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.
You always get it.
***BREAKING NEWS*** The shareholders send their PROPOSED ORDER to the Supreme Court, with the expectation that it will be unveiled next Thursday in their scheduled day for opinions.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1348088593005359104.html
$160 billion UST refund +$19b in Moral Damages, secured. Per the #Fanniegate hashtag. Breakdown:
$110b SPS overpayment
$7b Corporate Tax on the settlements (a non-taxable income)
$23b TCCA fees (barred in the Charter's Fee Limitation)
$15b MHA, Foreclosure moratorium and Forbearance programs.
$5b 1.5% on the escrow account.
I think that only Justice Sotomayor had doubts, because she stated in a question to the appellant that the third amendment was "a valid or a reasonable business decision to be entered into". Also she told the attorney that she was reluctant to grant remedies and she only wants to strike the "for cause" removal protection.
Maybe she was just the one chosen among the Justices to play the role of devil's advocate, but later the decision will be unanimous.
Opinions are typically released on Tuesday and Wednesday mornings and on the third Monday of each "sitting" (January 25th)
So, the first day after the Christmas recess is January 12th.
My view is that the whole conservatorship will be struck. Both the FHFA's director and acting director are illegally constituted directors and acting directors under the Constitution, because both have removal protection (if the Acting Dtr is fired for cause, the President can only choose among the 3 Deputy Dtrs chosen, in turn, by the Acting Dtr). So, their actions have been taken without powers.
The Justicies complained about why drawing a line with the 3rd amendment and with Derivative cases instead of a Takings claim, so they were inclined to blow all up from the beginning.
My view is that the FHFA and the Treasury will act beforehand.
January 12th is the first day that Scotus could publish the opinion.
They already made the decision in a meeting that always takes place the Friday of the week where they hold the Oral Arguments. If the decision was unanimous, the opinion is released fast.
After the Christmas recess and under lockdown, one month is enough time to write the opinion by the Justice chosen.
The SCOTUS's opinion is expected on January 12th.
The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, in the hearing en-banc (judge Willett), stated that the conservator exceeded its powers with the NWS.
Days later, the FHFA and the Treasury approved a 5th amendment to the PA (September 2019), that was an attempt to mislead us, as the NWS still persists (the NWS is paid in-kind with SPSs)
Scotus called it Nationalization, which was clearly a blow to the Court Of Federal Claims, because it's its subject-matter jurisdiction. A Court specifically created to handle theses cases of loss of property value through regulation.
If Scotus rules Nationalization, it would translate into the dissolution of the Court of Federal Claims.
That said I think we all agree on what has happened here; the illegal takeover (by coercion, and then subsequent accounting fraud)
@Ano has been placed into the shareholders' conservatorship.
Due to his multiple mistakes. For instance: claim that
Fannie and Freddie went into conservatorship on a 20.1% / 79.9% basis
No. ACG did not stimulate anything. They are a replica of Moelis paid by the hedge funds to damage our economic interests.
Calabria called it bankruptcy but he's wrong. So, you aren't doing this board a favor repeating it. A conservatorship isn't a bankruptcy.
He also said that FnF stocks were not trading on the Stock Market.
It's evident that he works for the hedge-funds to rip-off the shareholders and benefit the holders of JPSs.
Good people don't try to rip-off the shareholders, agreeing with the warrant, the 10% dividend, a swap jps for commons, a government explicit guarantee, a commitment fee.
The law states otherwise.
The difference is a common stock worth $270 versus $10.
I will defend our economic interests fiercely.
Glen Bradford and Tim Pagliara are trashed in the comment section of Bradford's latest SA article. There's a discussion with Bradford that ends up with: "You are a weirdo sociopath". The criminal gang that aims at ripping-off the retail investor has been exposed.
Instead of scouring Treasury documents, why don't you go to the law, where everything is set forth with regard to the relationship of FnF and the Treasury?
The warrant was authorized thanks to a provision that HERA incorporated into their charters, but, in the case of the warrant it was authorized (iii)to protect the taxpayer, that is, collateral of its investment in FnF, the SPS.
A warrant is barred in a provision in the Charter since its inception: Fee Limitation.
