Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
'Sub not necessarily traded' GREAT POINT! That is the game plan that i missed because Lockhart said that he wanted to have the Subs 'traded' but, that is the ruse to get the GSes out of C!
Scary that Lockhart put the GSE's in conservatoship. What did he have in mind 14 years ago? That it would be a 2 week trip in-and-out of C? Of course not! He wanted to grab this gem for his friends. He's been planning to find ways to steal it from the shareholders from day one and he thinks that he has a solution. SUBSIDIARIES???
Let's see. FNMA issues stock in FNMA JR. and floats it on the market to yield , say 9%, FNMA stops trading its own shares and everyone is happy. There is a public ownership in FNMA. What happens to the original shareholders? Well, they hold a holding company that transferred all its assets to the sub. FNMA Holding has no assets on the books. It's just a shell. No value. No trading. No S^&*T!
'set up new subsidiaries' is Lockhard suggesting that the current stockholders are going to be screwed again?
According to my recollection, Fannie Mae was the only entity that existed since its founding by FDR in 1933 or '36. During the recession of the early 1970s, Wall Street was preparing to finesse the extraction of Fannie from the Treasury - it started with rumblings that a government supported institution that dominated the mortgage insurance business was a socialist invention and was monopolistic as well. Congress, in 1970, responded by authorizing the creation of Freddie Mac to engage in an identical model to Fannie and 'compete'. Soon thereafter, agitation was set to free Fannie from government control. Fannie was IPO'ed in 1973, and Freddie a year or two later.
That my recollection of the history.
As to conditions for consolidation. I believe that the rule of 50% ownership necessary for consolidating financial statements was instituted after 2008. Prior to that, it was an option. However, I was aware that, at 80% ownership, the acquiring company was compelled to consolidate, hence, at the time, the 79.9% limit to the confiscation did not trigger adding F&F's debt to the national debt.
I checked on your statement that 50% is the current threshold for consolidation and you are 100% correct. Your contention that failing to consolidate and include F&F debt as part of our national debt is a violation of law, stands. Imagine the worldwide turmoil that would ensue if it was revealed that our national debt is currently at $43Trillion! It was only $5Trillion in 2007. WOW!
Thank you for bringing these items to my attention.
digressing from F&F chatter for awhile,
Student loan is a bank hold-up. Once you are out of college, the debt is transferred to a bank, usually JPM or BOA, and accrues interest at 7%. In the mid 70's , x-students were declaring chapter 11 and excused themselves from this onerous debt. Just like clock-work, the banks went to congress and had a law introduced that prevent default to eternity. At over a $Trillion in student debt outstanding, the banks are raking $Billions if profit from these loans. Stop the banks and change the law, and all will be cleared up. Until then, the banks and their lobbyists will impoverish this Nation until Kingdom Come.
If you know a struggling x-college student, try to get them to join for a Class Action suit against their colleges, for not equipping them with the knowledge to compete.
Alternatively, if the student's credit is still good, get one of those credit card, interest free, loan flipping, deals and pay down as much as possible before the deal expires. They can save a bundle in interest and, if they flip it again, and can pay-off the loans years quicker.
You got it! At 80% the corporate debt of F&F will have to be added to our National Debt. F&F debt is much more than $7T, more like $20T.
Going back to the Nixon era's National debt 'crisis'. The 'crisis' was mainly due to our bourgeoning increase in oil imports, and our war in Vietnam that created a massive increase in the debt. The solution, in 1973, was to do an IPO for Fannie and remove, at the time, $5B from our National debt. A well subscribed New Issue was able to raise a huge sum for the Treasury as well as to remove Fannie Mae's debt from the National debt. This act served to subdue the 'debt crisis' raucous filling the press at the time (imagine, the outrage today at @ $33T). From 1973 onward, Fannie Mae, and later Freddie Mac, were publicly held companies just like GM and IBM. They had a BOD, an annual meeting, and an outside auditor etc...
I was young at the time and did not give much thought to the press's reasons for the debt hysteria. In retrospect, and armed with 'fake news' awareness, it is now obvious to me, that there was a well orchestrated Wall Street agenda to profit from the projected IPO income and the press was recruited to propagate the 'crisis'..
