Midas79 Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 What's the purpose of this proposed order? https://gselinks.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/13-cv-01053-0097.pdf Is the information in these documents really that sensitive? Or is it just standard procedure so Lamberth can use the documents from discovery in Sweeney's court? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rros Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 What's the purpose of this proposed order? https://gselinks.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/13-cv-01053-0097.pdf Is the information in these documents really that sensitive? Or is it just standard procedure so Lamberth can use the documents from discovery in Sweeney's court? Not sure it is about "sensitivity". This sentence caught my eye: "A copy of the Protective Order shall be served along with any subpoena served in connection with this litigation that seeks documents." And this: * Protected Information does not include discovery material. * Non-parties producing documents in the course of this litigation may also designate materials as Protected Information. Putting it altogether it either looks like *somebody may know something* and that information has to come out or... Lamberth realizes the flaw in his initial ruling was about not getting ALL the information and... has requested this? This broad brush of protection will have rats coming out of hiding. He can then get THE full picture. I admit, I haven't read the entire thing... so this interpretation could be off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allnatural Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 What's taking so long for Collin En Banc panel to simply copy/paste the Willet dissent! I guess the merit panel majority will actually have to defend their position on why the NWS isnt a violation of HERA (and make some counter-points against Willet instead of ignoring him) instead of just saying in 1 paragraph b/c the other courts already said so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cherzeca Posted April 2, 2019 Share Posted April 2, 2019 What's taking so long for Collin En Banc panel to simply copy/paste the Willet dissent! I guess the merit panel majority will actually have to defend their position on why the NWS isnt a violation of HERA (and make some counter-points against Willet instead of ignoring him) instead of just saying in 1 paragraph b/c the other courts already said so. collins counsel has said that 5th c rehearings take as a median 5 months from arg to decision. dont forget you have 16 judges to review maj/min opinions, everybody has got to get into the act, and they all have their separate workloads. likely will take into June Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rros Posted April 2, 2019 Share Posted April 2, 2019 What's taking so long for Collin En Banc panel to simply copy/paste the Willet dissent! I guess the merit panel majority will actually have to defend their position on why the NWS isnt a violation of HERA (and make some counter-points against Willet instead of ignoring him) instead of just saying in 1 paragraph b/c the other courts already said so. collins counsel has said that 5th c rehearings take as a median 5 months from arg to decision. dont forget you have 16 judges to review maj/min opinions, everybody has got to get into the act, and they all have their separate workloads. likely will take into June The Zimbabwe discount :) I hope your hopes on the Collins en banc decision are hopefully right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke 532 Posted April 2, 2019 Share Posted April 2, 2019 From cherzeca... Will Fannie And Freddie Investors Finally Get Relief? POTUS Memo, Collins En Banc And The Smart Way To Recapitalize The GSEs https://seekingalpha.com/article/4252309-will-fannie-freddie-investors-finally-get-relief-potus-memo-collins-en-banc-smart-way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midas79 Posted April 2, 2019 Share Posted April 2, 2019 Good article, cherzeca. Thank you for posting it. I largely agree with the legal aspect and that the presidential memo is inherently contradictory. However, I think your recap method is unnecessarily complicated. If Treasury just exercises the warrants before the capital raise and holds onto the shares, it can recover quite a bit of value. Also, you have them selling 60% of their 80% stake for $30B, but said that the warrants are valued at around $100B. Wouldn't 3/4 of that have to result in Treasury getting preferred shares in the amount of $75B instead? That might change the calculus some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke 532 Posted April 2, 2019 Share Posted April 2, 2019 https://twitter.com/CGasparino/status/1113164109724438528 SCOOP-@POTUS privately directs economic team to talk to Wall Street bankers and private equity execs to examine complete privatization and possible sale to @FannieMae @FreddieMac more now @FoxBusiness $FNMA $FMCC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midas79 Posted April 2, 2019 Share Posted April 