So, there are two confronting provisions in the Charter and the one that prevails is always the original, as it's where is established the Congress' intent: The United States can't assess or collect a fee or charge on the securities of FnF, other than a small rate on obligations, that is, a cheap UST backstop.
Calabria doesn't have powers to approve a 4th amendment, according to the Supreme Court, because he's an ILLEGALLY constituted director under constitution. Where have you been?
By the way, it would be the 6th amendment.
COULD YOU STOP WITH THE NONSENSE OF CONSENT ORDER, PLEASE?
Scotus made clear that all the Director's actions are void because he's an illegally constituted Director.
The FHFA couldn't even be represented by an attorney before Scotus, because it was already declared unconstitutional by the 5th Circuit Court.
How about asking for a refund of the $160 billion owed by the Treasury? $110 billion in SPS overpayments alone.
Later, FnF are regulated by the Charter, not by the FHFA. So the FHFA could be dissolved and no one cares.
"Your stuff is for the #donkeys"?
What are you, 5?
ARE YOU ENVIOUS OF MY IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS?
Why don't you simply say that you don't understand them because you are mentally incapable of understanding complex analysis?
It's what all the hearing was about. Whether an FHFA Director and Acting Director have some protection from removal, with the objective to know which actions will be declared void.
***BOOM*** All the actions taken either by a Director or Acting Director will be declared null and void.
The case of a Director was unanimous among the Justices, as he has a clear protection from removal with the "for cause" clause.
The debate was about the removal of an Acting Director. It's the key because he's the one that approved the third amendment (NWS).
But the case is clear: he's protected from removal because, even if he's removed at will, POTUS can only choose an Acting Dtr among the Deputy Directors that the Acting Director appointed. But the thing is that an FHFA Acting Director can't be removed at will in the first place, because it would break the "independent agency" status.
Subsequently, all their actions will be declared null and void:
Director: 2008 SPSPA
Acting Director: 1st, 2nd & 3rd amendments
Director: 4th & 5th amendments.
The Treasury will reimburse all the payments made by FnF, netted out with the principal amount of the obligations SPS.
The outcome is $110 billion Capital Reserve in the FnF's balance-sheets.
The WSJ Editorial Board is beaten-up.
.@WSJ "EDDY" BOARD IS THE EPITOME OF FINANCIAL ILLITERACY
— Conservatives against Trump (@CarlosVignote) December 9, 2020
It ignores "explicit UST backstop"and
-Fees PROHIBITED(exception)
-The Warrant authorized to(iii)protect the taxpayer(SPS collateral)or barred
-UST never suffers losses. It just buys obligations.#Fanniegate @TheJusticeDept https://t.co/UdFSVehy8H pic.twitter.com/BFIJVnYfq0
Who will argue on behalf of the Govt before Scotus?
There are rumors that it's not the Acting Solicitor General.
***BOOM***The shareholders issue a warning to the DOJ's Solicitor General.
The DOJ's question presented at Scotus about the anti-injunction or anti-judicial review, was already answered in the ruling of the 5th Circuit Court hearing en-banc: "It's inapplicable when the conservator acts beyond its powers, which is the NWS case." Besides, when he's asked by the Justices what remedies the UST and the FHFA approved after the ruling mentioned, the Solicitor General can't say that, with the 5th amendment to the purchase agreement of September 2019, FnF are retaining Capital, because that's false. There's an offset pending to be recorded in the balance sheet in the form of REDUCTION of the Retained Earnings account, once it's posted the true amount of SPS corresponding to the SPS increase each quarter since the 5th amendment, because, currently, it's posted a wrong amount.
The Solicitor General could face charges of abuse of Court process and perjury.
Mnuchin is defended by the DOJ, that in Scotus is the Solicitor General. Don't play dumb now.
What are you talking about? The Scotus-appointed Amicus is a third party and he's amicus of the FHFA, because the FHFA can't defend itself. The professor filed his amicus brief as requested by the court.
There's a reply filed by the DOJ on October 23 that I have mentioned, but you reply repeating that Mnuchin declined to file a brief.
You have to explain why.
The shareholders respond to the DOJ's omnibus reply filed with Scotus on October 23. In this board, Guido has repeatedly stated that Mnuchin didn't file a reply, and he has to explain why.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1335676713402060800.html
From the #Fanniegate hashtag. Daily in-depth analysis.
