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.
Should be only one on the compel order I believe...
Stupid...waste of money...waste of time...she really has no clue on how to spend taxpayer's money...no wonder they want to keep raising taxes and screw over the taxpayers...go ahead and recount and give her 1000 votes just to give her a happy ending and say thank you for the $3.8 million+...what an idiot...that's going to be one expensive happy ending...I hope she enjoys it...
In particular, the U.S. House of Representatives’
Committee on the Budget has approved a plan – titled
“A Balanced Budget for a Stronger America” – that
identifies $5.5 trillion of spending cuts that can be made
over the next decade. Savings would come from repealing
Obamacare, eliminating corporate welfare, reducing
government interference in the energy industry, privatizing
housing giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and other
measures.
....then wind them down...pay off the shareholders and the taxpayers can then take on the debt as well as the risk....after all no risk, no reward...
Please keep your hands inside the tram at all times during the Fannie Mae Ride and refrain from feeding the trolls. Thank you!
Get in while you can...this train is about to leave the station...
FINAL ELECTION 2016 NUMBERS: TRUMP WON BOTH POPULAR ( 62.9 M -62.2 M ) AND ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTES ( 306-232)
$3 Dolla Holla...lol
Really? You ate the arrow with bun?
THE COURT: What's the harm to you if I were to say --
3
4
I mean, when I originally set this hearing I was going to say,
why not have them be as co-plaintiffs, but they say they're the
5 exclusive plaintiffs, not co-plaintiffs. That's the problem.
6 Then I don't know. How does that work?
7
8
You've got money in this case I suspect.
MR. TURKEL: Judge, the settlement is confidential.
9 We'd be more than willing to submit it in camera, but yes.
10 THE COURT: Well, I wouldn't want you to say how much,
11
12
13
but you've got money.
MR. TURKEL: Yes.
THE COURT: I mean, you're not doing this to write a
14 law review article.
15 MR. TURKEL: Correct. No, Your Honor, I'm not. Though
16
17
I should say, we're not.
THE COURT: So you're going to get the money either
18 way.
19 MR. TURKEL: That from our perspective, Judge, would be
20
21
the ultimate resolution.
Yes...and that would only be the judge who decides on the Writ of Mandamus that was submitted to the higher court...
Paper copies were submitted for "in camera view"...not for plaintiffs to see...
Look who's pushing for answers...Page 18 PWC, false representation charges...Fannie and Freddie also on the list...
http://www.warren.senate.gov/files/documents/2016-9-15_Referral_DOJ_IG_letter.pdf
http://www.warren.senate.gov/files/documents/2016-9-15_Comey_letter.pdf
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/elizabeth-warren-letter-to-fbi-2008-wall-street-investigations_us_57dae09fe4b0071a6e05dc53
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/obama-james-comey-surveillance_us_5814f125e4b0390e69d0aa65
Very good...file that brief...let's hear it...it should help Anthony in his case...it is so ordered...
That's what it says maybe not exactly in your words, but you can extract that same idea just by reading that section.
Yes, but Treasury wants the court find the contract/agreement to be found illegal before they will write the letter. In other words, we (Treasury) write the agreement if you the court disagree with it or find it illegal through trial first, then we'll cancel the contract and reverse the sweep or we'll continue to take the GSE's money. By definition of the agreement, FHFA is the conservator for the Treasury on behalf of the taxpayers and not the shareholders which is not what Congress wrote HERA to be.
It means that if the court finds the contract to be illegal then the Treasury can write a letter to FHFA to void and nullify the agreement/contract and reverse the entire process including the senior preferred stocks, the bail out commitment and act as if nothing happened...no harm, no foul basicly...
6.12. Non-Severability. Each of the provisions of this Agreement is integrated with and integral to the whole and shall not be severable from the remainder of the Agreement. In the event that any provision of this Agreement, the Senior Preferred Stock or the Warrant is determined to be illegal or unenforceable, then Purchaser may, in its sole discretion, by written notice to Conservator and Seller, declare this Agreement null and void, whereupon all transfers hereunder (including the issuance of the Senior Preferred Stock and the Warrant and any funding of the Commitment) shall be rescinded and unwound and all obligations of the parties (other than to effectuate such rescission and unwind) shall immediately and automatically terminate.
Exactly 8 years ago...Sept 07, 2008
https://www.c-span.org/video/?280948-1/federal-takeover-fannie-mae-freddie-mac
Whether it's resolved in court or government settles...the fact is...the GSE's are not shutting down...they're here to stay with more stability...this administration is done turning it's pages...times run out and the next administration needs to answer to the American people to include affordable housing one way or another...and it's not happening without the GSE's...
