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.
In 2012, McFarland told senior officials at the Treasury and Federal Housing Finance Agency that Fannie and Freddie had become sustainably profitable and expected to remain that way for the forseeable future, according to Matthew McGill, attorney for Perry Capital.
“It was precisely that moment, literally days later, that the government made the decision to take all of the profits for themselves forever,” McGill said, referring to the government’s decision to modify the terms of its bailout of Fannie and Freddie.
The government had originally argued that depositing the profits into the Treasury would prevent taxpayers from burdensome losses.
“In the lower court, the government told a story ... that in 2012 Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were on death’s door, and the only way to keep them alive would be to do this trade, where the government would trade a 10 percent dividend for the net worth sweep,” said McGill.
“But what these seven documents show is that that narrative was false from the beginning,” McGill said. “The immediate goal is for an order that vacates the Third Amendment and requires FHFA and Treasury to follow the law and act as a conservator.”
Thanks. Didn’t know it was $150B stolen, the highest I heard before was $130B per Hamish Hume.
Another big question: Mr Parrott, you and your fellow travelers including WH staff were determined to wind down gses and not let them escape from govt control forever and make sure not a nickel of dividend goes to shareholders, how is that anywhere close to justify covenant of implied good faith and fair dealing of a contract between gses and shareholders on their stock certificates? How could they have expected nws for all their shares bought before 8/17/2012?
Hope they live stream trial proceedings for all of us 10/17 onwards. Will soon hear from Hamish Hume.
Death spiral vs next 8 yrs FnF entering into golden yrs of profits. How do you square that Mr Ugoletti? Big question that will be asked in front of jury and we all wait for the day of cross testimony between Ugoletti vs Susan McFarland & Grant Thorton
Yes true, Yellen holds all the cards and will have to act before 19th bcoz that’s when statements including Ugoletti death spiral lies are due, imo
Don’t know what’s stopping ST from relisting FnF on nyse if their goal is to exit cship?
voir dire a preliminary examination of a witness or a juror by a judge or counsel.
What does voir dire literally mean?
to speak the truth
Voir dire (/'vw??r d??r/; often /v??r da??r/; from an Anglo-Norman phrase meaning "to speak the truth") is a legal phrase for a variety of procedures connected with jury trials.
Yes sir, about 2 weeks left. Train is about to leave the station.
Waiting for ruling in next two months for Bhatti and Rop.
"….This pre-trial ruling is disappointing and mischaracterizes Visa's role and its policies and practices. Visa will not tolerate the use of our network for illegal activity..."
Judge Lamberth may also give similar pretrial ruling in favor of plaintiffs any day.
Its not always about money, Bill likes to fight for helpless people who are harmed by big Cos or Govt doing illegal & crime against innocent people. If not Bill, who else will fight for these people?
https://www.cnbc.com/video/2022/08/02/billionaire-investor-bill-ackman-speaks-out-against-visa-amid-child-porn-lawsuit.html
20. Plaintiff Louise Rafter is a retired nurse who resides in California. She owns 36,000 shares of Fannie Mae common stock, some of which she and her husband purchased over 25 years ago and which she and/or her late husband have held continuously since then. She brings claims as a common shareholder of Fannie Mae only; she does not bring claims with respect to Freddie Mac.
21. Plaintiffs Josephine and Stephen Rattien are a married couple who reside in
Washington, D.C. Josephine Rattien is a retired psychiatric social worker and inner-city school counselor. Stephen Rattien is a retired senior science and technology policy manager. They jointly own 1,000 shares of Fannie Mae common stock, which they purchased approximately 15
years ago, and which they have held continuously since then. They bring claims as common shareholders of Fannie Mae only; they do not bring claims with respect to Freddie Mac.
Mario Ugoletti going to make so many new Millionaires soon. Thanks Guido for everything you do for us. Few more months, stay focused and ignore the noise. We know what we hold and where this will eventually end and that’s all matters.
Please email Hamish Hume, you wont be able to change my mind but maybe you can save his time & effort
Ave prior 20 day price comes to $26
Lamberth will take care of us imo, won’t have to wait for scotus. I expect $14 plus punitive damages of at least $6. So $20 per share by end of Oct is not bad thing to look forward to imo.
