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.
FOFreddie, I think that’s a fantastic idea. I’m not much of a writer ✍️.
Thank you for your pre-Conservatorship list and then, maybe with this…
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=172987595
"garbage" ?? The Treasury has received $301 billion!
Apparently, you must own JPS, and as a JPS owner you continue on a Common Stock message board, why?
Mr. Self-Proclaimed Prophet, Read it again!
Rodney5 01/30/24 8:33 PM
Post #784543 on Fannie Mae (FNMA)
The SCOTUS upholding the NWS does not change the fact the liquidation preference can be paid down and the Senior Preferred Stock redeemed under the terms of the law of HERA. The SCOTUS DID NOT SAY THE TREASURY CAN KEEP THE NET WORTH THAT WAS SWEPT!
The money kept by the Treasury by the NWS should be applied to principle and 10% interest and over payment should be returned to the companies. $301 billion is more than enough to pay the liquidation preference and redeem the Senior Preferred Stock.
READ IT REAL SLOW!
IF THE FHFA / TREASURY are allowed to continue with the illegal contract the SPSPA, If the agreement is allowed to stand consideration should be given the FHFA Breach of Contract Bad faith and Unfair Dealings actions of the government in litigation that took place in Judge Lamberth's Court. It took 8 random DC Jurors only 10 hours of deliberations to see right through the Government's false narratives.
It’s bad faith and unfair dealing when the Regulator is authorized to pay down the Senior Preferred Stock and sent the Net Worth without the pay down option. The FHFA Director doesn’t need the Treasury approval to pay down the Senior Preferred Stock the Director has the authority from Congress written in HERA:
HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2008
RESTRICTION ON CAPITAL DISTRIBUTIONS.— page 2731
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—A regulated entity shall make no capital distribution if, after making the distribution, the regulated entity would be undercapitalized. The exception.
Quote: “Page 2732
EXCEPTION.—Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the Director may permit a regulated entity, to the extent appropriate or applicable, to repurchase, redeem, retire, or otherwise acquire shares or ownership interests if the repurchase, redemption, retirement, or other acquisition— ‘‘(A) is made in connection with the issuance of additional shares or obligations of the regulated entity in at least an equivalent amount; and ‘‘(B) will reduce the financial obligations of the regulated entity or otherwise improve the financial condition of the entity.’’.
NOTE: REPURCHASE, REDEEM, RETIRE...
WILL REDUCE THE FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS OF THE REGULATED ENTITY.
Link: https://www.congress.gov/110/plaws/publ289/PLAW-110publ289.pdf
In essence allows the trustees of Fannie and Freddie to go to the market at any time to raise new capital, including new capital with lower dividend coupons, to buy back the Treasury’s senior preferred. Any loyal conservator of Fannie and Freddie would take advantage of this refinancing option to end the bailout arrangement, by paying off the senior preferred in full. The Treasury did not take a Perpetual Equity Investment in the enterprises, the Treasury stated a temporary investment period!
The calculation of the pay down of the liquidation preference of the Senior Preferred Stock, apply the law written in the HERA legislation passed by Congress.
Link to the calculation:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/15978NWfDcTtuClMBnwgWFmoPnwK94vWn/view
The liquidation preference has been paid and the Senior Preferred Stock should be canceled.
You are still here?? No shame...
Rodney5
Re: Wingsjr post# 785003
Sunday, February 04, 2024, 1:50:36 PM
Advice to Common Shareholders to sell their shares at the absolute bottom 6 months ago just before a 200% return.
Quote: JOoa0ky Monday, June 12, 2023,
"Commons are going to sink... Sell out now while you still can..."
Link: https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=172114484
It’s not working we see right through the smoke and mirrors. So sad the investors who sold their common shares just before the latest advancement in price. The person that freely admitted short selling the common stock of Fannie Mae. What do short sellers do?? They preach a cram-down forever doing away with the Common Shareholders.
Preaching a cram-down all the while short selling the common stock. AND bragged about it.
Link: https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=173604551
No Name Quote: "So when you speak of writing down the SPS to zero for no compensation....that narrative runs counter to Treasury's and FHFA's duty to taxpayers. It's never gonna happen." End of Quote
That's a bald-faced lie! NO COMPENSATION!
"It's never gonna happen." ... Self-Proclaimed Prophet.
Mr. Bryndon Fisher gave us the calculation of the pay down of the liquidation preference no need of a third-party RE-IPO. The companies are fully capitalized with the payment of the liquidation preference the Senior Preferred Stock should be canceled.