Double check the paper you did the math last time...if I remember correctly you said $368...you left it in your car because you were getting hot dogs at Costco and didn't want to get ketchup on it...remember?
Quit with your nonsense...this is not about junior preferreds vs commons...it's about 3rd amendment being illegal...if 3rd amendment is found illegal then the only class losing is the government's senior preferreds...not junior preferreds and certainly not commons...so please...take your comments onto the preferreds board cause we don't want to hear it...really sick of it!
Good get rid of Mayo...sloppy with hot dogs at Costco anyway...
Ladies and gentleman we're about to embark on a journey to get our company back. Please keep your hands inside the tram at all times and refrain from feeding the trolls. Thank you for joining us on the GSE ride...
Would a President Trump abolish Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?
http://bcove.me/irsmsh2v
David Fiderer@Ny1david David Fiderer Retweeted Donald J. Trump
Donald takes a swipe at Ed DeMarco & management under GSE conservatorship
Donald J. Trump@realDonaldTrump
American homeownership rate in Q2 2016 was 62.9% - lowest rate in 51yrs. WE will bring back the 'American Dream!'
That's largely the problem...a judge who doesn't follow the law, but rather believes in changing the law that was laid out...if the judge would make decisions based on the laws that was laid out and not so much on questioning the decisions by the law makers, we would have a more compliant judge who sits behind that bench...shut up and do your job...
Shall is being derived from a religious perspective of shalt...such example being thou shalt not kill...in the days that may and may not was used, they both had inferences of must and must not...however the definitions have much mutated since they were first utilized. Many legal books were written based on the old English definition so those who are in the newer generation "may not" comprehend what it's true legal meanings are...
Try again tomorrow...it's Friday, maybe you'll have better luck...besides the converging triangle says tomorrow it'll make a move...
You're absolutely right...my bad...
I hardly call it fabricated when congress wrote a letter to treasury to refrain from selling the shares...
Really!?...then explain why congress doesn't want treasury to sell their shares...
You're not possibly throwing in all the eggs in the hail mary case are you?...lol
Lol...the title says preferred stock purchase agreement...I guess that means stockholder not shareholder...yet we're all purchasing stocks too...so what does that make the rest of us...peanutholders?...c'mon, it's all about the word game...read and understand what the direct law is meant to be without twisting it...
Lol...cat chasing it's own tail...FHFA as conservator received the power and rights by HERA to make all decisions for shareholders, yet treasury is also a shareholder...which FHFA should adhere to the laws so stated by HERA...
" A. HERA’s Express Language Transfers “All Rights” of Fannie Mae’s
Shareholders to the Conservator. This Includes the Shareholder-Right to
Inspect and Mandates Substitution of the Conservator as Plaintiff Here."
" Through the PSPAs, Treasury agreed to provide billions
of dollars for the Enterprises’ continued operations in exchange for a comprehensive package of
rights."
" 12 U.S.C. § 4511 et seq.); see also Compl. ¶¶ 54, 55. HERA grants FHFA’s Director authority
to place Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in conservatorship and specifies that at the inception of
conservatorship, FHFA shall “by operation of law, immediately succeed to . . . all rights, titles,
powers, and privileges of the regulated entity, and of any stockholder, officer, or director of such
regulated entity with respect to the regulated entity and the assets of the regulated entity.” 12
U.S.C. § 4617(b)(2)(A); see also Compl. ¶ 55. HERA also expressly empowers the Conservator
to “[o]perate the [Enterprises] . . . with all the powers of the shareholders, the directors, and the
officers” and to “conduct all business of the [Enterprises].” Id. § 4617(b)(2)(B)(i)."
They must have switched the oxygen tank with nitrogen dioxide by accident...
Waiting for Congress to make a new legislation when HERA was passed was not a condition when they were placed into conservatorship...the deal was when they are back sound and solvent, they are to be released...that was the condition, that was the deal, that was the goal...
Don't lie...it's going to be on Friday...
Directors have a fiduciary duty when not in conservatorship yet the conservator can do whatever the conservator wants? What in the world??? The conservator stepped into the shoes of the directors to make the correction necessary to steer the companies in the right path to healthy companies. Which includes fiduciary duties to shareholders, but is not limited to shareholders.
As a regulator the fiduciary doesn't exist, not as a conservator. As a conservator, the conservator does have the responsibility and is accountable for his or her actions to the conservatee since the conservator is also wearing the shoes of the directors of the company(s).
Also all cases have to follow suit with every other past cases not just appeals. If past cases exist that does not follow suit with any other previous cases or new evidence arise, then the appellate court may overturn a case for that reason. Hence, trying a case to uphold laws to paint a bigger picture or as you say, "the whole enchilada". Which means every pending cases will follow every other court case's verdict, not just the appellate court's.