2, 2019 https://twitter.com/CGasparino/status/1113164109724438528 SCOOP-@POTUS privately directs economic team to talk to Wall Street bankers and private equity execs to examine complete privatization and possible sale to @FannieMae @FreddieMac more now @FoxBusiness $FNMA $FMCC That would explain the 3% or so move in the final half hour of trading. Still, "privatization" can mean a lot of different things, not all of them good for current shareholders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cherzeca Posted April 2, 2019 Share Posted April 2, 2019 Good article, cherzeca. Thank you for posting it. I largely agree with the legal aspect and that the presidential memo is inherently contradictory. However, I think your recap method is unnecessarily complicated. If Treasury just exercises the warrants before the capital raise and holds onto the shares, it can recover quite a bit of value. Also, you have them selling 60% of their 80% stake for $30B, but said that the warrants are valued at around $100B. Wouldn't 3/4 of that have to result in Treasury getting preferred shares in the amount of $75B instead? That might change the calculus some. the art of finance is that sometimes less is more. does treasury want a chance at $100B 3 years down the road, but only if Wall Street can execute on $75B of new common offerings...which are hard to do when there is an 80% owner sitting there and promising to blow out its shares after you have just bought...not good for share prices...or $30B on the barrelhead now, much improved chances to sell common at high prices and then get out of your 20% common thereafter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midas79 Posted April 2, 2019 Share Posted April 2, 2019 the art of finance is that sometimes less is more. does treasury want a chance at $100B 3 years down the road, but only if Wall Street can execute on $75B of new common offerings...which are hard to do when there is an 80% owner sitting there and promising to blow out its shares after you have just bought...not good for share prices...or $30B on the barrelhead now, much improved chances to sell common at high prices and then get out of your 20% common thereafter. I agree with that part, which is why Treasury would exercise its warrants, for 7.2 billion shares, before the equity raise. At around $10 per share, that gets them to $72B. And if they were content with around $40B then the offering price would be a more palatable $5.56. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cherzeca Posted April 2, 2019 Share Posted April 2, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muscleman Posted April 2, 2019 Share Posted April 2, 2019 Nice! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rros Posted April 3, 2019 Share Posted April 3, 2019 For Today: NOTE: Senators will gather in the Senate Chamber at 10:35 a.m. in order to proceed as a body to the Hall of the House of Representatives. At 11 a.m., His Excellency Jens Stoltenberg, Secretary-General of NATO, will address a Joint Session of Congress. The Senate will convene at 12:30 p.m. At 2 p.m., the Senate is expected to vote on cloture for the nomination of Jeffrey Kessler to be Assistant Secretary of Commerce. No further votes have been scheduled, but more roll call votes are possible today. Upon the disposition of the Kessler nomination, there will be a cloture vote for the nomination Roy Kalman Altman to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muscleman Posted April 3, 2019 Share Posted April 3, 2019 For Today: NOTE: Senators will gather in the Senate Chamber at 10:35 a.m. in order to proceed as a body to the Hall of the House of Representatives. At 11 a.m., His Excellency Jens Stoltenberg, Secretary-General of NATO, will address a Joint Session of Congress. The Senate will convene at 12:30 p.m. At 2 p.m., the Senate is expected to vote on cloture for the nomination of Jeffrey Kessler to be Assistant Secretary of Commerce. No further votes have been scheduled, but more roll call votes are possible today. Upon the disposition of the Kessler nomination, there will be a cloture vote for the nomination Roy Kalman Altman to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Hmm... Why is Calabria not included? The twit above shows Mitch filing closure for Calabria. Is the senate doing only one vote per week? That's gonna be really slow to get all vacancies filled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke 532 Posted April 4, 2019 Share Posted April 4, 2019 Senate will confirm Mark Calabria as FHFA director tomorrow afternoon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midas79 Posted April 4, 2019 Share Posted April 4, 2019 https://twitter.com/SenSherrodBrown/status/1113577615141502977 .@senatemajldr is changing the rules, and giving us less time to debate nominees who will have tremendous power over people’s lives—like @FHFA nominee Mark Calabria. (I'm borrowing your tweet-posting style, Luke. