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.
Well said SGINPHX!
Well said action8101!!
No, what was ridiculous was the take down of Fannie and Freddie. The value of the firms is incredible. $250 is just math. If you refuse math, then maybe the world is still flat for you and you should just make do with your $5 or $10 because you don't dare to accept the simple facts and laws of math.
Just a few minutes ago, CNBC's Andrew Ross Sorkin asked Dimon: What do you think about what Mnuchin said about fixing Fannie and Freddie? To that he said something to the effect that "...yes, I think that's a problem that needs to be fixed."
Yeah! Just a few of minutes ago, to the question of what do you think about Steve Mnuchin saying that he's going to fix Fannie and Freddie, Jamie Dimon agreed that that's a problem that has to be fixed. At Davos on CNBC.
Watt is guilty of obstructing justice in all the GSE lawsuits and maybe the new AG Sessions could look into the matter should he exhibit any reluctance to release the firms right away. Punishment is five years. Maybe he needs a visit from one of Sessions' new guys.
https://www.ohiobar.org/forpublic/resources/lawyoucanuse/pages/lawyoucanuse-132.aspx
Mel Watt s\b in prison next to Madoff!
With one stroke of the pen, Mnuchin can cancel the Gov't's warrants.
No, F the conversions. Just cancel the Gov't's senior preferred.
Why:
1) They were issued fraudulently;
2) They forced loans where overpaid back
Yes, FNMA=GOLD!
Mel Watt is a useless coward. A total tool of Obama. The worst kind of rubber stamp kiss _ss!
Yeah, I know the NWS agreement between two Gov't Agencies is illegal, but that happened before I got here.
What, so if the agreement was to buy and sell African slaves, you would enforce that kind of agreement too, just because it happened before you got here too?
You're welcome.
Jump down to the last paragraph or two of this article.
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-11-22/trump-treasury-contender-mnuchin-found-profits-in-mortgage-mess
And when Mnuchin cancels the warrants, as his buddy John Paulson has to be counting on him to do so, multiply $80 X 5 to get the undiluted value.
Out of all the friends I shared the opportunity with, about 20% are now happily parked in Fannie, some deeply so.
I don't see there being any danger of Watt refusing to release FnF, that is, when Mnuchin gives the signal. I believe Watt absolutely believes in critical role FnF plays in the residential housing market and and in the people it is supposed to serve. What is more, he has bitched and wailed at the threat of the firms' capital situation. What has been lacking is his nerve to act unilaterally. He is like an obedient house maid that is just waiting to be told that it is time for release.
Sweeney should have said no, as in you bastards have had enough extensions already. So, you have 2 weeks from today to prepare both a victory and concession brief. This way you can just submit the applicable brief the day the appeals court decides.
It won't take a few years to hit $200 or even $300!
I say significantly higher than 5 (:
All this talk about ending the conservatorship being too complicated to end easily is just holdover talk from the usual pack of liars that pretend the that the Treasury Sec'y can't just unilaterally declare that the Gov't has been paid back and cancel the Gov't's Senior Preferred (exactly as Dick Bove said on Fox Business News the other day), which would end the Gov't's call on the quarterly dividends of Fannie and Freddie (FnF).
Not to even mention the fact that Watt has been uselessly wining that OMG FnF are running out of money, which has been like publicly bitching at himself because as the DIRECTOR OF THE FHFA, HERA empowers him from the git go the right release the firm no questions asked. Be could even say, to Jeb and Barack, "Hey Bitches, I decided to release FnF b\c my enffin parakeet told me to!"
When Watt first came into office, in reference to his unilateral power, he said that before he would consider doing so, that the signal to do so would first have to come from Treasury and he would only agree to take the cue after he finished that work he was planning on completing. Well, he finished that critical work. So, we all know what's coming after Mnuchin gets confirmed on or shortly after Jan 20.
On top of all that, the new Attorney General need only issue court filings in Perry, Fairholme and Washington Federal to end the the cases.
On the other hand, if you speculate within your 401(k) or IRA, you won't have to pay tax on the miracle gains until and unless you withdraw from your account.
FHFA agreed with the GAO's conclusions, but why is Mel Watt pretending that he doesn't have the power to just unilaterally release the firms? He doesn't need anyone's approval, ok, and on this point he is lord and master over the decision.
If memory serves and there have been no changes, Carl Icahn owns approximately 24M shares split between both GSEs. Not bad. And I'm sure that there is no way that he has talked to Trump about the GSEs and what needs to happen. LOL.
Thanks For All Your Posts NavyCommander,
I enjoyed this key line from Plaintiffs' 10/13 opposition filing:
"...D.C. Circuit. That court's historical practice suggests that a ruling is likely to issue soon."