THE TREASURY HAS COLLECTED ENOUGH.
NOW WE HAVE 8-0 JURY verdict.
Link to the calculation.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/15978NWfDcTtuClMBnwgWFmoPnwK94vWn/view
AIG REPURCHASES WARRANTS FROM U.S. TREASURY $25 million for the warrants.
NEW YORK, March 1, 2013 – American International Group, Inc. (NYSE: AIG) announced today that it completed the repurchase of warrants issued to the United States Department of the Treasury (U.S. Treasury) in 2008 and 2009. The warrant issued in 2008 provided the right to purchase approximately 2.7 million shares of AIG common stock at $50.00 per share, and the warrant issued in 2009 provided the right to purchase up to 150 shares of AIG common stock at $0.00002 per share. AIG and the U.S. Treasury agreed upon a repurchase price of approximately $25 million for the warrants. The U.S. Treasury does not have any residual interest in AIG after AIG’s repurchase of these warrants.
“With AIG repurchasing all outstanding warrants issued to the U.S. Treasury, we are turning the final page on America’s assistance to AIG,” said Robert H. Benmosche, AIG President and Chief Executive Officer. “We appreciate the opportunities this support allowed and are proud to have returned to America every cent plus a profit of $22.7 billion.”
Link: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/5272/000119312513086875/d495224dex991.htm
naveedkhan
06/12/23 1:45 PM
#757484 RE: JOoa0ky #757477
Just Sold All of My Common Holdings
Thank you very much JOoaOky - that was a close one! I'm sure I speak for everyone when I thank you for your unsolicited financial advice. Please continue to keep us informed.
The Man With No Name
06/12/23 1:07 PM
#757478 RE: JOoa0ky #757477
No no no, buy more. Take a second mortgage, get a car title loan, pimp out your old lady...just buy
Commons_Cancelled
06/12/23 5:06 PM
#757507 RE: JOoa0ky #757477
With this ruling, the Cancellation of Commons increases significantly. If not Cancelled, then diluted into oblivion is on deck.
Bearish
BEARISH
Advice to Common Shareholders to sell their shares at the absolute bottom 6 months ago just before a 200% return.
Quote: JOoa0ky Monday, June 12, 2023,
"Commons are going to sink... Sell out now while you still can..."
Link: https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=172114484
Being you don’t think $ 10 to $ 20 is a fair deal when you factor in the deception that was done and how much money the UST has already made on a Conservatorship that was unnecessary based on the known facts as of today. Will you kindly post a list of the factors you consider deceptive? For any new investors on this board that possibly do not have a clear understanding of the history. I think you would agree that would be an ethical thing to do.
Regards
-R
I'm not sure about the Merchant of Venice; I do know about the Law of Sowing and Reaping. I am sorry to hear about your lose.
I have been advocating fair treatment for all shareholders, (see link):
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=173747946
You know it and I know it and everyone that has studied the facts knows the truth; what the FHFA / Treasury has done is illegal and unconstitutional. The Treasury should pay the Shareholders fair market value for the Common and Preferred equity ownership; Anything less is stealing.
When you and every other JPS holder start throwing out numbers as $10 to $20 per share that really rubs me wrong. I do not own JPS; You or any other JPS holder do not have the right to suggest the Treasury steal the Common Shareholders equity.
This is what you said, “I would hope and expect that common trades in the $10 to $20 range and that JPS gets PAR on the Exit.”
“I believe we all should be rooting for justice and fair treatment under the Law for all GSE Shareholders - JPS and Common alike.”
Do you think $10 to $20 per share is justice and fair treatment??
Regards,
-R
Okay, I apologize you're not promoting anything. You're echoing the cram-down argument preached over over by Kt.
Kindly Explain: Where is "maximize profits for taxpayers" written in the Charter Act?
Specifically, in this provision entitled Fee Limitation of the United States:
Link to Charter Act: https://www.fanniemae.com/sites/g/files/koqyhd191/files/migrated-files/resources/file/aboutus/pdf/fm-amended-charter.pdf
FOFreddie, you seem to be a decent person, I’m beginning to wonder whose side you’re on? Throwing around numbers “if JPS is paid out at PAR and common gets a value in the $ 10 to $ 20 Range” ??? $10 to $20, I guess it’s okay as long as you get your JPS Par… Your in a discussion with a person ‘European’, promoting a cram-down Treasury theft of private property. HELLO ?