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery!) This makes me wonder if McConnell invoked the nuclear option specifically to get Calabria in office quickly. The timing seems a bit suspicious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rros Posted April 4, 2019 Share Posted April 4, 2019 Some more color of how it went down.. 6:42 p.m. The Senate adjourned and will convene Thursday, April 4th at 11:00 a.m. and will resume consideration of the Calabria nomination. There will be 2 votes beginning at 11:45 a.m.: Confirmation of the nomination of Roy Kalman Altman to be U.S. District Judge of the Southern District of Florida. Motion to invoke cloture on the nomination of Mark Anthony Calabria to be Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency. **** 6:22 p.m. Senator Brown spoke about the Calabria nomination. 6:07 p.m. Senator Hoeven spoke on the confirmation process. 6:06 p.m. ML McConnell received unanimous consent to have the confirmation vote on the Altman nomination occur at 11:45 a.m. tomorrow, April 4. 5:50 p.m. Senator Grassley spoke about his Enhancement of Savings Act of 2019. 5:49 p.m. On a vote of 48-51, the Senate has over-ruled the ruling of the chair that post cloture time on district judge is 30 hours. @ Midas Yes, it's all looking like a freight train. But it doesn't seem its us the ones being railroaded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muscleman Posted April 4, 2019 Share Posted April 4, 2019 Nice! Now finally all the right people are in charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rros Posted April 4, 2019 Share Posted April 4, 2019 1:54 p.m. Senator Brown spoke in opposition to the Calabria nomination. 1:49 p.m. Senator Tillis spoke about NATO’s 70th anniversary. 1:35 p.m. Senator Toomey spoke on the Calabria nomination and on taxing unrealized investment gains. 1:30 p.m. Senator Barrasso spoke about NATO’s 70th anniversary. 1:19 p.m. Senator Warner spoke on the Mueller report. Senator Warner asked u.c to consider H.Con.Res. 24, Expressing the sense of Congress that the report of Special Counsel Mueller should be made available to the public and to Congress. Senator Paul asked u.c to amend the Senator Warner’s request to include all of the communications. Senator Warner objected. Senator Paul objected to the original request. 12:55 p.m. Senator Alexander spoke on the agreement between the US and China to reduce the flow of fentanyl. He later spoke on health care. 12:54 p.m. Cloture was invoked on the Calabria nomination, 53-46. Senators voting in favor: 53 Republicans. Senators voting against: 44 Democrats, 2 Independents: King and Sanders. Senators not voting: 1 Democrat: Harris. 12:23 p.m. Roll call vote began on the nomination of Mark Calabria to be director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency. 12:22 p.m. The Altman nomination was confirmed 66-33. So cloture passed. Confirmation should follow? Sorry, I do not understand how this works... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midas79 Posted April 4, 2019 Share Posted April 4, 2019 1:35 p.m. Senator Toomey spoke on the Calabria nomination and on taxing unrealized investment gains. So cloture passed. Confirmation should follow? Sorry, I do not understand how this works... Yes, the confirmation vote should happen this afternoon. I tuned in to Toomey's time as he was talking about the unrealized gain tax, I guess he had already talked about Calabria. Did anyone here hear what Toomey had to say about Calabria? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rros Posted April 4, 2019 Share Posted April 4, 2019 1:35 p.m. Senator Toomey spoke on the Calabria nomination and on taxing unrealized investment gains. So cloture passed. Confirmation should follow? Sorry, I do not understand how this works... Yes, the confirmation vote should happen this afternoon. I tuned in to Toomey's time as he was talking about the unrealized gain tax, I guess he had already talked about Calabria. Did anyone here hear what Toomey had to say about Calabria? Missed it. Now, Schumer on. Strongly against Calabria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rros Posted April 4, 2019 Share Posted April 4, 2019 choo choo all aboard! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midas79 Posted April 5, 2019 Share Posted April 5, 2019 How soon do the various NWS plaintiffs start filing briefs to change the defendant to Calabria, and then immediately cite his white paper saying that he believes the NWS is illegal? I would expect it very soon, those things were probably written up months ago. I don't see how the government's case can continue to stand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnarkyPuppy Posted April 5, 2019 Share Posted April 5, 2019 How soon do the various NWS plaintiffs start filing briefs to change the defendant to Calabria, and then immediately cite his white paper saying that he believes the NWS is illegal? I would expect it very soon, those things were probably written up months ago. I don't see how the government's case can continue to stand. Yeah- cherz would you mind commenting on this? From a layman's perspective seems like this is a pretty hard thing to defend against. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now