Wamu WKN 893906 News !

Zitat faster: "etwas zu wmi  
aber nur am rande, grins.
in den usa steht gerade die diskussion um die mögliche nachfolge von tim geithner als finanzminister am anfang.
und ratet mal, wer da in der diskusion ganz vorne liegt?
nein, es ist nicht sheila bair, die kommt nur an dritter stelle.
unglaublich, oder?
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/...RzbGsDZGltb25iZXN0cmVw "

Das wundert Dich doch nicht wirklich, oder? Bei uns ist das doch nicht anders. Für die Jüngeren unter uns zwei Videos über "unseren" Finanzminister Schäuble:

www.youtube.com/watch

www.youtube.com/watch

Haben wir hier in forum hell seher der kann uns sagen was uns zu kommt.
ich persönlich habe ich menine gefühl 70% positif.

Mein Gefühl sagt 100%, dass Du hier mal klicken solltest:

www.nachhilfe.de/neustadtweinstr/leistungen/...tschreib-schule-9.html

*KA*

Gezahlt worden ist an das Estate von WMB, die damit einen Teil der nicht von JPM übernommenen Verbindlichkeiten abdecken (siehe die WMB Bilanz vom 30 Sep 2010)  - die Cashposition im WMB estate besteht fast ausschließlich aus dem von JPM geleisteten Kaufpreis

Meines Wissens ist der Kaufpreis an Fdic gezahlt worden.
WMI hat die Annahme in 2008 verweigert.
Dies wurde Ende 2008 Anfang 2009 hier im Tread und bei WO diskutiert.
Grund Kaufpreis zu niedrig.
Flucht von Wamu in Chapter11 zum Schutz vor Ausverkauf.

investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=64861477

Zitat REALtime64:

I am giving up my 8 ball found the orb when I first picked it up I did not ask it any thig just flipped and read it was real negative like 3 times in row like highly doughtful, never,absolutely not . This got my attention my first thought Jeff must have made this thing then I decided to really test it I ask if Wamu will ever pay off it came back with ask again later so I held on to it threw the store then I asked if Wamu would settle before the 13 of July this year it came back Absolutely YES I was blowen away so there you have it soon to be over friends happy 4th and 13 July

Yes this is a REAL True Story ...............
----------------------------------------------
Zitat Large Green:

What is so funny is that I would almost make a fairly large wager in that I agree wiht your eight ball. I will define settlement on or before 7/13. By that we will know if Equity is officially in the money and not cancelled as an actual settlement could be partial, whole or a combination with some form of litigation continuing after exit from chapter 11.
--------------------------------------
Zitat jackfburns:

With all due respect, LG, but didn't you also say that the hedgies would NEVER allow themselves to be deposed?

Very few predictions have come to pass over the past year - mine included. The only thing we know is that we don't know (forgive the allusion to Rumsfeld).

That said, I do believe that the hedgies are looking at disallowance if we get to a confirmation hearing... which will help P's, certainly. We've got a ways to go before U's see anything...

Jack
-----------------------
Zitat Large Green:

Jack, you are exactly correct I did say that but you are missing a vital important piece of this. That is JPM/FDIC threw Rosie and the Horsies under the bus as they NEVER planned on being deposed and yes I will say they did not do so on their OWN account. They were forced to and had NO CHOICE in the matter. Obviously, the Horsies (some) turned over evidence to Susman and may have ALMOST had a settlement. So, they did everything in their power to keep from being deposed and that is why I said when they were being deposed, there would be no way they would protect Rosie and JPM/FDIC.

I will still say you will see no objections from Susman as I repeatedly alluded to and you WILL NOT see a full blown Confirmation Hearing. Look at the facts, the Criminals have had a total blackout for almost three years and you think they are going to allow Susman to dissect all of their illegal dirty laundry in public? No way and you can take that to the bank! You will see some form of an agreement on or before 7/13/2011 unless they move the POR out which I highly doubt. There is NO WAY Rosie goes forward with POS POR 6+ without material changes positive to Equity and you can also take that to the bank!!!
--------------------------------------------------
Zitatende


MfG.L:)

investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=64862533

Zitat william48:

OK, somebody's got to say it.

