Mephistopheles

It's obvious to me that Ackman's extremely positive views on Trump are to stroke his ego as he has reason to be on his good side (Fannie and Freddie). And I bet Buffett or anyone significant who is smart if asked publicly about Trump would be as diplomatic and gracious as they can be as you don't want the madman exacting revenge. Having said that I agree about being optimistic and positive

Argh, I wish they showed more than just 2 minutes of video online, it's such a tease EDIT (Full Video):

Bingo. I see almost nil chance of Trump taking up the fight against preferred shareholders especially when one of his advisors (Paulson) owns preferred and others he knows well (Icahn, etc) are invested. Yep, so we can't assume he does nothing because by doing nothing he will have to continue to fight (which he won't), so by merely pulling out of the lawsuits is a big win for us. Question, the FHFA on the other hand is independent, correct? Mel Watt and co may continue the fight on their own?

What happens to the lawsuits once Obama leaves? Is Trump's Treasury going to pick up the fight? I can't imagine that happening...

I think Icahn and Paulson own the common...I wonder if they may even go further and get Trump to repeal the Govt warrants, which would mean 100 baggers for the common. In either case, if their influence is at all helpful to us, then it may mean the common now are better than the preferred, as that is what they own. I can't imagine a scenario in which they get Trump to reverse the 3rd amendment, but allow a deal that is worse for the common than the preferred. On the other hand the preferred are still a better bet in regards to the Court of Claims case as merkhet and others have pointed out. Thoughts anyone?

I have no problem with Buffett arguing for higher taxes while avoiding taxes himself by not realizing his gains AND by donating everything to philanthropy. If you don't cash in on your net worth, you shouldn't have to pay taxes on it, that's my belief. My peeve with Buffett is the whole bullshit secretary example, where he includes the payroll tax but not the benefit, includes the employers portion of the payroll tax, and ignores the double taxation of dividends and cap gains. Not only is this a crap argument but it also leaves him personally unaffected were they to change the rules he says. I'd respect him more if he argued to raise corporate income tax or lower corporate deductions, even if I may not agree with him.

I'm in the "Buffett is a hypocrite" camp for taxes but this argument is ridiculous. Are you being sarcastic?

One of them is Perry Capital. Someone else find the other 3. Thanks and yw.

Wow, I stand corrected. Another poster kindly informed me through PM that I've been looking at the wrong page. I was looking at the page titled "Opinions" but I should be looking at "Judgements", and that's why I've missed them. I guess not all decisions contain lengthy opinions, and that's the difference? In case anyone wants, here's the link to find "Judgements": https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/judgments.nsf/DocsByRDate?OpenView&count=100&SKey=201603 Sorry for misinforming anyone who paid attention to my several posts on this topic over the last couple of months. I'm happy I was wrong though!

So I've been keeping track of this, and I hope I'm wrong, but I see plenty of cases that have yet not been issued opinions. Been checking the https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/OpinionsByMonday?OpenView&StartKey=2016082016080812&Count=0&scode=0 site. Either I'm making a huge mistake, or there are actually a ton of cases yet waiting to be opined on from last session. I am also consistently seeing opinions from cases argued last Sept, Oct, Nov being released recently. According to my tracking, 30/37 from March have been released. 20/34 from April, and 12/24 from May. Below are the ones we are still waiting on from Mar-May: Case - Argument Date Independent Pilots Association 3/7/2016 DOJ v Daniel Chapter One 3/7/2016 Nieves Rocha 3/7/2016 Sandra Compton 3/17/2016 USA v Derrick Byas 3/21/2016 Grotheer & Company 3/22/2016 Act Now to Stop War 3/24/2016 Noble Energy 4/1/2016 U.S. Assoc of Reptile Keepers 4/1/2016 Dwight Robbins 4/4/2016 USA v Hector Orjuela 4/4/2016 City of Duluth 4/7/2016 Marquez Brothers Enterprises 4/7/2016 James Fulbright 4/12/2016 Flamingo 4/15/2016 Perry Capital 4/15/2016 Takeda Pharmaceuticals 4/15/2016 Matthew Corrigan 4/18/2016 Walter Freeman 4/18/2016 BCB Holdings Limited 4/19/2016 Newco Limited 4/19/2016 American Transmission Systems 5/4/2016 Washington Alliance 5/4/2016 Free Access 5/5/2016 USA v Rodney Class 5/5/2016 Modern Management Services 5/6/2016 William Boykin 5/6/2016 Lynn Johnson 5/9/2016 David Sickle 5/16/2016 Mary Turner 5/17/2016 USA vs Nizar Trabelsi 5/17/2016 Enyclopedia Britannica 5/20/2016 National Distribution Services 5/20/2016

^agreed; except that is too smart for most people to understand, particularly his supporters. FWIW, Trump is absolutely right when he says Buffett pays as little as possible. Trump has so much material from BRK letters if he wanted to pick a fight on this point.

I know you're just quoting here but 308 cases in what time frame? I've been keeping track of Mar-May hearings and we have heard back from roughly only 50% of them.

So I'm a bit confused. I thought the motion was granted in full. Doesn't that mean that the Plaintiff's lawyers already have access to the 11,000 documents, or only the 50?? I thought the debate was whether any of those will be unsealed for the public or not. Sorry for such a naive question...

When will he admit that Sears is a POS?

What's wrong with the way Buffett's children have developed?

This is so stupid, I feel as if you're trolling

What does this mean for the Perry charges in the court of appeals??

These guys are all on loosing streaks. I doubt they will do better betting on election outcome. ? They are not betting on an election as they've held shares well before Trump entered the race. It's a good bet regardless of his win or not. But if he wins, the influence of these guys over him, particularly Icahn, makes it highly likely we get a win from the Executive Branch (rather than just the Judicial).

That's not the full video though. I did find the entire interview on YouTube:

So now Bruce Berkowitz, John Paulson, and Carl Icahn are publicly supporting Trump. Probably giving him good money as well. Highly likely that a Trump win = win for us.

Let's say she is willing to release all 11,000 documents. What are the chances govt willing to settle? The folks in the Obama administration (current and former) aren't going to be happy having all these emails public.

I think we need to hope on a Hail Mary here - Trump '16

I've always wondered, why did Buffett change from 33 over a 6 hurdle to 25 over 6? Did he think the former was too expensive for the value delivered, and corrected it downwards? Or was it because he had a lot of capital by then and could afford a discount?

Theranos Voids Two Years of Edison Blood-Test Results The company has told the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services that it has issued tens of thousands of corrected blood-test reports to doctors and patients, voiding some results and revising others, according to the person familiar with the matter. http://www.wsj.com/articles/theranos-voids-two-years-of-edison-blood-test-results-1463616976

How did you know that? :o But I guess that's normal with this guy. Having been burned by the Chinese reverse mergers, I guess he finally saved enough money to get back into the game again, so he is desperately needing to swing through the fence and make a large profit. Then he can start bragging about his legendary trade. In his Seeking Alpha I believe he's disclosed taking out a loan and owns 60,000 prefs or something https://twitter.com/donotlose/status/774516681334980608