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.
Stop it.
This head line is Bull Shet - fannie and freddie are not out of MONEY - that is a stupid thing to write and the person that writes it is obviously an idiot.
Yep,
More Greedy Government at taxpayer (we ARE taxpayers)expense.
None.
I could see the greedy government taking $ from the preferreds by paying them less than full value - by saying something like - well we assumed all their rights. So we settled for 50% on the dollar. We also did the warrants and squashed the commons, became one of them and then settled lawsuits for pennies.
Thus every one gets screwed by the greedy government.
Either that or preferreds get 100% par and common's get something - but less than fair value - still a win but not a big win.
Ultimately, the greedy government has to pay for what it took.
Simple answer is Yes. Watt can tell the fhfa lawyers to back off and capitulate.
He can not do so for Treasury obviously, but absolutely, watt is the king of fhfa and his "decisions" as conservator are beyond reproach.
So, Yes.
Chess,
Yes, this was debated here the other day, and it was proven that watt has the ability and rights under HERA to do as he sees fit, sine the law is the law and it trumps contracts.
Glad he now realizes this just like we do here.
"Yes, Watt can end the sweep. He can do anything he wants. "
No...he can't.
Correct, he can't pay the CEO's over 500K or some such. Because congress passed that stupid law.
"Hera allows him unbridled authority as opined by these idiot judges."
You have misread the judges opinion. Neither HERA nor the judges opinion allow Watt unbridled authority in all things.
Sorry Pal, Hera coupled with the judges, have in fact provided near unbridled authority to act in all capacities consistent with his opinion as "conservator". You've miss-interpreted what they wrote.
"So, yes, in spite of a contract and since he has the authority to breach a contract without being held accountable - again see the aforementioned idiot judges, he can if he wants, decide to not pay treasury and cancel the debt (again in his capacity as conservator) which is as judged limitless (or near limitless) then, yep, he can say, to bad so sad treasury no more money for you and I'll mark the debt paid in full. "
You are mistaken here as well. The Treasury wouldn't need to sue FHFA. They can just use their tool called THE IRS to just take the money out of FHFA coffers. If Watt has a problem with that, he'd have to sue the Treasury. Good luck there!
No, the IRS can't just take the money. What you've written is really silly. They don't owe the IRS they'd owe treasury and the irs is an arm of treasury. The IRS would be violating the law and would not do this. Again, acting as conservator Watt has no equal - other than congress. That has been tried and appealed. That is the law whether I like it or not. Until it is overturned.
Yes, Watt can end the sweep. He can do anything he wants.
Hera allows him unbridled authority as opined by these idiot judges. So, yes, in spite of a contract and since he has the authority to breach a contract without being held accountable - again see the aforementioned idiot judges, he can if he wants, decide to not pay treasury and cancel the debt (again in his capacity as conservator) which is as judged limitless (or near limitless) then, yep, he can say, to bad so sad treasury no more money for you and I'll mark the debt paid in full.
O you want to argue... sue me... o that's right you can't as no judge can do that because i am conservator in my role and acting as conservator.
So, don't let some one mis lead you into thinking contracts matter, they obviously do not.
Peace.
It really is that easy. No harder than for IBM or Proctor and Gamble to operate. Just remove the Greedy Government and their testicles from being up in there business.
The hard part is extricating government from the affairs of fannie and freddie.
The rest, is easy.
Its just business.
Fixing Fannie and Freddie.
step 1 - get government out of their way - and hands off.
step 2 - get congress out of their way - and hands off
step 3 - get some honest judges - if you can!
the rest is easy.
The first two are the hard part. The third is like playing blind mans bluff, you know there just has to be one out there - somewhere.
Yeah, Watt, was the perfect pick for this post. No ability to think for himself, and a complete desire to be a yes man.
Sad for what a real person could have done with all that HERA power bestowed on them.
Shame he wasted all this time, he could have simply watched grass grow and been as productive.
Good morning.
So, watt can't end it because it would be breach of contract....
