Author Topic: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.  (Read 4278771 times)

cherzeca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3259
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #15730 on: June 29, 2020, 03:47:10 PM »
With Calabrias recent statement he must be getting legal advice from someone (milbank?) that he is not fireable based on this ruling. If he truely was why make a fool of yourself with a statement like that?  Multiple times he has made a point that he will serve his 5 year term knowing this case was before the SCOTUS.

At a minimum he can contest its applicabilty to FHFA in some fashion to drag things out right?

Perhaps we'll know more Thursday.   

If the SC takes up Collins constitutional then he's got some wiggle room because that suggests the SC thinks Collins constitutional is different than Seila. 

If SC declines (or GVRs) Collins constitutional then the 5th circuit en banc stands which makes him fire-able in about 6.5 months.

this is precisely why it is dangerous to listen to armchair lawyers.

investorG: what does GVR mean?  grant, VACATE and remand.

so if scotus GVRs the Collins constitutional claim, the collins 5th C en banc ruling on the constitutional claim DOES NOT STAND.


investorG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 875
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #15731 on: June 29, 2020, 04:00:55 PM »
With Calabrias recent statement he must be getting legal advice from someone (milbank?) that he is not fireable based on this ruling. If he truely was why make a fool of yourself with a statement like that?  Multiple times he has made a point that he will serve his 5 year term knowing this case was before the SCOTUS.

At a minimum he can contest its applicabilty to FHFA in some fashion to drag things out right?

Perhaps we'll know more Thursday.   

If the SC takes up Collins constitutional then he's got some wiggle room because that suggests the SC thinks Collins constitutional is different than Seila. 

If SC declines (or GVRs) Collins constitutional then the 5th circuit en banc stands which makes him fire-able in about 6.5 months.

this is precisely why it is dangerous to listen to armchair lawyers.

investorG: what does GVR mean?  grant, VACATE and remand.

so if scotus GVRs the Collins constitutional claim, the collins 5th C en banc ruling on the constitutional claim DOES NOT STAND.

I mainly expect them to accept or decline the collins constitutional.   probably decline. 

But I was throwing around the (gvr) token in case there are some nuances of the Seila decision that could possibly -- but not likely -- change the outcome of the collins constitutional.

guess it will be known thursday.?
« Last Edit: June 29, 2020, 04:12:39 PM by investorG »

cherzeca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3259
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #15732 on: June 29, 2020, 04:17:49 PM »
With Calabrias recent statement he must be getting legal advice from someone (milbank?) that he is not fireable based on this ruling. If he truely was why make a fool of yourself with a statement like that?  Multiple times he has made a point that he will serve his 5 year term knowing this case was before the SCOTUS.

At a minimum he can contest its applicabilty to FHFA in some fashion to drag things out right?

Perhaps we'll know more Thursday.   

If the SC takes up Collins constitutional then he's got some wiggle room because that suggests the SC thinks Collins constitutional is different than Seila. 

If SC declines (or GVRs) Collins constitutional then the 5th circuit en banc stands which makes him fire-able in about 6.5 months.

this is precisely why it is dangerous to listen to armchair lawyers.

investorG: what does GVR mean?  grant, VACATE and remand.

so if scotus GVRs the Collins constitutional claim, the collins 5th C en banc ruling on the constitutional claim DOES NOT STAND.

I mainly expect them to accept or decline the collins constitutional.   probably decline. 

But I was throwing around the (gvr) token in case there are some nuances of the Seila decision that could possibly -- but not likely -- change the outcome of the collins constitutional.

guess it will be known thursday.?

I expect a GVR.  scheduled to know Thursday

Luke 5:32

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2860
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #15733 on: June 29, 2020, 07:10:13 PM »
Capital rule to be published tomorrow in Federal Register...60 day clock for comments is now ticking.
"You are life, You are life, in You death has lost its sting.  I'm running to Your arms, I'm running to Your arms.  The riches of Your love will always be enough, nothing compares to Your embrace.  Light of the world, forever reign." Listen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADuWzd7x25c

cherzeca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3259
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #15734 on: June 29, 2020, 07:50:26 PM »
Capital rule to be published tomorrow in Federal Register...60 day clock for comments is now ticking.

8/28 cut off date.  I would think fhfa moves rather quickly after that, based upon comments, and based upon feedback from MS and JPM

investorG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 875
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #15735 on: June 30, 2020, 06:57:15 AM »
With Calabrias recent statement he must be getting legal advice from someone (milbank?) that he is not fireable based on this ruling. If he truely was why make a fool of yourself with a statement like that?  Multiple times he has made a point that he will serve his 5 year term knowing this case was before the SCOTUS.

At a minimum he can contest its applicabilty to FHFA in some fashion to drag things out right?

Perhaps we'll know more Thursday.   

If the SC takes up Collins constitutional then he's got some wiggle room because that suggests the SC thinks Collins constitutional is different than Seila. 

