Rather one-sided of you not to mention the hundreds of posts by far-left lunatic fanatics isn't it? Personally, I think it's pretty even between the two.
It's going to be very hard to prove, particularly since the DA is taking a broad swath approach by suing all the big banks for the same reason. Plus, part of what he's looking for is damages relating to how much revenue the city may or may not have lost in property taxes. This is nothing more than an attempt to throw out a big net and see if anything gets drug in. Most judges don't take to kindly to those sorts of fishing expeditions.
Oh, and it won't be necessary for you to respond as you are now on ignore.
Really? You doubt whether I'm a Christian just because I disagree with you? Show me, anywhere in the Bible that says we are to try to make this a better world? We are commanded to love our neighbors, be kind, and be compassionate, but this world needs to be saved, not reformed. My friend, for you to judge my relationship with the Lord solely based on my comment is very judgmental on your part and, to tell you the truth, I feel sorry for you that you feel you even need to make a statement like that.
If we lived in a world where everyone voluntarily lived according to biblical principles, then such a egalitarian society might be possible, but we don't. It really is the height of arrogance for those of us who are Christians to think others can or would be willing to live according to principles we mostly fail to live by ourselves. On a theoretical level Pope Francis is correct. On a practical level he will only find frustration in trying to convince others. The best think he could do right now is to show what he means by making the institution he leads live according to the principles he espouses.
Considering BAC has been leading the rest for the past couple of days, it's about time for one of the others to do the heavy lifting. :-)
LOL! You call this "tanking"? And you think this lawsuit business is something new? What rock have you been hiding under?
The thing with Freddie isn't that big of an issue. They still have to face the $10 billion lawsuit by AIG and they still have the government investigating and threatening further action. I wouldn't rule out the idea that now that JPM has settled, BAC or WFC are next on the list.
An increase of one third by the end of the year may be a bit of a stretch, but who knows, if everyone who has pending legal action against BAC withdraws all their lawsuits, and the government says they are done and promise not more actions against the bank, then yes, we could see a significant pop in the stock price. How likely is it for that scenario to play out before the end of the year? Well, I guess anything is possible. :-)
The amount of the mortgages in contention is $1.4 billion. If the past is any indicator, any settlement would be for much less than that amount.
Not sure about the Walnut Group, but the Home Loan Banks and others that were in opposition previously withdrew their complaints a little while back. AIG is one of the last remaining of the original opposition.
What's funny is that the attorney for those opposing the deal said today that "sophisticated" investors recognize that it is an insufficient deal. Well, if they were so "sophisticated" then why didn't they see the problems before they even bought the MBS in the first place?
I guess you missed my inference. Let me speak plainly. AIG is trying to improve their own books by taking money from BAC 1) by opposing the $8.5 billion mortgage settlement and 2) a separate $10 billion lawsuit against BAC currently in the courts. AIG is desperate to make up for the bad decisions they made in the past and hide the losses that still plague them today.