Well now, someone forgot to read HERA which clearly according to the perry appeal indicates that fhfa can do what ever it wants to and its beyond ANY judicial review.
Since a breach of contract would only be enforceable if it were brought before a court and judges are precluded from reviewing any thing the conservator does in its role of conservator .... then,
guess what genuises
Watt can do darnwell whatever he wants.
including breaching some silly ole contract...
lol!
Its just amazing here. Yet another ... delay.
Good grief!
WAIT a minute.
your gonna get a wannabe atty tell you that its not unconstittional (no matter how wrong it is) until some wannabe judge says it is.
blah blha blah.
But, yeah... it reeks of puss and sour milk.
fhfa is bad for business. bad for america and bad in general.
fhfa - claims the sky is blue in court.
fhfa - claims the sky is white in SEC filings
fhfa - claims it gets to decide when things are when; when it decides.
fhfa - claims its all knowing and it doesn't matter what you think cause they get to tell you when and how to think what.
fhfa - is deranged!
It continues to amaze me - knowing what i do about what fannie and freddie are and do - that they are tied up the way they are.
Really, these two support the entire home loan process and yet are pawns at the whim and will of this idiot greedy government people. Yes, greedy government people that are taking what does not belong to them and spreading the wealth in a totally socialistic approach of using other peoples money to enrich themselves and those that they are beholding too.
So, crazy.
Could you imagine how this could ever work?
I mean, why not put Goldmans sachs in it too? I mean they are having a tough time, could go bankrupt and may need a bailout? If they reserved for all their potential losses too, why they'd be insolvent right? No capital, how could this be allowed?
Sure, why not put Hawaii in there as well. I mean, why not?
Its laughable but so serious to see how things have gone sideways.
But, yes, GREEDY Government people. GREED
No more of this Government wins at Taxapayer expense. This Greed has to stop!
Wrong.
Really, you have no clue as to what coercion is and how it was enacted here? Maybe, you don't define coercion the common way, being undue influence or threat either real, veiled, or implied interpreted by the other individual.
In this case as the Paulson book indicated - whether there was a matter at hand or it just innuendo - the directors were told - vote for us and we won't prosecute you; in so many words. Now, that is, whether you agree or not coercion, why? Because they had the power to enforce the promise of investigation and that was something the directors opted out of whether real or imagined.
But, if you decide your coercion is only at the point of a gun, well my common sense approach may not suffice for you, but its nevertheless, what would have been felt by the individual and in my view, as a director of a company, and i am, if that company were being attacked and foundering and the takeover people, who had the ability to put you in jail or you believed they ddid, or cause you much harm, and you wanted to avoid it, like most people would.... and you could just get a free pass of taking your ball and going on home, with NO consequences since they made all the rules and controlled the courts, the executive branch and had the congress snowed.... well son, that's coercion.
At least it would be to me.
This is not coercion...lawsuits are a legal right. Coercion requires either physical force, threat of physical harm or duress. No it don't - coercion is what is felt or perceived.
Simple definition for you "The intimidation of a victim to compel the individual to do some act against his or her will by the use of psychological pressure, physical force, or threats."
Rek, you are caught up in the interpretation, instead of the application.
Bottom line...
They were Coerced.
We know they were coerced.
They were told - if you agree to this - we won't prosecute you for any "potential" lapse in judgement.
This was a special time.
Many people were panicking and those directors took the bait. They took the get out of jail free card whether or not they ever needed it.
This is what we've been told by the experts, those that wrote the books. It was a choice, but the choice was so compelling as to really not be a choice.
To me, and i realize you like to argue, this is upper handed coercion.
They were coerced.
Maybe, but that gives corky too much credit.
Feel it interestingly similar that Corker gets a pass by promoting the anti - Freddie and Fannie - ie. short them to make money. When, Kelly Conway - got in trouble with ethics people by promoting a shout out of a brand.
Isn't it not similar?
Why no ethic's probe of Corker?