You were promoting Common Shareholders to sell their shares at the absolute bottom 6 months ago just before a 200% return.
Quote: JOoa0ky Monday, June 12, 2023,
"Commons are going to sink... Sell out now while you still can..."
Link: https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=172114484
LuLeVan, as you said “You should not criticize people here who are expressing their (legal) expectations about the future of the GSE saga.” I agree, BUT Promoting theft is not expressing legal expectations.
Read it again!
Rodney5
11/16/23 8:23 PM
Post #774859 on Fannie Mae (FNMA)
Information for anyone new on this board concerning the ‘Cram-Down’ argument.
There are certain people that are encouraging theft, these people want the Treasury Department to wipe out the Common Shareholders, referred to as Legacy Common Shareholders. Not only do these people want the Owners of Common Stock destroyed but take great links in rejoicing of the destruction of the Common Shareholders and consistently for many years have advocated this theft.
Transfer of Ownership Cram-Down
Explained,
Legacy Shareholders means, collectively, each person that owns common stock of the Company immediately prior to the closing of the Transaction (cram-down) which in no event shall include any of the Investors; or very few will remain afterwards maybe 1% or less.
A cram-down deal refers to a situation where an investor or creditor is forced into accepting undesirable terms in a transaction or bankruptcy proceedings.
In the case with Fannie Mae the Treasury's holding of senior preferred stock in the amount of $120.8 billion, with a liquidation preference of $190.5 billion.
If the Treasury converts this amount of SPS into common stock the Treasury in essence will own 99.9% of all the common stock outstanding. The number of shares outstanding depends on price per share at the time converted. The amount of shares outstanding after the cram-down does not matter at all, it's the percent ownership, a transfer of ownership from the legacy common shareholders to the Treasury. This transaction will cause the legacy common stock to vanish along with any short positions, naked short positions as well as any counterfeit common stock outstanding. Afterwards, the Treasury can do a reverse split reducing the amount in number of the new common stock outstanding to any amount outstanding the Treasury decides.
Quote: “ The existing "owners of the company" (by which I assume you mean the legacy common, even though you're wrong about that too) have about $2B worth of wealth: 1.8B outstanding shares times around $1.30/share in market value.” End of Quote… WRONG
The Treasury pays the Shareholders fair market value for the Common and Preferred equity ownership; Anything less is stealing.
Mr. Bryndon Fisher gave us the calculation of the pay down of the liquidation preference no need of a third-party RE-IPO.
The companies are fully capitalized by the payment of the liquidation preference the Senior Preferred Stock should be canceled.
THE TREASURY HAS COLLECTED ENOUGH.
NOW WE HAVE 8-0 JURY verdict.
Link to the calculation.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/15978NWfDcTtuClMBnwgWFmoPnwK94vWn/view
IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE CALCULATED VALUE PAY THE SHAREHOLDERS FOR THE EARNINGS POWER OF THE BUSINESSES:
The Value calculation should start with the number $436.1 billion. This is the Intrinsic Value of both companies businesses including the JPS, the estimated value of Fannie and Freddie.
$402.9 billion earnings power plus $33.2 billion JPS = $436.1 billion.
Fannie Mae
EARNINGS POWER OF THE BUSINESS
$263 Billion Intrinsic Value
Freddie Mac
EARNINGS POWER OF THE BUSINESS
$139.9 Billion Intrinsic Value
Fannie Mae JPS $19.1 billion par value
Freddie Mac JPS $14.1 billion par value
The amount of $402.9 billion is the calculated Intrinsic Value of the Earnings Power of both businesses combined using a Price to Earnings Ratio of 14.
The SCOTUS upholding the NWS does not change the fact the liquidation preference can be paid down and the Senior Preferred Stock redeemed under the terms of the law of HERA. The SCOTUS DID NOT SAY THE TREASURY CAN KEEP THE NET WORTH THAT WAS SWEPT!
The money kept by the Treasury by the NWS should be applied to principle and 10% interest and over payment should be returned to the companies. $301 billion is more than enough to pay the liquidation preference and redeem the Senior Preferred Stock.
READ IT REAL SLOW!
IF THE FHFA / TREASURY are allowed to continue with the illegal contract the SPSPA, If the agreement is allowed to stand consideration should be given the FHFA Breach of Contract Bad faith and Unfair Dealings actions of the government in litigation that took place in Judge Lamberth's Court. It took 8 random DC Jurors only 10 hours of deliberations to see right through the Government's false narratives.