SG has saddled us with a terrible precedent in filing its long awaited objection ENTIRELY under seal. Why all the cloak and dagger now? Though many will not admit it, an equal number were were solely frustrated. Why couldn’t SG have filed a bifurcated objection; sealing only those issues addressed by the confidentiality agreements? Surely the issue regarding releases did not have to sealed (it wasn’t last time). The same goes for the very excellent issues raised by Bettina Harper (which weren’t sealed) and Ben Mason (ditto). And why not so much as a single revealed word about assets or value? How is it that assets -- and where they might be residing -- are suddenly confidential? Hasn’t that been the single, overriding problem in this POS case since its inception … that the existence and whereabouts of assets have always been TOO d@mned ‘confidential. Why stuff the public power of everything that we had going for us into an airless black box; especially now that the media have taken a very determined interest in the proceedings? What happened to notions of transparency, or (God forbid) the skillful use of a strategic PR?

One now has to really wonder how Walrath can even draft an opinion that won’t reveal the subject matter of that which is now under seal. How does she discuss it publicly when SG can’t even disclose its content (ANY of its content)?

Has SG/EC perpetrated the final indignity on the shareholders in this POS BK … drawing the blinds on the one last remaining (and highly awaited) window of optimism we had?

I know, I know. Those who have sat (no doubt stupefied) in the EC’s ‘Amen-Corner’ since its inception will surely rally around such worn-out phrases as: “I put my total faith and trust in SG and our EC, -- blah, blah, blah – so I don’t have any problem with this filing that says absolutely nothing and reveals absolutely nothing.”

Please. Spare me your contentment

Zitatende



MfG.L:)

As part of last week’s settlement, the SEC accused the same JPMorgan subsidiary of again violating the same section of the law. However, the commission’s complaint didn’t include any allegation that the company had breached its 2006 cease-and- desist order. An SEC spokesman, John Nester, didn’t offer an answer when asked why not. A JPMorgan spokesman, Joseph Evangelisti, declined to comment.

“This is inexcusable on the part of the SEC not to push this, and it shows how pathetically eager it is to hang up part of the scalp, close an investigation, point to a remedy, and then move on,” says James Cox, a securities-law professor at Duke University School of Law. “They’re just indicating that these orders don’t have any future impact. That’s too bad for the public interest.”

Here’s what the SEC should have done, for appearances’ sake if nothing else. It should have added a claim for violating the 2006 order and fined the company for that infraction separately, even if it kept the total settlement amount the same. Instead, the SEC acted as if the cease-and-desist order never existed, which makes you wonder why the commission bothered to issue it in the first place.
No Names

Under last week’s settlement, which was approved yesterday by a federal judge in New York, JPMorgan will pay $153.6 million. No individuals who worked for JPMorgan were named as defendants, as if the fraud just happened of its own volition. The company also consented to an injunction barring future violations.

Technically, the infractions cited in the 2006 complaint should have disqualified the company from participating in certain kinds of securities offerings. So, back in 2006, JPMorgan asked the SEC’s staff for a waiver that would let it go about its business as usual. (This, too, is standard operating procedure whenever a big securities firm settles an SEC fraud complaint.)

The company got what it wanted, with one catch. The staff wrote that its decision was based on the assumption that JPMorgan “will continue to comply with” the SEC’s cease-and- desist order. The company received two similar waivers from the five-member commission, as well. Don’t count on the SEC to revoke any of those waivers now, though.
Third Time

Last week’s lawsuit was the third time since 2006 that the SEC accused the same subsidiary, J.P. Morgan Securities, of the same kind of fraud violation. In 2009, the company -- without admitting or denying anything, of course -- paid $75 million to end the SEC’s investigation into some nasty derivatives it sold to Jefferson County, Alabama. The alleged misconduct in that instance predated the 2006 order, though. The SEC went ahead and issued another cease-and-desist order.

What’s galling is how typical this is. Back in 2006, the securities arms of Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS) and Wachovia Corp. were co-defendants with JPMorgan in the same auction-rate- securities case. They, too, were issued cease-and-desist orders barring the same type of future violations as JPMorgan.

Both Goldman and Wachovia were accused later by the SEC of violating the same section of the law again. The SEC settled those cases without accusing either company of violating the prior orders. Per the usual ritual, they neither admitted nor denied the SEC’s claims.

Now ask yourself: Is this any way to run a cop shop? The SEC’s enforcement division, led by Robert Khuzami, should be embarrassed for engaging in such charades, as should Chairman Mary Schapiro and her fellow commissioners. No one can expect Wall Street to respect the SEC when the agency doesn’t even pay lip service to its own orders against repeat offenders. The notion of deterrence has become a fantasy.