I don't know how many documents are in 7 or 8 bankers boxes, but assuming that it is equal in size to the GSE documents (11,000), did you also have to cross reference those documents and weight them in order of privilege protection in order to determine the most likely to be found in violation of national security? Then did you need to summarize the 11,000 documents and propose to your clients how you'd like to proceed, wait for a response, and then re-cross reference in order to meet with your clients demands? I imagine that would have taken a bit longer.
Rek.. Bankers Boxes are bigger than normal paper boxes that can hold 10 reams of paper or 5,000 sheets of paper; so this is minimum likely over 35,000 pages of paper. Now, bare in mind that 35K pages may or may not equate to x number of "documents" and in my profession, I was able to scan for relevance very quickly. Yes, all of these would have been bate stamped; and catalogued - the jr. attorneys and para legals usually did this.
And remember in my note... I am only one person. These clowns have access to a cadre of peeps.
It could be a stalling tactic...but that doesn't make their claim illegitimate. Stalling tactics are not impermissible as long as they don't create undue hardship on the opposing party. The plaintiffs don't need to do anything here, so no undue hardship.
You and I both know that a staling tactic is just that part of strategy. Its how some people who can't win on the arguments win on the clock and $$. Also, you and i also both know that "time" is a hardship. Its just a matter of how much you can endure or put up with. That the government has a limitless supply of time, money and other resources. There is an unspoken disadvantage - so, next question, when does the aggregation of their stalling equate to that "hardship" you write?
Let's not forget that we haven't even STARTED trial yet. lol.
So true, in many ways, i am beginning to believe a trial will never occur.
Because he isn't our friend.
I get that, but he's supposed to be for something and that should be against what has previously occurred, regardless of being a friend or not.
Thanks for the commentary. Just mostly frustrated.
I don't know how many documents are in 7 or 8 bankers boxes, but assuming that it is equal in size to the GSE documents (11,000), did you also have to cross reference those documents and weight them in order of privilege protection in order to determine the most likely to be found in violation of national security? Then did you need to summarize the 11,000 documents and propose to your clients how you'd like to proceed, wait for a response, and then re-cross reference in order to meet with your clients demands? I imagine that would have taken a bit longer.
Rek.. Bankers Boxes are bigger than normal paper boxes that can hold 10 reams of paper or 5,000 sheets of paper; so this is minimum likely over 35,000 pages of paper. Now, bare in mind that 35K pages may or may not equate to x number of "documents" and in my profession, I was able to scan for relevance very quickly. Yes, all of these would have been bate stamped; and catalogued - the jr. attorneys and para legals usually did this.
And remember in my note... I am only one person. These clowns have access to a cadre of peeps.
It could be a stalling tactic...but that doesn't make their claim illegitimate. Stalling tactics are not impermissible as long as they don't create undue hardship on the opposing party. The plaintiffs don't need to do anything here, so no undue hardship.
You and I both know that a staling tactic is just that part of strategy. Its how some people who can't win on the arguments when on the clock and $$. Also, you and i also both know that "time" is a hardship. Its just a matter of how much you can endure or put up with. That the government has a limitless supply of time, money and other resources. There is an unspoken disadvantage - so, next question, when does the aggregation of their stalling equate to that "hardship" you write?
Let's not forget that we haven't even STARTED trial yet. lol.
So true, in many ways, i am beginning to believe a trial will never occur.
Because he isn't our friend.
I get that, but he's supposed to be for something and that should be against what has previously occurred, regardless of being a friend or not.
Thanks for the commentary. Just mostly frustrated.
There is no reason why this should not have been done by now or at least years ago.
I've personally, reviewed 7 or 8 bankers boxes filled with pages, contracts, memo's, tax returns, financials, emails, etc. in a few weeks, let alone the months these clowns claim and i was working alone as opposed to the cadre of people they have access to.
Its clearly a stalling tactic.
Question is .... then what is next? What is the next mouse chase game they are going to play on the owners of Fannie and Freddie, and for the love of all that is right, why is Trump permitting it to occur?
In the case of Fannie and Freddie...