It’s bad faith and unfair dealing when the Regulator is authorized to pay down the Senior Preferred Stock and sent the Net Worth without the pay down option. The FHFA Director doesn’t need the Treasury approval to pay down the Senior Preferred Stock the Director has the authority from Congress written in HERA:
HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2008
RESTRICTION ON CAPITAL DISTRIBUTIONS.— page 2731
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—A regulated entity shall make no capital distribution if, after making the distribution, the regulated entity would be undercapitalized. The exception.
Quote: “Page 2732
EXCEPTION.—Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the Director may permit a regulated entity, to the extent appropriate or applicable, to repurchase, redeem, retire, or otherwise acquire shares or ownership interests if the repurchase, redemption, retirement, or other acquisition— ‘‘(A) is made in connection with the issuance of additional shares or obligations of the regulated entity in at least an equivalent amount; and ‘‘(B) will reduce the financial obligations of the regulated entity or otherwise improve the financial condition of the entity.’’.
NOTE: REPURCHASE, REDEEM, RETIRE...
WILL REDUCE THE FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS OF THE REGULATED ENTITY.
Link: https://www.congress.gov/110/plaws/publ289/PLAW-110publ289.pdf
In essence allows the trustees of Fannie and Freddie to go to the market at any time to raise new capital, including new capital with lower dividend coupons, to buy back the Treasury’s senior preferred. Any loyal conservator of Fannie and Freddie would take advantage of this refinancing option to end the bailout arrangement, by paying off the senior preferred in full. The Treasury did not take a Perpetual Equity Investment in the enterprises, the Treasury stated a temporary investment period!
The calculation of the pay down of the liquidation preference of the Senior Preferred Stock, apply the law written in the HERA legislation passed by Congress.
Link to the calculation:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/15978NWfDcTtuClMBnwgWFmoPnwK94vWn/view
The liquidation preference has been paid and the Senior Preferred Stock should be canceled.
Sir, just maybe the short sellers are long FNMA common now and are attempting to persuade the owners of the Common Shares to sale.... ??
Either way the cram-down people continue.
The 6 mo. chart of FNMA Common Stock printed +203.41% today. This is your cram-down!
The person that freely admitted short selling the common stock of Fannie Mae. What do short sellers do?? They preach a cram-down forever doing away with the Common Shareholders.
You want proof?
Link: https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=173604551
JOoa0ky, she posted a thumbs down emoji of the 6 mo. chart of FNMA Common Stock that printed +203.41% today. This is your cram-down!
Quote: JOoa0ky Monday, June 12, 2023, 12:54:14 PM
Post#
757477 of 784489
"Commons are going to sink... Sell out now while you still can..."
Link: https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=172114484
Thanks, stockprofitter for posting the link to the picture.
Here's the link to the letter...
Link: https://assets.realclear.com/files/2021/11/1921_trump_letter_to_rand_paul.pdf
Wise Man, will you kindly explain your reasoning for the sheeet emoji you posted on Mr. Trumps letter to Mr. Paul ?? Thank you.
Sharkey777 Quote: "Show the letter I'm sure everybody would want to see it" End of Quote
The Honorable Rand Paul United States Senate Washington, D.C.
Dear Senator Paul,
DONALD J. TRUMP November 1, 2021
Thank you for talking to me about the need to privatize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, two great American companies, and about the question the Supreme Court has raised about what I would have been able to accomplish if I had been able to fire the incompetent Mel Watt from day one of my Administration.
Another Obama/Biden scam in legal trouble was when they allowed the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) to steal the retirement savings of hardworking Americans who had invested in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court has recognized that my Administration was denied the ability to oversee the work of FHFA in violation of the Constitution. The Supreme Court's decision asks what I would have done had I controlled FHFA from the beginning of my Administration, as the Constitution required. From the start, I would have fired former Democrat Congressman and political hack Mel Watt from his position as Director and would have ordered FHFA to release these companies from conservatorship. My Administration would have also sold the government's common stock in these companies at a huge profit and fully privatized the companies. The idea that the government can steal money from its citizens is socialism and is a travesty brought to you by the Obama/Biden administration. My Administration was denied the time it needed to fix this problem because of the unconstitutional restriction on firing Mel Watt. It has to come to an end and courts must protect our citizens.
Link: https://assets.realclear.com/files/2021/11/1921_trump_letter_to_rand_paul.pdf
Sir, BTIG is advocating theft with the 79.9% warrants.
The Treasury told us the reason for the warrants, their intention was never to take ownership.