Justice Sotomayor - "For no rational
reason, FHFA sold all of Fannie and
Freddie's assets, in exchange for
$1.00, to itself. It did exactly what
Justice Breyer said, it nationalized
things. It nationalized the companies.”
Wow, not even close to good faith & fair deal, bring it, unpaid dividend for last 9 yrs, go Hamish Hume
Lamberth not letting govt go hay wire this time imo, if you are short then I can understand the negativity. Never before evidence was presented in the court room, so far it was motion drill, now it’s showtime.
Thanks Navy for the effort from your side for all of us. Justice thru jury and rule of law will prevail. We never give up.
Very likely before 10/17 with oral arguments in Dec
A spokesperson for FHFA said that terminating the suspensions would be a “coordinated process,” and conversations about changes to the Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements (PSPAs) are regularly conducted at the “highest levels.”
Formal changes to the document that contains the provisions — the PSPAs — are haggled over by the Treasury and the FHFA.
Negotiating on behalf of the government sponsored enterprises, as their conservator, is FHFA Director Thompson. On the other side of the table is Treasury Sec. Janet Yellen, since her agency holds a majority stake in the GSEs. Both FHFA and Treasury declined to provide information about the specific staff responsible for the agreement which governs most of the mortgage market.
Thanks Guido, I firmly believe admn action is coming before Lamberth action
Good to see Hamish Hume & Jones Day is not giving up on Takings claim, if scotus accepts it we will win this time
Woo hoo I remember supremes asking why is this not filed as Taking?
Yes I will join you Navy, cant wait for our day in court, it will be made so easy to follow the paper trail of “most illegal act of scale govt ever did, and massive accounting fraud”
Mid teens when ipo comes out per Ackman
Govt got to act before next recession
https://finance.yahoo.com/video/bill-ackman-sees-resolution-fannie-135411464.html
The parties tell Judge Lamberth FHFA and the GSEs have turned over 65,000 documents consisting of more than 650,000 pages since Aug. 7, 2019, in addition to extensive privilege logs.
12/18/2019
The GSEs received no new investment in exchange for the change in dividend structure. The reason given publicly for the Third Amendment was to end the practice of circular dividends paid to Treasury from funds drawn from Treasury's commitment to the GSEs. As of February 2018, Treasury has received over $276 billion in dividends from the companies $88 billion more
than Treasury's total investment in both companies.
-Lamberth
Parties are free to enter into good and bad
contracts, and the law enforces both. In fact, "good faith" in this context simply entails “faithfulness to the scope, purpose, and terms of the parties' contract." Gerber v. Enters. Prods. Holdings, LIC, 67 A.3d 400, 419 (Del. 2013), overruled on other grounds by Winshall v. Viacom Int'l, Inc., 76 A.3d 808 (Del. 2013). Similarly, "fair dealing" does not imply equitable behavior, but rather, actions consonant "with the terms of the parties' agreement and its purpose." Id. Courts “will only imply contract terms when the party asserting the implied covenant proves that the other party has acted arbitrarily or unreasonably, thereby frustrating the fruits of the bargain that the asserting party reasonably expected.” Nemec, 991 A.2d at 1126.
Moreover, other provisions of HERA actually advance Plaintiffs' position that they could not reasonably expect the Net Worth Sweep. For example, while HERA gave the Treasury temporary authority to purchase new shares in the GSEs, Treasury was required to consider "[t]he
[GSEs'] plan[s] for the orderly resumption of private market funding or capital market access" and “[the need to maintain the [GSEs'] status[es] as a private shareholder-owned company."
12 U.S.C. $$ 1719 (g)(1)(C), 1455(](1)(C). These provisions signal to shareholders a Congressional expectation that the GSEs would work back towards normalcy, and lend support to Plaintiffs who claim they could not reasonably expect the Net Worth Sweep (which essentially permanently
closed off access to capital markets) at a time when the GSEs were entering a period of profitability.
-Lamberth
The Net Worth Sweep-_however- is fundamentally different than Treasury's right to veto capital distributions. For one thing, if Treasury withheld approval for a dividend to Plaintiffs under the original terms of the PSPAs, that available cash on hand would not simply be handed out to
Treasury. One would expect that cash to increase the value of Plaintiffs' underlying securities either by way of reinvestment into the company or reduction of debt. The Net Worth Sweep does exactly the opposite. It decreases the value of all securities other than the PSPAs by eliminating the possibility of profits accruing in any way to their benefit.
