes CFPB Director To Protect Consumers, Not Corporations
JULY 7, 2020
Brown Blasts The Trump Administration for Gutting The Payday Lending Rule
MORE"
https://www.brown.senate.gov/issues/taking-on-wall-street-and-housing
"Incoming Senate committee chairs will include:
Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio at the Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee"
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/03/senate-reaches-deal-on-organizing-resolution-chuck-schumer-says.html
This could be a problem....
I don't think it did last quarter, the governments boot is still on our necks, the 12+ year "Conservatorship" coupled with the net worth Swipe (now with a dollar for dollar increase in the "Liquidation Preference"-thanks Steve!) is really just a big bummer for us!
Another big unknown is exactly who will be the next Director assuming they rule that way. Do you think MC lifted his arms in the air today around 10:30am and proclaimed: "I AM STILL THE CZAR OVER THE TWINS!"
Do you think he was jamming to this song:
Well, they totally get the idea of just how abusive it is when governments take their citizens private property (sound familiar?). LUCKILY WE KNOW EXACTLY WHICH SOVEREIGN EXPROPRIATED OUR PROPERTY! Let's see how they rule, we will know likely prior to July 1st, in the meantime, earnings should build to create a 1st Loss Position of Capital!
I just read the 20 pager, Germany v. Phillips, the word "Exproriation" is used 40 times but deals with the concept of Exproriation in the context of the jurisdiction of the US Courts over sovereign expropriation of sovereign nationals property. The court decided not to allow the US Courts to have jurisdiction when foreign nationals property is EXPROPRIATED by a foreign sovereign:
"Held: The phrase “rights in property taken in violation of international
law,” as used in the FSIA’s expropriation exception, refers to violations
of the international law of expropriation and thereby incorporates the
domestic takings rule."
Here's the fact pattern: "Respondents are the heirs of German Jewish art dealers who formed a
consortium during the waning years of the Weimar Republic to pur-
chase a collection of medieval relics known as the Welfenschatz. The
heirs allege that when the Nazi government rose to power, it unlaw-
fully coerced the consortium into selling the collection to Prussia for a
third of its value. The relics are currently maintained by the Stiftung
Preussischer Kulturbesitz (SPK), an instrumentality of the Federal
Republic of Germany, and displayed at a Berlin museum. After unsuc-
cessfully seeking compensation in Germany, the heirs brought several
common law property claims in United States District Court against
Germany and SPK (collectively Germany). Germany moved to dis-
miss, arguing that it was immune from suit under the Foreign Sover-
eign Immunities Act. As relevant, Germany asserted that the heirs’
claims did not fall within the FSIA’s exception to sovereign immunity
for “property taken in violation of international law,” 28 U. S. C.
§1605(a)(3), because a sovereign’s taking of its own nationals’ property
is not unlawful under the international law of expropriation. The heirs
countered that the exception did apply because Germany’s purchase of
the Welfenschatz was an act of genocide, and the relics were therefore
taken in violation of international human rights law. The District
Court denied Germany’s motion to dismiss, and the D. C. Circuit af-
firmed."
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/slipopinion/20
Nothing from the SCOTUS today, issued a "R" number case!
From Amy, "Mark mentioned that there are no R-numbers, so we are expecting more decisions. We will not see the first decision from Justice Barrett today. The justices release opinions (even electronically) in order of reverse seniority, so the next opinion will come from Sotomayor or from someone senior to her -- Alito, Breyer, Thomas, or the Chief. No opinions expected from Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh or Barrett."
1st case is Salinas v RR, not Collins! It is by Justice Sotomayor, and it is 5-4. The Chief Justice joined Sotomayor, Breyer, Kagan, and Kavanaugh. Thomas dissented, joined by Alito, Gorsuch, and Barrett. And no R number, so more to come!
This is a case in which the retirement board denied benefits to a former railroad employee when he applied in 2006, but then granted him benefits when he reapplied in 2013. The employee, Manfredo Salinas, asked the board to reopen its decision to deny his 2006 application, but the board refused to do so. The question before the court was whether the board's refusal to reopen the prior denial of benefits is subject to review by courts. The Supreme Court holds today that it is.