Quote: “Furthermore, by design, the warrants were issued not to take ownership but rather to devalue the common stock.” End of Quote
Quote:” Driving the stock market value to zero prevents this manipulation from happening. ” End of quote
Quote: "Mr. Werfel then explained that it is important to understand the government’s intention. The intention was not to eliminate the ownership interests but to prevent current shareholder speculation resulting in speculators taking advantage of government intervention at the expense of others. Driving the stock market value to zero prevents this manipulation from happening. " End of Quote page 24
Link to page 24
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=173695132
I’m not as you said, “Playing the fool is an aggravating circumstance”
Actually, just trying to understand what you’re trying to explain to the board. I can’t figure it out. If anyone disagrees with you that person becomes “ plaintiff Joshua Angel”…
Wise Man, trying to understand your reasoning conclusion I’m not sure whose side you’re on… let me try to get this straight. You’re saying the government confiscating private property of the GSE Shareholders has purposely made it appear it’s a theft but in reality at the end of the conservatorship the government with the separate account makes everyone whole??
The separate account is the property confiscated by the government??
If the Treasury committed the theft the cram-down people are advocating the same day the SPS converts to common shares immediately the Treasury could offer an IPO selling the holdings in the open market; I maybe wrong, seems this would avoid adding trillions onto the national debt. But then again this would be stealing.
No need to raise additional capital.
Rodney5
01/09/24 10:52 AM
Post #781375 on Fannie Mae (FNMA)
Mr. Bryndon Fisher gave us the calculation of the pay down of the liquidation preference no need of a third-party RE-IPO.
The companies are fully capitalized with the payment of the liquidation preference the Senior Preferred Stock should be canceled.
THE TREASURY HAS COLLECTED ENOUGH.
NOW WE HAVE 8-0 JURY verdict.
Link to the calculation.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/15978NWfDcTtuClMBnwgWFmoPnwK94vWn/view
Viking, you read it wrong, that was a direct quote from the FHFA: Best Regards
“ Freddie Mac’s core capital of $37.1 billion exceeded the FHFA-directed minimum capital requirement by $2.7 billion.”
Rodney5
11/16/23 8:47 PM
Post #774861 on Fannie Mae (FNMA)
The cram-down people pushing to wipeout the common, it may BACKFIRE in their face.
Treasury restructuring explained below in two different ways, but not limited to the two.
The Treasury can choose to declare the Liquidation Preference paid in full and cancel the Senior Preferred Stock.
Or
What makes the JPS so sure the Treasury will not demand payment in full on the Liquidation Preference wiping out both JPS / Common in receivership?
The Treasury’s LP continues to grow the regulator is authorized or required to place the companies into receivership under specified conditions, which would result in our liquidation. Money received by the Treasury pays off the LP by confiscation of our companies. Leaving nothing for JPS or Common.
As we speak the value of the LP is greater than the entire business operation of Fannie and Freddie.
Company’s Financial Statement
Risk Factors Summary
GSE and Conservatorship Risk
Quote: "Our business activities are significantly affected by the senior preferred stock purchase agreement. Our regulator is authorized or required to place us into receivership under specified conditions, which would result in our liquidation. Amounts recovered by our receiver may not be sufficient to pay claims outstanding against us, repay the liquidation preference of our preferred stock or to provide any proceeds to common shareholders." End of Quote Page 33
Link: https://www.fanniemae.com/media/46276/display
"In the event the assets legally available for distribution to stockholders are insufficient to pay the liquidation preference of all Preferred Stock in full, the assets available for distribution will be divided among all holders of Preferred Stock on a pro rata basis, based on the value of the liquidation preference of each series of Preferred Stock." Page 5
Link: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/310522/000031052220000121/descriptionofsecuritie.htm
“ Can somebody remind me of the scenario whereby Fannie Mae is released from conservatorship and the Commons get screwed? ”
Rodney5
11/16/23 8:23 PM
Post #774859 on Fannie Mae (FNMA)
Information for anyone new on this board concerning the ‘Cram-Down’ argument.
There are certain people that are encouraging theft, these people want the Treasury Department to wiped out the Common Shareholders, referred to as Legacy Common Shareholders. Not only do these people want the Owners of Common Stock destroyed but take great links in rejoicing of the destruction of the Common Shareholders and consistently for many years have advocated this theft.
Transfer of Ownership Cram-Down
Explained,
Legacy Shareholders means, collectively, each person that owns common stock of the Company immediately prior to the closing of the Transaction (cram-down) which in no event shall include any of the Investors; or very few will remain afterwards maybe 1% or less.