Furthermore, Treasury's authority to prevent distributions existed only during
conservatorship. And Plaintiffs believed conservatorship would be temporary. At the time of the enactment of the PSPAs, the FHFA stated, "Upon the Director's determination that the Conservator's plan to restore the [GSEs] to a safe and solvént condition has been completed
successfully, the Director will issue an order terminating the conservatorship[s]." Class SAC $40 (quoting FHFA Fact Sheet, Questions and Answers on Conservatorship 2); Fairholme FAC 9 34; Arrowood FAC $ 30. In fact, the FHFA Director described the conservatorship as "a statutory process designed to stabilize a troubled institution with the objective of returning the entities to normal business operations." Fairholme FAC 1 31; Arrowood FAC 9 27. These statements are
important to the implied covenant analysis. They inform what Plaintiffs reasonably believed at the time the GSEs entered into conservatorship and the PSPAs with Treasury. And at the nascent
of a sustained period of profitability, Plaintiffs would have reasonably expected the GSEs to be moving out of conservatorship, not doubling down by executing the Net Worth Sweep.
-Lamberth
“I am saying, you cannot retrade the deal after the fact. You have to stick with the deal you originally made and you don't get to nullify people's rights by retrading it later.”
-Hamish Hume
First time judge & jury will see the discovery docs & deposition transcripts plus will go thru testimony of fellow travelers in the court room.
Lamberth has already done home work on govt bad faith before, so additional evidence in last 4 yrs will only add fuel to fire for us
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4209422-past-motion-to-dismiss-gse-implied-covenant-claims-move-forward
Damages on common is at least $14 per Hamish Hume
https://dsnews.com/news/04-19-2016/counsels-corner-the-battle-over-gse-profits-is-raging
You mean 4 weeks left to settle this illegal taking?
Deja vu….
During the savings-and-loan crisis of the 1990s, the government faced dozens of lawsuits for illegally seizing various banks and S&Ls. Known as the Winstar cases, they were presided over by Loren Smith, chief judge of the U. S. Court of Federal Claims. At one point, Judge Smith called all the parties into his courtroom and told them:
"It is the obligation of the United States to do right. Every free government can be judged by the degree to which it respects the life, liberty, and property of its citizens. The United States stands tall among the nations because it is a just nation. In the instant cases (however), the United States has not acted in a manner worthy of the great (and) just nation (that) it is. Because the dollars at stake appear to be so large, the government has raised legal and factual arguments that have little or no basis in law, fact or logic.
"While the court can appreciate the concerns of the government's attorneys to protect the public treasury, and they are honorable people, it must severely criticize the tactics and approach of the government . . . if the arguments put forth here are the strongest the United States can muster against liability, then the government has a moral obligation to seek a fair and equitable settlement from the parties whose contracts were breached. If this cannot be achieved, then the court is here to resolve these cases. However, the court is a tool of last resort. Where the government has violated rights, it should first attempt to do justice without judicial prompting.”
In 7 weeks govt & plaintiffs meet in Lamberth’s court for pretrial conference
Lamberth is very likely imo to tell the govt something similar to what judge Smith said back then.
Yes and out of $84B if we deduct $34B for pref, common equity is $50B, well worth waiting last two yrs for recap
Slide #104 http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/irasohnfinal2014.pdf
I believe this is where we will end up, the fact is fnf income has doubled to $34B since 2014
Bill was projecting future value as $45 when ggp was trading at $1.19, slide #49 & #57 5/27/2009 in his presentation…..
“The Buck’s Rebound Begins Here”
Cant post the pdf here
Almost all Plaintiffs not challenging what happened in 2008, they trying to prove 3rd amdt in 2012 as illegal unless Wazi wins 2008 deal will remain as is imo
But warrants I believe will be part of negotiations when they settle all lawsuits before recap thru outside capital
And chances of settlement happening before Oct 17th are very very high imo
Plan is to retain earnings as much as possible so less dilution to common of which they hold 80% stake. Good to be on the side of govt when RRR happens, they make lot of money for taxpayers and so do we. At $35 they make $$250B we make fortune too.