"Yeah...he has no insight. He only advises the major P's in this case and knows the FnF structure better than anyone."
You kind of just made my point. He's advising PLAINTIFF'S case. Do you think that the PLAINTIFF'S adviser knows what the DEFENDANT'S lawyers are going to do? That is never true in any lawsuit. Otherwise, the defendant's lawyers would get disbarred.
If you want insight as to Fairholmes strategy, I'm sure he could write books. But if you ask him insight as to the governments strategy, his guess is as good as any with any legal or economic background.
"This admin cares about the documents. The new admin will settle because they do not care about Obama admin docs. The fact that you can't understand this really says it all."
I do understand your premise and I understand the logic behind it. What I am saying is that it doesn't matter if the new admin wants to settle because they don't have the power to settle in any meaningful way without Mel Watt's support (minus Congressional action)...and Mel Watt has clearly stated that he favors continued Conservatorship. However, in a hypothetical where Mel Watt suddenly reverses his opinion to be in line with the Trump administration, well...then yes...I'd agree with you.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