Well, now, these companies were well intrenched as PUBLICLY HELD COMPANIES, entitled to the same constitutional shareholder protection as any other publicly held company. Government interference in the operation of these companies is a gross violation of Law. No Federal agency has any right to confiscate these companies. especially, when they were fully solvent and operating for the public good. I can't see any justification for the Treasury or FHA to intervene. Yes, there was a financial emergency, the government had to correct it.
Good! I get it! Why not just issue $Billions of Treasury debt to fix the problem that our congress was largely and integrally responsible for. A private entity could not, and should not, shoulder the entire solution to the crisis on the back of its shareholders. There was plenty of shenanigans' going around in the financial community in 2005-2008, why did the 'wise' Treasury officials not attended to those misdeeds at the time. To blame F&F for the crisis is simply scapegoating the victim This whole SAGE sickens me!
Sad. But, true.
In a nutshell.
All Shareholders arguments are cogent and valid.
All Constitutional arguments favor shareholders.
All reasonable arguments favor shareholders.
The plain facts are that the greatest theft in history was perpetrated against F&F shareholders.
The ugly truth is that no one cares.
Thankfully, the American culture changes every 20 years or so. we are due for a major shift in the public's perception of Government and the Rule of Law. It's coming soon (or we are all doomed), and that will open the world's eye to this injustice. I fully believe that. Hang in there if you can.
The good news here is that 'all the king's men' can't make this conservatorship disappear.
Firstly, it is not bankruptcy, so, the courts can't pull usual magic BS to dismiss the small shareholders, because the shareholders are equity holders and wherever you turn, there is money floating in. The judges can't simply ignore the shareholders because there are more of them than there are creditors.
Secondly, There is very little Law precedent in conservatorship,. It has a real meaning (currently ignored), that forces whoever is put in charge to keep the organization solvent in the interest of the SHAREHOLDERS (current SCOTUS opinion not withstanding), hence they must maintain equity for the shareholders and not for any administration agency..
Thirdly, Hindering the operations of F&F would cause more trouble to the economy than all of the past bank failures combined. A total collapse of the US mortgage market valued in the $TRLLIONS.. Only fools would attempt such a move (Oh! Wait... they are already here).
Eventually, there would have to be a public admission that this was a major crime committed against all the people of the United States.
The good news here is that 'all the king's men' can't make this conservatorship disappear.
Firstly, it is not bankruptcy, so, the courts can't pull usual magic BS to dismiss the small shareholders, because the shareholders are equity holders and wherever you turn, there is money floating in. The judges can't simply ignore the shareholders because there are more of them than there are creditors.
Secondly, There is very little Law precedent in conservatorship,. It has a real meaning (currently ignored), that forces whoever is put in charge to keep the organization solvent in the interest of the SHAREHOLDERS (current SCOTUS opinion not withstanding), hence they must maintain equity for the shareholders and not for any administration agency..
Thirdly, Hindering the operations of F&F would cause more trouble to the economy than all of the past bank failures combined. A total collapse of the US mortgage market valued in the $TRLLIONS.. Only fools would attempt such a move (Oh! Wait... they are already here).
Eventually, there would have to be a public admission that this was a major crime committed against all the people of the United States.
Thanks Heyyyyy, but as Brad says, I don't have any funds left to fight after the drubbing that I took on FNMA et al.
Thanks Heyyyyy, but as Brad says, I don't have any funds left to fight after the drubbing that I took on FNMA et al.
Hi Brad, I often see you here, but, I have mostly stayed away since this board can be extremely nasty. I give you credit for all the abuse that you get here for promoting the JPS over the Commons. I have no opinion on that particular issue since the theft engulfed ALL classes of shareholders..
Anyway, I just posted the 'consideration' ploy as an amusement piece since I have practically lost all hope to reclaim my share of stolen property.
The Fed, the Treasury, the FHA and its offshoots, the Courts, The Congress, The Administrations, the Press, the Media, Academia and virtually every past official who had any contact with F&F and the conservatorship is against the equity holders, I don't see a happy ending.
So, It just amuses me to conjure outrageous scenarios that may move this saga along.
Wouldn't it be a most ironic twist to this sad saga, that it hinges on a single $. If someone were to sue the Treasury for stealing $Billions from F&F on the grounds that it was repayment of a 'loan' that never happened. This alleged 'loan' is the basis of the entire Consrvertership. Yet ,since not a single $ of consideration was paid to F&F by the Treasury, the entire transaction is illegal. But, for a single Dollar the whole frame-up is illegal based on Law 101 rule that for any financial transaction to be legal CONSIDERATION HAS TO BE PAID! No such event has been recorded hence....