A cram-down deal refers to a situation where an investor or creditor is forced into accepting undesirable terms in a transaction or bankruptcy proceedings.
In the case with Fannie Mae the Treasury's holding of senior preferred stock in the amount of $120.8 billion, with a liquidation preference of $190.5 billion.
If the Treasury converts this amount of SPS into common stock the Treasury in essence will own 99.9% of all the common stock outstanding. The number of shares outstanding depends on price per share at the time converted. The amount of shares outstanding after the cram-down does not matter at all, it's the percent ownership, a transfer of ownership from the legacy common shareholders to the Treasury. This transaction will cause the legacy common stock to vanish along with any short positions, naked short positions as well as any counterfeit common stock outstanding. Afterwards, the Treasury can do a reverse split reducing the amount in number of the new common stock outstanding to any amount outstanding the Treasury decides.
When Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were taken over by the FHFA no emergency existed and the FHFA had no authority granted by Congress to take over the companies, no authority written in the Charter Act that gave the FHFA right to take down the companies.
Charter Act: SUBSECTION (g) TEMPORARY AUTHORITY OF TREASURY TO PURCHASE OBLIGATIONS AND SECURITIES; CONDITIONS.— EMERGENCY DETERMINATION REQUIRED. Page 16
Under this subsection no emergency existed.
This leads to the question, who authorized the appropriation of taxpayer debt to provide the 200 billion commitment? Certainly not Congress. Treasury took it upon themselves and authorized a 200 billion commitment available in exchange for One Million Shares (1,000,000) with an initial liquidation preference of $1,000 per share. Shares of senior equity illegal and unconstitutional.
Page 5
Link: https://www.fhfa.gov/Conservatorship/Documents/Senior-Preferred-Stock-Agree/FNM/SPSPA-amends/FNM-SPSPA_09-07-2008.pdf
Quote: “ There was an emergency: China and Russia had bought huge amounts of MBS from Fannie and Freddie” End of Quote
The emergency was not with Fannie and Freddie, but with Paulson bailing out his banker buddies!
Before the take down of the companies Treasury Secretary Paulson was unaware that the FHFA Regulator had sent both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac letters saying the companies were safe and sound and exceeded their regulatory capital requirements. Paulson told FHFA Director Lockhart that he had to change his agency’s posture on the two companies, and FHFA did exactly that. FHFA sent each company an extremely harsh mid-year review letter, and two days later, Paulson, Lockhart and Fed chairman Bernanke met with the companies’ CEO's and directors to tell them they had no choice but to agree to conservatorship.
When Paulson met with the directors of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to inform them of his intent to take over their companies, neither entity met any of the twelve conditions for conservatorship spelled out in the newly passed HERA legislation. Paulson since has admitted he took the companies over by threat.
HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2008 Page 2734 Twelve Conditions
APPOINTMENT OF THE AGENCY AS CONSERVATOR OR RECEIVER
Link: https://www.congress.gov/110/plaws/publ289/PLAW-110publ289.pdf
The FHFA freely admitted the companies were adequately capitalized.
SECOND QUARTER CAPITAL RESULTS
Minimum Capital
Fannie Mae’s FHFA-directed capital requirement on June 30, 2008 was $37.5 billion and its statutory minimum capital requirement was $32.6 billion. Fannie Mae’s core capital of $47.0 billion exceeded the FHFA-directed capital requirement by $9.4 billion.
Freddie Mac’s FHFA-directed capital requirement on June 30, 2008 was $34.5 billion and its statutory minimum capital requirement was $28.7 billion. Freddie Mac’s core capital of $37.1 billion exceeded the FHFA-directed minimum capital requirement by $2.7 billion.
Link: https://www.fhfa.gov/Media/PublicAffairs/Pages/FHFA-Announces-Suspension-of-Capital-Classifications-During-Conservatorship-and-Discloses-Minimum-and-RiskBased-Cap.aspx#:~:text=During%20the%20conservatorship%2C%20FHFA%20will%20not%20issue%20a,submit%20capital%20reports%20to%20FHFA%20during%20the%20conservatorship.
The FHFA forced Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into a contract with the United States Treasury by Senior Preferred Stock. The Senior Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement is not a law: The SPSPA is an illegal contract between Treasury and FHFA as conservator of the two companies. The Charter Act, FHEFSSA and HERA passed by Congress is the supreme law of the land that governs the two companies.