Quelle: www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-30/...enders-jonathan-weil.html

Zweiter Artikel von Bloomberg, hier geht es um Geihtner...

Geithner’s Possible Departure Would Make Obama Rebuild Team For Campaign

Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner’s potential departure from the administration would force President Barack Obama to assemble a new economic team as he enters a re-election campaign that’s likely to be dominated by voter concern over jobs.

Geithner has told Obama that he’s considering leaving the administration after the president reaches an agreement with Congress to raise the national debt limit, according to a person familiar with the matter.

The Treasury secretary said yesterday that speculation about his departure was being driven by his decision to commute to New York so his son can finish his final year of high school there. He stated his intention to stay, without saying how long.

“I live for this work,” he said at the Clinton Global Initiative in Chicago. “It’s the only thing I’ve ever done. I believe in it. We have a lot of challenges as a country. I’m going to be doing it for the foreseeable future.”

Geithner, 49, won’t make a final decision on whether to leave until the debt-ceiling issue has been resolved, according to another person familiar with the matter. Both people spoke on condition of anonymity to talk about private discussions.

An exit by Geithner would complete the turnover in Obama’s original economic team, with Council of Economic Advisers Chairman Austan Goolsbee scheduled to leave in early August to return to the University of Chicago. It would leave Obama with two key posts to fill as the recovery slows. The unemployment rate rose to 9.1 percent in May, and the economy grew at a 1.9 percent pace in the first quarter, the government reported.
‘New Blood’

Three other top economic advisers already have departed. Goolsbee replaced Christina Romer at the CEA, and National Economic Council Director Lawrence Summers and Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag left the administration last year.

“There is never a good time to leave, but there is also value to bringing new blood into the policymaking process,” said Stephen Myrow, a former Treasury official who’s now with ACG Analytics Inc., a Washington investment research firm.

“If and when Secretary Geithner announces his departure, it will be interesting to see whether the president emphasizes with his replacement financial-sector credentials like he did by choosing William Daley as his chief of staff, or if he focuses primarily on Washington experience and regulatory acumen,” said Myrow.
Needs a Break

Geithner has told associates he needs a break from government service after dealing with the turmoil that followed the collapse of Wall Street firms, including Bear Stearns Cos. and Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., first as president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and then as Treasury secretary.

Now he’s facing pressure over the debt limit. He has said the U.S. risks defaulting on its obligations if Congress doesn’t raise the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling by Aug. 2. The administration and Republicans in Congress are at an impasse in negotiations over increasing the limit, which is tied to efforts to cut the nation’s long-term deficit.

Moody’s Investors Service said on June 2 that it expects to place the U.S. government’s Aaa credit rating under review for a possible downgrade if there’s no progress on the talks by mid- July. Fitch Ratings said June 21 it would place the U.S. on a negative rating watch if no action is taken by Aug. 2.

“Geithner leaving may raise the level of uncertainty for the direction of economic policy, and that is never a positive thing for the markets and the recovery,” said Christopher Sullivan, who oversees $1.7 billion as chief investment officer at the United Nations Federal Credit Union in New York.
No ‘Shock Value’

Still, he said, it wouldn’t have too much “shock value,” especially if Geithner remains at Treasury until the debt ceiling is settled, “which is the most pressing concern.”

Treasuries fell for a fourth day yesterday as stocks rose and a measure of U.S. business activity improved. The yield on the 10-year note rose five basis points, or 0.05 percentage point, to 3.16 percent at 5:14 p.m. in New York.

Investors may be more interested in who would come after Geithner.

“The question in cases like this is always who will be the replacement,” said Jay Mueller, who manages about $3 billion of bonds at Wells Fargo Capital Management in Milwaukee. “You can’t judge if this is good or bad for the market until you see who follows.”

Investors were “comfortable” with Geithner because he was “a visible player in trying to blunt the crisis,” he said.
Need a CEO

Some Republicans are already urging Obama to select a replacement from the business community.

“What would be smart is to bring a CEO on board,” Senator Rob Portman of Ohio said on Bloomberg Television. “Somebody who’s got business experience. Somebody who, again, understands the important connection between policies and jobs and the economy and the fiscal situation.”

If Geithner does leave, Obama would be losing a member of his economic team who understands Washington institutions and the New York banking world as well as the intricacies of the Chinese economy. Geithner has pressed the Chinese to let their currency appreciate faster to reduce the global imbalances that both he and Obama have blamed for financial uncertainty.