An interesting thought. According to Contract Law, money has to be exchanged for a transaction to be legal. Even $1.00 would have confirmed legitimacy on this ugly act.
This lapse could possibly have a wide raging ramification. Who knows? No one in power really cares.
Wise Man, thank you for your contributions. Always informative...er WISE.
Thumbs' up! Let's hope that this time we get to win one solid.
We have been getting a beating every time we appear in court. Back in 2012 it looked a a slam-dunk 'takings clause' violation, 'misappropriation' etc. yet, every court hearing beginning with the original Lambert case, has been less than a stellar outcome for the Plaintiffs. It's always some insignificant technicality that sidesteps the shareholders' claims. I realize that it is not completely hopeless, but I am getting the vibes that the courts are following instruction from the sidelines.
I was referring to a lower level of listing than just the OTC. It used to be called the pink sheet but I don't recall the current appellation. But, thanks for remembering to bring this up again. And yes there is a rule about getting kicked out of the OTC after 30 day of trading under $!.00.
Not on purpose. An error.
Looks like it's check -mate at this point. We have one more court (lambert) and maybe, SCOTUS. Unless... you have some more enlightening thoughts on the subject.
Looks like it's check -mate at this point. We have one more court (lambert) and maybe, SCOTUS. Unless... you have some more enlightening thoughts on the subject.
navycmdr, You realize that some of the most powerful players in Washington are behind this takedown based on a deep Ideological viewpoint that hates it when the government stands behind a company that they are not the beneficiaries (i.e. banking, defense, drug and agricultural) that they control. This takedown, therefore, is part of the SWAMP and is very deeply imbedded into the ruling elites. SCOTUS, Congress and the Media are cohorts in this deviously malignant operation. And, while I truly appreciate the outstanding material that you have accessed for us, I feel that the 'powers that be' are greater than the voice of justice and truth.
IT'S OVER-THE-COUNTER? nO? IS IT OFF THEAT AS WELL?
OF COURSE IT'S BELOW THE $1.00 THRESH-HOLD FOR A LONG TIME. WHY IS IT STILL LISTED?
If FNMA and FNCC continue to trade under $1 on the over-the-counter market for more than 30 days aren't they in danger of being will be delisted?
Thank you. it seems that you unloaded a truck full of possible answers. I will slug thru them for the info that I am seeking.
thank you for your prompt response. I will spend the weekend studying it.
Can someone help me find the news story that in 9/2008 Treasury conspired with F&F accounting firm to show that they were insolvent, thus prompting the T step in with $187B. Only later, in 2012, to find that those entries had to be reversed?
Looking forward to the next 14 years of Court room drama of the know-nothing judges and the conniving Treasury thieves. Nothing is happening until then.
Thank you again navycmdr for a fabulaous summation and transmission.
In other words BRIBERY! Because that is how Congress operates! How TRUE and Depressing?
Thank you for the most cogent downloads over these many years. As to the 3rd Avenue Fund's letter, we can all understand that in order to get laws written and public agendas publicized, organizations hire 'think tanks' like the Bookings Institute to publish a 'learned article' pushing the correct agenda. This is religiously, picked up by the media as Gospel from God himself and promulgated throughout the spectrum until is is fully accepted as the ONLY solution that is viable. Than, as rain falls from above, it is followed by appropriate legislative or executive orders and action is taken accordingly. Thus, this remarkable revelation that you found in the Fund's letter is the path that is most likely to be taken... in ten years or so, and, yes, I'm a cynic. Thanks for the download.
FOFFreddie you found a gold mine! Now I know why there was no settlement earlier, we need 12 1/2 years time to read this stuff.
Another very informative post
MIA CULPA
Yesterday I quickly looked at the calendar and missed this.
So solly!
I thought I recently saw the SCOTUS calendar
Collins vs Yellen Dec 9 2021
Thanks nanavycmdr, You always add depth to this message board. But the frequency of your contributions indicates that the Navy is in dire shape, because you are 100% dedicated to FNMA and away from your Naval duties.(joking)
Very important insight into how the Judges are thinking. Especially the liberal ones that we as shareholders are most disturbed by
I am sure that you meant Nixon not LBJ. 1972-3.