HERA AUTHORIZED PURCHASE OF OBLIGATIONS NOT PROVIDE AN INSURANCE POLICY
FROM THE FEDERAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS ADVISORY BOARD
QUOTE: “This area generated the most discussion because it was part of the overall liquidity agreement. In return for the senior preferred stock and common stock warrants, Treasury agreed to provide up to $100 billion ($100 B) to each GSE based upon quarterly payments if liabilities exceed assets. After significant internal Treasury discussions, it was concluded that this looked like a guarantee or insurance policy page 18
As a result, different components of the agreement are treated as either entity or nonentity transactions (Please refer to the attached Treasury letter dated August 24, 1998 for related details).
Classification of GSE-related and ESF Money Market Fund Insurance Transactions as Entity or Non-entity. Page 19” End of Quote
Link to page 18-19
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=173695132
The Charter
The Treasury was authorized by Congress a limit of $2.25 billion to purchase obligations. The $2.25 billion was the explicit obligation. Page 14
NOTE: to purchase obligations NOT A $200 billion line of credit ( Insurance Policy) attached to the Senior Preferred Stock.
The amount was increased by Congress in the Charter Act that was amended by HERA to purchase obligations but only under emergency conditions, no emergency existed. Page 16
The amount today $200 billion as of December 24, 2009, expired on December 31, 2009: and no more. The $200 billion commitment ( Insurance Policy) was forced on the GSEs by the FHFA / Treasury by the illegal contract the SPSPA. The GSEs never needed a capital infusion, both Fannie and Freddie were adequately capitalized.
FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION CHARTER ACT
PURCHASE OF OBLIGATIONS BY TREASURY; CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS
The Secretary of the Treasury shall not at any time purchase any obligations under this subsection if such purchase would increase the aggregate principal amount of the Secretary’s, then outstanding holdings of such obligations under this subsection to an amount greater than $2,250,000,000. Page 14
Charter
Link: https://www.fanniemae.com/sites/g/files/koqyhd191/files/migrated-files/resources/file/aboutus/pdf/fm-amended-charter.pdf
With the passage of HERA Legislation: (purchase obligations increased with an expiration date of December 31, 2009).
SEC. 1117. TEMPORARY AUTHORITY FOR PURCHASE OF OBLIGATIONS OF REGULATED ENTITIES BY SECRETARY OF TREASURY.
The HERA legislation granted temporary authority to the Treasury to purchase obligations of the Enterprise, ( Not an Insurance Policy), above the limits written in the Charter, (Charter limitation of 2.25 billion) up to the point in time of ‘‘(4) TERMINATION OF AUTHORITY.—The authority under this subsection (g), with the exception of paragraphs (2) and (3) of this subsection, shall expire December 31, 2009.
HERA Section 1117
Link: https://www.congress.gov/110/plaws/publ289/PLAW-110publ289.pdf
DaJester
Quote: “Furthermore, by design, the warrants were issued not to take ownership but rather to devalue the common stock.” End of Quote
Quote:”Driving the stock market value to zero prevents this manipulation from happening.” End of quote page 24
Theory: The Treasury may have opened two trading accounts in an attempt to drive the share price to zero ‘0’; The first account used to naked short sell (creating counterfeit shares) Treasury short selling these counterfeit shares to itself to the second account which would cancel out the trade, as if the trade never happened in the sense of possession of real shares, DRIVING THE PRICE PER SHARE DOWN.
Makes a person wonder if the Treasury has purposely kept the price per share down all these years.
Nevertheless, it’s obvious the Treasury never intended the companies to recover. The powers that be intend Congress to wipeout the GSE’s, this waiting has lasted 15 years.
Link to page 24
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=173695132
DaJester, what stood out to me the most was the 'Price Manipulation':
Quote: "Furthermore, by design, the warrants were issued not to take ownership but rather to devalue the common stock." End of Quote.
Quote: "Driving the stock market value to zero prevents this manipulation from happening." End of Quote.
Definition: Manipulation is illegal in most cases, but it can be difficult for regulators and other authorities to detect and prove. BUT I guess it's okay when the authorities do it !
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/manipulation.asp
For new investors who may have missed it.
The Honorable Rand Paul United States Senate Washington, D.C.
Dear Senator Paul,
DONALD J. TRUMP November 1, 2021
Thank you for talking to me about the need to privatize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, two great American companies, and about the question the Supreme Court has raised about what I would have been able to accomplish if I had been able to fire the incompetent Mel Watt from day one of my Administration.