Thanks for asking.
***THE ORAL ARGUMENTS AT SCOTUS WILL BE SUSPENDED***
Didn't you read the rumor posted in the PlusOneCoin top post?
There's a simple reason: the attorneys and professor Nielson can't lie before the 9 Justices.
And they go there with the task of lying like crazy.
BOMBSHELL! THE FUNDING COMMITMENT IS A FARCE: SECURITIES FRAUD AND BREACH OF THE CONGRESS' INTENT.
It's based on a TEMPORARY authority of Treasury to PURCHASE unlimited yield obligations.
The temporary authority expired in December 2009. To override this deadline, the UST hasn't PURCHASED even one SPS. The UST got 1mll SPS valued at $1,000ps ($1 billion) in each GSE, for free and no reason, on day one of conservatorship, and since then, the SPS liquidation value increases. That's SECURITIES FRAUD because any obligation is unique and you can't increase the amount outstanding, but you have to issue new obligations, forcing the UST to purchase them.
Therefore, that provision that Pelosi's HERA incorporated into their Charters, doesn't allow an indefinite funding commitment.
It's only allowed in the original low cost UST backstop.
Yes, there are two UST backstops in the charter, one with unlimited yield for the Secret Plan, and the original low cost backstop.
More detail here.
RUMOR HAS IT THAT THE DEC9th ORAL ARGUMENTS AT SCOTUS WILL BE SUSPENDED.
Fact: FnF are not building up a Capital Reserve as contemplated first in the 4th amendment to the PA in Dec 2017, and later, in the 5th amendment in Sept 2019.
Their Capital Reserve is $0 since the end of 2017. This is because every time that FnF post a Comprehensive Income (Retained Earnings), the SPS are increased in the same amount, and that reduces the Retained Earnings account as an offset.
The 5th Circuit Court ruled that the FHFA exceeded its powers transferring all the Net Worth to the Treasury and we now know that this transfer of Net Worth continued in the form of payment-in-kind (SPS)
Thus, the Solicitor General can't claim the official version contending that FnF are building a Capital Reserve of $35 billion, when the Capital Reserve is $0 and the $35 billion of Net Worth is solely SPS.
The Solicitor General can't lie before the 9 Supreme Court Justices and, more importantly, there's a breach of the ruling in the case that is being reviewed by the Justices.
The Appellants' attorney, D.Thompson, can't lie either. He has omitted numerous statutory provisions. For instance, the Charter's "special borrowing rights from UST" (a low cost UST backstop) that the other participant in the Oral Arguments, the Scotus-appointed FHFA-amicus, Professor Nielson, outlines in his Amicus-brief.
Now, it's the turn of Professor Nielson. He also can't lie before the Scotus Justices when he omitted in his brief, that the FHFA, as regulator, has a "coercive power" that gives it Limitless Power outlined in its duty "(v) make sure that the activities of FnF are consistent with the Public Interest", that is, the coercive power to use FnF for Public Policy, not contemplated in the Charter, and it's the reason that he claims in his brief that would make FHFA unconstitutional, due to the Separation of Powers and non-delegation doctrine.
3 outright liars before the 9 Scotus Justices is unacceptable.
I expect a final resolution before the Oral Arguments, both about Fanniegate and the dissolution of the FHFA.
***BOMBSHELL*** THE FHFA's DIRECTOR TO BE FIRED FOR CAUSE.
The roadmap in HERA states that the Capital Distributions (like dividends) are restricted, with the EXCEPTION: to reduce the financial obligations with respect to ownership interest. That is, to reduce the SPS.
In a July 2011 Final Rule that aimed at clarifying this restriction in HERA, it made clear that the dividends to the shareholders (Equity holders) are suspended until FnF are Adequately Capitalized.
But surprisingly, we can read a changed behavior in the report of the Capital rule published yesterday, explaining that it thinks that it can waive the application of this restriction because it suspended the Capital Classifications in 2008, since this restriction appears inside the section in HERA: Capital Classifications.
But a Federal Agency isn't empowered to waive the application of statutory provisions.
The fact that in the 2011 Final Rule it approved another exception to allow the capital distributions (1) to recapitalize FnF, is the evidence that there's a Secret Plan of fast repayment of the obligations SPS and recapitalization, under the guise of dividend payments to the Treasury.