Has the government been honest?
Has the government been honorable?
Has the government been good stewards?
Should the government feel proud of their efforts?
Rek if FHFA is working as conservator of GSE's are they not then therefore one and the same? Thus a suit against fhfa as conservator is a direct claim not an indirect claim?
No $$ = death of obamascare
Say no to the NWS
Yeah, I thought about that.
Cancel or suspend the Nws and it would be an indicator of intentions to recap and we may go to 80 or so.
Sorry for being short sighted.
Good catch.
Nope.
We'd be at $20-30 if the NWS was announced ended.
Heck the best thing these clowns could do would be to suspend the NWS pending their review - whatever that is.
That way the $$ will be still in the companies. Far easier to do this than to "give it back!"
Hello up there anyone home?
So frustrating!
Chess,....
While I agree totally.
IF, we had to raise some cap cash...
I'd willingly do it at $125 share valuation for 280M shares.
But, not withstanding any of that. Totally AGREE!
Raise 30Billion by selling 280M shares and In would be all for it.
LOL
How incredibly WRONG
Liquidation preference for commons is = all else.
All else is what then becomes debatable meaning... why isn't more left?
BECAUSE the government STOLE it..
Therein lies the power of the liquidation preference and the fiduciary duties that belies this very simple argument.
wow!
This is a class Action suit.
The Government could use this case to settle all of the matters and wipe the issues clear and clean - by encapsulating a settlement of and for everyone by coming to the table with a fair and reasonable offer and compromise.
Doing so would end this!
Lets hope there are at least some smart people in government... hello? Anyone? just takes one just one.
Also, under the perry remand, this suit can't be dismissed using the same gyrations and slight of hand. These are direct claims and "regarding" liquidation preferences, ie. equity.
from the Perry remand... "The remaining claims, which are contract -based claims regarding liquidation preferences
and dividend rights, are remanded to the district court for further proceedings."
Reading this as "regarding" implies in similar interpretation as that of the liberal judges, in the most liberal way, to me means that anything that could give rise to liquidation preferences, ie. remains which are based upon the operations net of liabilities ie... equity, or value are remanded.
Thus, again in the most liberal meaning of liberal judges this should open the box for discussions actions or inactions of or for which rights and values are determined and caused by the contractual rights of the shareholders for further proceedings, which in this sentence is also undefined and thus may mean anything, liberally defined.
in other, more simply words, this would put the actions of the conservator under microscope.
Why wouldn't this be a clear WIN for shareholders.
Yes, its just a survey... but
Hey...
We are on the radar that is the good thing.
Now to make it a priority.
Cap bro...
I am a professional... of one sort or another.
And... i don't believe the warrants will ever be exercised.
From a legal perspective, the warrants not being canceled. Will only beget more legal wrangling and extend the resolution into the next decade.
Its my very firm belief, that the current president will have no desire to allow this to extend and squander the opportunity to help the masses. Trump, is very much about the American people.
Not resolving this fannie and freddie mess will not sit well. Taking 80% of the entities, when they could stimulate the economy and put people back to work by allowing the value to be used would be the preferred goal. So, taking 80% for themselves just goes in the wrong direction.
As for a recap.
The dilution of the warrants would impose would cause a flood of shares and lessen the ease of recapping the entities.
But, hey what do I know. I am just a professional of one sort or another.
My belief is a settlement is in the works, it'll be a slow process, but this is very likely to happen.
You want to make that a combo - hey Ricky - supersize me!
So frustrating.
Sitting at the edge of so much that can be right all for the want of people doing right.
What the heck are they going to do?
What are the viable options that don't include recapping in some fashion these too entities?
If they are going to crush the shareholders from fair value down to 1/5th of that value. THEN DO IT and get it over with. Take your lumps and move these court cases ahead.
But for the love of the game,
IF They aren't - then get on with it ALREADY!
In order to capitalize the companies. Warrants have to be cancelled. They're not a legitimate contract owed to the government. That the government will want to defend.
In order to resolve this mess; this has to end.