This jives with David Thompson's (Managing Partner at Cooper & Kirk)10/6 comment at the IU Conference Call:
"...that everyone should be glued to their monitor every Tuesday and Friday from 10-noon, to see if the [DC Circuit] court issues it’s opinion."
https://www.aei.org/publication/will-feds-wall-of-secrecy-in-fannie-mae-case-fall/
(Note the date)
March 14, 2016 | San Francisco Chronicle
Will Feds’ wall of secrecy in Fannie Mae case fall?
Economics, Housing Finance
Any day now, a federal court in Washington, DC, could force the Obama administration to disclose thousands of documents in a suit challenging the takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac during the 2008-09 housing crisis. The Fairholme Funds argue that the Obama administration acted without authority when it wiped out the value of equity and shareholders and took full control of the two government-sponsored enterprises. But an even greater constitutional principle is at stake: The White House is attempting to double down on its unprecedented taking of property by concealing from the federal courts information necessary to uphold the law.
In 2008, with financial markets in free fall, federal officials moved to prevent the collapse of the enterprises, which buy mortgage loans from banks, bundle them into securities, and sell them to investors. The Housing and Economic Recovery Act went into effect, providing them with $187.5 billion in public funds and placing them in conservatorship under a new Federal Housing Finance Agency. In 2012, when Fannie and Freddie were again generating profits, the Treasury Department implemented what has become known as the Net Worth Sweep. Under the amended terms of conservatorship, the profits of the two enterprises are diverted to the government’s general revenue stream, with nothing going to Fannie and Freddie shareholders. The arrangement remains in effect.
In 2013, Fairholme Funds filed suit in federal court, alleging the government exceeded its authority and vacated the law’s requirement to preserve and conserve the assets of the enterprises, which are privately held companies. Essentially, the lawsuit alleges that the agency took the property of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s investors, for which the Constitution’s Fifth Amendment requires the government to pay “just compensation.”
The case has landed before Judge Margaret Sweeney of the US Court of Federal Claims. As the case has proceeded to discovery, where both sides must provide all information relevant to the case, the Obama administration has dug in its heels. It has invoked a variety of executive privilege claims, focusing on the “deliberative process” of government, to conceal its reasons for seizing investors’ property.
The Obama administration’s claims mark yet another step in its misuse of presidential power. Presidents have invoked executive privilege rarely. Richard Nixon invoked it just six times during the Watergate probe. Bill Clinton sought to invoke it 14 times during congressional queries related to the Monica Lewinsky matter. It was not until the landmark United States vs. Nixon case in 1974, however, that the Supreme Court rejected the claim of “an absolute privilege of confidentiality for all presidential communications.” The president’s general interest in candor in policy discussions would give way before the legitimate needs of the federal judiciary to perform its own constitutional function — that of deciding cases under federal law.
If the Obama administration persists in its efforts to block judicial understanding of its seizures of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, it would surely lose under the Nixon test. But the government has invoked this privilege in such a haphazard and flawed manner that Judge Sweeney should toss out the claim before it even reaches a level of constitutional seriousness. For example, the government on the one hand claims that the housing finance agency cannot be considered the “United States” because it is merely acting as conservator of non-government business enterprises, but on the other invokes the deliberative process privilege, which belongs only to the executive branch of the government. The president cannot extend executive privilege to the operations of a government-owned corporation and its regulator in the commercial markets.
For more than a year, the sheer volume of documents for which the government has sought confidential treatment has drawn scrutiny from Senate Judiciary Chairman Charles Grassley and the media. Attorneys for Fairholme contend that the government wants 77,945 documents withheld from public view and 12,251 documents completely withheld.
The administration’s executive privilege claim is also on thin ice because of the dubious relationship between the subject matter of the material and the nation’s security or economic interests. The government has asserted the information could be “disruptive to markets.” However, it is difficult to imagine how discussions by officials as far back as eight years ago and emails on matters as mundane as daily press clips could impact today’s markets, which, by definition operate on the very latest information.
Executive privilege is available for presidents to use in highly sensitive matters, and its use is constrained by specific procedures. In the pending litigation on the Net Worth Sweep, the government has applied this privilege in an overly broad and unjustified manner. Either federal officials are trying to cover up something they know is illegal, or we are witnessing an unprecedented and disturbing obsession with secrecy.
Let’s hope Judge Sweeney continues to chip away at the wall the government has erected.
I have heard that too. Sadly, a disproportionate number of DOJ attorneys get appointed to federal judgeships.
Were did news of Watt telling members of Fannie and Freddie's board to be around for Monday morning appear?
It hints at how terrified the WH is about Sweeney unsealing the 11K documents that ARE STILL under HER old protective order.