Full explanation.
Pelosi's former chief of staff and a member of Pelosi Team since 2007, currently is a lobbyist (sponsor) for Dominion Voting Systems, the company center of the fraud in the elections. Several whistleblowers from this company have come forward. It's worth noting that Pelosi was also the sole sponsor of 2008 HERA, a law meant to override existing rights in the charters of FnF, like the UST low cost backstop and the Fee Limitation that prohibits the United States from assessing or levying a fee or charge using the securities issued by FnF, other than the low rate mentioned. Pelosi set up a criminal enterprise and everything is melting down.
It's breaking news on Fannie. The evidence of a criminal enterprise will speed up the resolution according to Law. The announcement is imminent.
A Consent Decree is a backdoor Conservatorship. Another scheme to override the charter, which is the ONLY law where their activities are set forth.
What we require is a final resolution according to Law and FnF to resume independent operations.
BOOM! PELOSI WITHHOLDS A FANNIEGATE RESOLUTION TO LEVER UP HER LOCAL AND STATE GOVT BAILOUT NEGOTIATION.
https://twitter.com/CarlosVignote/status/1326035892193079296?s=19
In a press conference that took place one week before the elections, she stressed that "the fiscal soundness of the state and local govts is important", when fiscal soundness doesn't exist, but fiscal consolidation, fiscal discipline or balanced budget.
It's obvious that she was briefed by Mnuchin about FnF and the conservator's power: "put FnF in a sound and solvent condition", and she wants the same cheap bailout written in their Charters for the local and state govts.
***THE TWITTER THREAD THAT WE WERE WAITING FOR***
Pelosi will concede. We need the Congress to revoke the Charter as part of a broad revamp of the Housing Finance System through the FnF's Common Securitization Platform.
The announcement of the ultimate resolution is imminent.
THE SHAREHOLDERS ARE OPPOSED TO ANY NEW AMENDMENT OR CONSENT DECREE.
What we are witnessing is a regulatory taking.
In companies with a charter, the designation is the charter itself.
Besides, FnF aren't utilities but insurers.
Never trust a guy like HoldenWalker99 that doesn't tell us his name and who he works for.
BOMBSHELL! SHEILA BAIR TOOK THE DECISION OF THE CONSERVATORSHIP.
A WSJ's article in 2008 explained that "a top banking official" was among those officials involved in the obscure process that ended up in the decision of conservatorship, using a report by Morgan Stanley that claimed that "FnF were in need of $50 billion", that was the based to justify the conservatorship under the provision (G) LOSSES: likely to incur losses that deplete capital. They formed a conclave. What today is the FSOC.
🚨@SheilaBair2013 TOOK THE DECISION OF CONSERVATORSHIP
— Conservatives against Trump (@CarlosVignote) November 8, 2020
The thread cited is an excerpt from a 2008 WSJ's article explaining how the decision was made using a $MS's report:"FnF in need of $50b".
"A top banking official" and I can only think of the FDIC chair.#Fanniegate @WhiteHouse https://t.co/PVeTzKTOtY pic.twitter.com/oF2pJdmIIZ
.@SheilaBair2013 WAS FDIC CHAIR WHEN INDYMAC WAS SOLD TO A✡️CONSORTIUM HEADED BY #MNUCHIN/J.PAULSON
— Conservatives against Trump (@CarlosVignote) November 8, 2020
The same accounting rule that placed FnF in Consvtrshp, made them millionaires thanks to a loss-sharing deal w/ FDIC(a rebate for each foreclosure w/o loan modification)#Fanniegate https://t.co/fzfM47spxF
THE NEGOTIATION OF A RESOLUTION TAKES PLACE ON #FANNIEGATE.
🚨@USTreasury INCREASES THE PROFIT DURING CONSERVATORSHIP TO $50B
— Conservatives against Trump (@CarlosVignote) November 7, 2020
$1.1b 3Q TCCA fees added.
With the Secret Plan +2 g-fees accounting change➡️$0 refund
Otherwise SP +$0 profit +$160b refund,applying what is written.
Requirements:
Mngmt/BOD reshuffle
$18b Moral Damages.#Fanniegate https://t.co/RVba1lCZxH