After Obama’s victory in the 2008 election, Geithner had a rocky start in Washington as he faced Senate scrutiny over his failure to pay self-employment tax returns while he worked at the International Monetary Fund. He paid some of the taxes after being audited by the Internal Revenue Service and didn’t pay the rest until it was clear that he would be nominated for the Treasury post, according to the Senate Finance Committee.
Growing Stature

His initial moves to return financial markets to health were rebuffed by Wall Street. On Feb. 10, 2009, when Geithner unveiled a plan to bolster the banking system, the Standard & Poor’s 500 stock index tumbled 4.9 percent. Before the 2010 mid- term elections, then-House Minority Leader John Boehner called on Obama to fire Geithner and other members of the economic team.

As Obama’s presidency progressed, administration officials began to view Geithner as more of a public asset.

“Tim was very influential from day one,” said Romer. “His public persona has just caught up with what has always been true inside the White House.”

Former President Bill Clinton said he didn’t know whether business confidence might be hurt if Geithner leaves.

“What people want is predictability now,” Clinton said in an interview with Bloomberg Television in Chicago. “We’ve absorbed a lot of change, we’ve absorbed a lot of trauma.”

Clinton said he hadn’t heard that the Treasury secretary was considering leaving. Later, while interviewing Geithner, Clinton said told him that staying at Treasury would “be good for America.”

Geithner earned a bachelor’s degree from Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire, and a master’s degree from Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies in Washington. After graduate school, he worked for three years at a global consulting firm founded by Henry A. Kissinger.

Quelle: www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-01/...rebuild-for-campaign.html

http://www.ariva.de/...KN_893906_News_t364286?page=5863#jumppos146581

ganz klar mit "sicheren" Leuten zu besetzen versucht, denn Schäuble kann nie wieder was werden und ist dankbar für jede Stelle.
Wie sehr sie sich gleichzeitig verhauen hat, kann man bei der "Besetzung" des Koalitionspartners mit der FDP sehen. Wie viele Nächte muss sie sich nach Steinmeier zurückgesehnt haben!

Man sollte nicht, wie Merkel,ohne Seele und ohne jegliche Vision regieren wollen.
Ich wette seit 2009 immer noch dagegen, dass sie die Legislaturperiode durchsteht, denn eine so substanz- und seelenlose Zombierunde an Regierung habe ich noch nie erlebt.

Die Wette, dass Guido den Ausssenministersposten NICHT annimmt, habe ich im Herbst 2009 verloren. Mit soviel Selbstüberschätzung habe ich damals nicht gerechnet und auch nicht damit, dass ihn niemand davon abhält, auch Genscher nicht.

Aber Deutschland hat eben politisch seit Brandt keinen Stil mehr, weder die Wähler noch die Gewählten.


Gruss, St. JCF

investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=64863023

Zitat Large Green:

William, the level of frustration is at an all time high and rightly so. I am still in the camp that Susman is behind the scenes calling the shots for the most part. I want to know as well but keep in mind the last time many posters ganged up on Susman and that was for not telling people how to vote. I am in the Susman camp because I have done much due diligence on he and his history that everything I know about his past and this current case; he is proceeding EXACTLY as his history shows.

Keep in mind Susman seems to speak silently about this case. What I mean when you look at this past voting sham and he did not say anything, I take it now to mean this POS POR was not going anywhere and so far he is spot on. I agree now that Susman has sent Rosie the valuation from PJS/BDO which Rosie cannot go ahead with POS POR 6+ without Equity positive changes, otherwise this is tantamount to bankruptcy fraud and that will not happen. So now Susman elected to redact the entire objections to POS POR 6+ and here again Susman is speaking silently, meaning we would NOT have redacted everything if Equity was/is not included. We shall see soon but I feel very comfortable where Equity is at this place and time.

Zitatende


MfG.L:)

für die kinder hiess es wohl "ab ins bettchen"
danke für die gehaltvollen beiträge ab 20:00 (...und für die davor)
war jetzt von mir nicht sehr gehaltvoll ich weiss - aber wollte mich einfach mal bedankt haben
so looong *klonk* und auf spannende wochen
/paketix

investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=64863254

Zitat gandalf48ct:

William...

this is what comes to mind...paraphrasing of course...

JMW: (To Aurelius) Are you sure you have given the EC all the information that they have requested...

AUR: That is so your honor

Sargent: Your Honor you can tell by this 2 page fully redacted document that it cannot possibly be true.