Another Obama/Biden scam in legal trouble was when they allowed the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) to steal the retirement savings of hardworking Americans who had invested in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court has recognized that my Administration was denied the ability to oversee the work of FHFA ni violation of the Constitution. The Supreme Court's decision asks what I would have done had I controlled FHFA from hte beginning of my Administration, as the Constitution required. From the start, I would have fired former Democrat Congressman and political hack Mel Watt from his position as Director and would have ordered FHFA to release these companies from conservatorship. My Administration would have also sold the government's common stock in these companies at a huge profit and fuly privatized the companies. The idea that the government can steal money from its citizens is socialism and si a travesty brought to you by the Obama/Biden ad ministration. My Administration was denied the time ti needed to fix this problem because of the unconstitutional restriction on firing Mel Watt. It has to come to an end and courts must protect our citizens.
Link: https://assets.realclear.com/files/2021/11/1921_trump_letter_to_rand_paul.pdf
FOFreddie, Mr. European has been promoting theft with his cram-down maximize profits for the Treasury! Yes, we have US laws and regulations that flow from the Constitution.
Ask this person,
Where is "maximize profits for taxpayers" written in the Charter Act? Specifically, in this provision entitled Fee Limitation of the United States:
Neither the Charter Act nor did HERA authorize the Treasury to charge a commitment fee on a line of credit to be paid by the Enterprise. The United States prohibition on assessment or collection of fee or charge to Fannie Mae, (section 304 Fee Limitation). Only Federal Reserve Banks are authorized to be reimbursed of fees, (section 309).
SEC. 304. SECONDARY MARKET OPERATION
Fee Limitation
Quote: “(f) PROHIBITION ON ASSESSMENT OR COLLECTION OF FEE OR CHARGE BY UNITED STATES.—Except for fees paid pursuant to section 309(g) of this Act and assessments pursuant to section 1316 of the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, no fee or charge may be assessed or collected by the United States (including any executive department, agency, or independent establishment of the United States) on or with regard to the purchase, acquisition, sale, pledge, issuance, guarantee, or redemption of any mortgage, asset, obligation, trust certificate of beneficial interest, or other security by the corporation. No provision of this subsection shall affect the purchase of any obligation by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to subsection (c) of this section.” End of Quote. Page 16
Only Federal Reserve Banks are authorized to be reimbursed of fees, (section 309).
SEC. 309. GENERAL POWERS OF GOVERNMENT NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION AND FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION
Federal Reserve Banks to Act as Fiscal Agents (Fannie Mae and GNMA)
Quote: “(g) DEPOSITARIES, CUSTODIANS, AND FISCAL AGENTS.—The Federal Reserve banks are authorized and directed to act as depositaries, custodians, and fiscal agents for each of the bodies corporate named in section 302(a)(2), for its own account or as fiduciary, and such banks shall be reimbursed for such services in such manner as may be agreed upon; and each of such bodies corporate may itself act in such capacities, for its own account or as fiduciary, and for the account of others.” End of Quote. Page 29
Link:
FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION CHARTER ACT
As amended through July 25, 2019
link: https://www.fanniemae.com/sites/g/files/koqyhd191/files/migrated-files/resources/file/aboutus/pdf/fm-amended-charter.pdf
10,978,920 short volume 01/22/2023
Shorts are trying to hold the price down?
https://www.otcshortreport.com/company/FNMA
§ 1229.13 Definitions.
For purposes of this subpart: NUMBER 3
Capital distribution means—
(1) Any dividend or other distribution in cash or in kind made with respect to any shares of, or other ownership interest in, an Enterprise, except a dividend consisting only of shares of the Enterprise;
(2) Any payment made by an Enterprise to repurchase, redeem, retire, or otherwise acquire any of its shares or other ownership interests, including any extension of credit made to finance an acquisition by the Enterprise of such shares or other ownership interests, except to the extent the Enterprise makes a payment to repurchase its shares for the purpose of fulfilling an obligation of the Enterprise under an employee stock ownership plan that is qualified under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 401 et seq.) or any substantially equivalent plan as determined by the Director of FHFA in writing in advance; and
(3) Any payment of any claim, whether or not reduced to judgment, liquidated or unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured or unmatured, disputed or undisputed, legal, equitable, secured or unsecured, arising from rescission of a purchase or sale of an equity security of an Enterprise or for damages arising from the purchase, sale, or retention of such a security.
Link: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/12/1229.13