If SC declines (or GVRs) Collins constitutional then the 5th circuit en banc stands which makes him fire-able in about 6.5 months.

this is precisely why it is dangerous to listen to armchair lawyers.

investorG: what does GVR mean?  grant, VACATE and remand.

so if scotus GVRs the Collins constitutional claim, the collins 5th C en banc ruling on the constitutional claim DOES NOT STAND.

I mainly expect them to accept or decline the collins constitutional.   probably decline. 

But I was throwing around the (gvr) token in case there are some nuances of the Seila decision that could possibly -- but not likely -- change the outcome of the collins constitutional.

guess it will be known thursday.?

I expect a GVR.  scheduled to know Thursday

If it's a GVR rather than a decline does that infer that the SC doesn't agree with the remedy in Collins constitutional of prospective relief only?   If so, and you are right on GVR with a decline on APA cert then that could be quite good for the situation and shares.   I don't expect this but if this is the correct read I'll certainly root for it.

muscleman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3363
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #15736 on: June 30, 2020, 09:16:30 AM »
The Supreme Court Monday morning backed the president’s power to fire the director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau without cause, but let stand the agency's operating architecture.

By a 5-4 vote, the court ruled that the CFPB’s leadership structure — headed by a single director who is removable by the president only for “inefficiency, neglect, or malfeasance” — violates the constitution’s separation of powers, because its director held too much unchecked power.

But the court did not go extreme to invalidate the entire consumer agency. Instead, the court held that the CFPB director’s removal protection can be separated from other provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act that established the bureau. In a nutshell, it means the bureau's past enforcement activities would remain intact.

Swap out CFPB with fhfa and that's what we'll get. A now constitutional thief.

Now Calabria's job is in danger if Trump loses re-election.
I can't believe even clear cut matters like this can be a 5-4 vote. This means the 4 liberal judges actually believe that there can be federal agencies whose director can't be fired by the US president.
I am muslceman. I have more muscle than brain!

cherzeca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3259
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #15737 on: June 30, 2020, 09:17:49 AM »
@IG

scotus could just decline cert on const claim, which would leave collins en banc in place, and leave the NWS intact at least insofar as that claim is concerned.  I dont expect that.  since there is a conflict split on the APA claim, I dont see scotus denying cert on that, but it may decline to act pending what happens to the const claim.  same remedy requested, so let's finish one claim at a time, in essence.  if GVRs const claim, then that might mean two things in my mind...one let 5th C confirm that fhfa=cfpb in terms of the removal issue, and second reconsider remedy.  but the GVR vacates prior const claim decision, and remand means do the claim over

investorG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 875
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #15738 on: June 30, 2020, 09:28:26 AM »
@IG

scotus could just decline cert on const claim, which would leave collins en banc in place, and leave the NWS intact at least insofar as that claim is concerned.  I dont expect that.  since there is a conflict split on the APA claim, I dont see scotus denying cert on that, but it may decline to act pending what happens to the const claim.  same remedy requested, so let's finish one claim at a time, in essence.  if GVRs const claim, then that might mean two things in my mind...one let 5th C confirm that fhfa=cfpb in terms of the removal issue, and second reconsider remedy.  but the GVR vacates prior const claim decision, and remand means do the claim over

Thanks.  While they can do what they want it makes little sense to GVR to re-address something both the SC (5-4) and 5th circuit (12-4) agree on - that the agency is unconstitutional.  If they GVR, it's probably over remedy and likely quite bullish.  However I expect them to take on the APA claim and decline the constitutional one.

cherzeca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3259
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #15739 on: June 30, 2020, 10:24:47 AM »
@IG

scotus could just decline cert on const claim, which would leave collins en banc in place, and leave the NWS intact at least insofar as that claim is concerned.  I dont expect that.  since there is a conflict split on the APA claim, I dont see scotus denying cert on that, but it may decline to act pending what happens to the const claim.  same remedy requested, so let's finish one claim at a time, in essence.  if GVRs const claim, then that might mean two things in my mind...one let 5th C confirm that fhfa=cfpb in terms of the removal issue, and second reconsider remedy.  but the GVR vacates prior const claim decision, and remand means do the claim over

Thanks.  While they can do what they want it makes little sense to GVR to re-address something both the SC (5-4) and 5th circuit (12-4) agree on - that the agency is unconstitutional.  If they GVR, it's probably over remedy and likely quite bullish.  However I expect them to take on the APA claim and decline the constitutional one.

while I think fhfa=cfpb, that is something that scotus would want 5th C to confirm.  in essence, 5th C ruled on removal issue before having scotus guidance.  now that the scotus opinion has been written, you can have another go at it.  fhfa has already announced that fhfa=/=cfpb, so it is a live issue, even though I think fhfa loses that argument. but yes, if GVR, then that might mean that scotus thinks 5th C should have another go at the remedy.