JMW: to AUR....you've given them nothing! I see nothing! How can you say you've given them everything??

This was public stuff...at least SOME of the rest of the subsequent objection really becomes a confidentiality issue that has been agreed to..and it won't be breached. We may never get to the bottome of this thing...that's the price/conceded in settlement. That's just the way it goes. I wonder at what point DOJ is legally obligated to twist a few ears/arms etc....whatever.

JMW won't have to draft an opinion if there has been a true global settlement...and there is no party at odds over this thing. The court's position is.... everyone agreed....matter disposed.

The valuation has been produced...Rosen knows the consequences of misrepresentation. I don't believe the entire contents of the EC's objection are going to be confidential, but in a matter of precaution, submitted in that manner.

I'm not content...by no means... I want this done and in plain sight, everything a matter of record....not going to happen. Let's agree to let time tell a better story than any of us could. Settlement is everyone's best interest now, where, there were too many loose ends previously. I'm hoping that I'm not too blind to some of your fears...I don't trust a single soul when it comes to large sums of money....but, anything out of the public eye, and in chambers, translates to a choke hold IMO. I liked the tone after chamber visits. :)

Zitatende


MfG.L:)

Objection under sealed

Suseman weiss was er tut.

OTS ........Verhoer

Hedgies........Verhoer

FDIC.......Sheila Bairs Abgang

JPM........Jamie - Geithner

Koennte da Interesse bestehen die Sache zu beenden.

Der Machtverlust bei der FDIC macht Sie angreifbarer. Noch gibt Sie die Richtung vor.
Gleichzeitg gewinnt Jamie Macht dazu. Und die letzten Monate haben gezeigt das die sich nicht immer Gruen waren.

Aurelios  rudert  auch  zurueck.

Auch Jamie,s Ambitionen wuerde ein friedliches Ende nicht schaden.

Drohendes Confirmation Hearing.  Eventuelles Valuation Hearing .

Ueberhaupt, Ich befuerchte das wir von dem Hearing bestimt nicht alles mitbekommen
wuerden. Viele Beweise stehen under sealed. 80 Prozent im Hinterzimmer ??

Ich behaupte einfach mal das WIR keine Angst vor den sealed  Docs haben muessen.

Fuer mich auch bemerkenswert, zum ersten Mal hat ein EC Anwalt geaeussert das "Sie genuegend Beweise haetten". Bisher haben immer nur die anderen gebellt.

Zum ersten Mal haben wir zurueckgeknurrt.

Bin mal gespannt was da bis 13 noch passiert.

lg

Meines Wissens ist der Kaufpreis an Fdic gezahlt worden.

WMI hat die Annahme in 2008 verweigert.

Dies wurde Ende 2008 Anfang 2009 hier im Tread und bei WO diskutiert.

Grund Kaufpreis zu niedrig.

Flucht von Wamu in Chapter11 zum Schutz vor Ausverkauf

Reagan - Evil Empire Slayer

Sehr interessante Gedankengänge von Lawrence auf IHub:

investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx

Gepostet wird.
WaMu wurde nicht ohne Grund vom kauf ausgeschlossen!!
Es wird Zeit das die Spiele beendet werden.
Und es wird Zeit für Unsere Entschädigung.
Ich denke das die Obersten zu viel verdient haben!!!!

investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=64864653
----------Zitatanfang
Lawrence 147 Member Profile   Lawrence 147       Share     Monday, July 04, 2011 6:04:47 PM
Re: None Post # of 316694
Ok some of you are bound to think I am just crazy and some already do but I will attempt to show you just what an abysmal position both the SNH and the Debtors’ council are in.
All of this is taken from the testimony of Nate Thoma so if anything is incorrect you can just verify for your self and I believe the link can still be found in the information box above.
Starting about 3:30 into the testimony Nate starts his explanation as to why he feels something is amiss. For starter Nate claims the SNH claim to holdover70% of the PIERS or in our case the WAHUQ, his assertion is based on the fact only 46.5% of the PIERS had been issued prior to the Bankruptcy and it held that way until the worker homeowner and business assistance act September 10 2008 Appaloosa was the first to purchase at .004 on the dollar on September 29th and the last in January 2009.
Though he dose not say so, it is clear what he is saying and it really has little to do with insider trading although insider trading is clearly the main point. By this I am saying what Nate does not come out and say; the SNH were brought in by the Debtors to destroy any recovery for the Equities. This was accomplished by the Debtors releasing more of the PIERS or H’s for the purposes of voting. When it became clear that so much money was available that could not be hidden for the senior subordinate securities they had to move down to the H’s and there were just not enough available for them to collect enough votes and many were restricted so it was virtually impossible to collect 70% of the PIERS even if they held everyone ever released. They must have received them from the Debtors; and there would be only one reason for the Debtors to release any more or for anyone to buy , hold and destroy these securities.
The statements of the SNH are basically saying to the debtors “hey you brought us in and we want our money back with profits now, before we get caught .” they have purchased bonds above par and that clearly was done to vote not a recovery or profit.

LET ME MAKE THIS PERFECTLY CLEAR; Nate testified that the SNH hold 70% of the PIERS or H’s Do you get it yet? It is the PIERS or the SNH however you want to look at it that has stopped the Equities from their recovery not and let me repeat not the EC withdrawing from settlement talks. This is still the SNH returning to the Equities yet more ammo to stop the POR.
Anyone thinking they will make it to the hearing is delusional on this I am 100% with Large Green. This will be the end of 4 hedge Funds and just as many law firms if not more.
Right now JPM and the FDIC are laughing their collective buts off at this foolishness. I expect this to change drastically in the near future as none of the Hedge funds will be doing business with JPM in the near future either way, they will be out of business or will seek other sources to do their bidding. JPM and the FDIC seem to feel they are protected by the knowledge of what went on but when that all comes out what is to keep the Hedge Funds from turning on JPM if they haven’t already.
The criminal acts of the FDIC and JPM were put on hold by the criminal acts of the Hedge Funds and the Debtors’. It must be clear to the court by now that for the Estate to exit bankruptcy the court must jettison the Debtors and the SNH. To do anything less will place the court as an accessory after the fact.
----------Zitatende

Ist das wirklich das Dynamit?


Gruss, St. JCF

Der Kaufpreis ist an die FDIC als Receiver von WMB gezahlt worden, schliesslich waren es Assets von WMB, die JPM gekauft hat. Und WMB hat ja auch andere Verbindlichkeiten, die davon (teilweise) bezahlt werden.

dann belege dein wissen doch bitte .. welche fakten hast du dazu?

ich danke dir für deine antwort.. darfst vorher auch bei pfandbrief um hilfe betteln..

Bei manchen Knallern hier kann es einem echt schlecht werden!

@Airfly: Wie langhe bist Du denn schon investiert? Hast Du ein echte Recht auf Entschädigung? Wenn überhaupt haben die Altaktionäre einen echten Anspruch! Wir als Cent-Einsteiger können hoffen einen Deal zu machen, aber betrogen wurden wir noch lange nicht! Zwing uns ja keiner hier zu kaufen! Also mal schön den Ball flachhalten!

Zitat: "Ist das wirklich Dynamit?"

Wenn es stimmt und sich schlüssig herleiten bzw. beweisen lässt, dann JA! Auf jeden Fall eine ganz neue Überlegung...

Könntest Du bitte in knappen Sätzen diesen ihub-beitrag auf Deutsch wiedergeben? Als Zusammenfassung?

Danke.

*KA*

bezugnehmend zu Post von User "Lawrence 147"

(investorshub.advfn.com/boards/...msg.aspx?message_id=64864653)

Zitat Large Green:

Lawrence, excellent analysis and I am surprised many more people do not realize what you just said. Let me add to that and that is what the Judge recently signed for TPS...that the EC can share with TPS any evidence they have and keep in mind TPS never signed a confidentiality agreement with the criminals. That means if TPS want to they can take this evidence and maybe some makes it to news sources if the criminals do not want to make this case right with the proper amount of funds.
------------
Zitat  Lawrence 147:

I have heard that TPS has not signed a C.A.. that being said I am sure they will need to before the EC can share any information as it is in their C.A. that if they are compelled to share with anyone the entity they are about to share with must sign the C.A. agreement as well.
Like wise should any charges be brought about due to information discovered the confidentiality agreement is out the window.
Personally I can see the SNH working hand in hand with the EC right now although through the PIERS.
-----------------
Zitat Large Green:

Yes as Rosie would say they are working "hand in glove" with each other and the criminals are going to be cornered. They keep playing and acting carefree with this time bomb, it is going to go off propelling this travesty into the stratosphere. Here is HURRY and HURRY...KAAABBBOOOMMM!!!
--------------------------------------------------
Zitatende


MfG.L:)