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.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/11/federal-judge-in-ohio-rules-cdc-exceeded-authority-with-eviction-ban.html
As the layers of the onion are peeled back and the long term game plan of the Executive branch of the federal government to nationalize two private corporations is shown, the governments precarious position in these shareholder lawsuits will be revealed!
I mean think about it, ALL THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAD TO DO TO BAILOUT THE TWINS WAS GIVE THEM ACCESS TO A REPAYABLE LOAN AT REASONABLE INTEREST RATES! A $2B line of credit at the UST had always been available pre 2008. Our federal branch of government has acted horribly here and I believe that the SCOTUS may be ready to put a major dent in this fiasco.
If he is in the US, a Judge could haul him into court and tell him, "You got some splanning to do, see that door leading to the jail? That's my fine for fibbers, now tell me again under oath what happened!"
Item 5.02. Departure of Directors or Certain Officers; Election of Directors; Appointment of Certain Officers; Compensatory Arrangements of Certain Officers.
On March 4, 2021, Ricardo A. Anzaldua, Executive Vice President and General Counsel, informed Freddie Mac (formally the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation) that he has decided to retire. Mr. Anzaldua will step down as General Counsel effective March 10, 2021 and will remain at Freddie Mac until on or about March 31, 2021 to assist with the transition of the General Counsel duties.
Probably realizes the governments precarious legal position in Collins and wants to buy some shares BEFORE the ruling!
After reading Tim Howards Amicus Brief, I think the tables will turn rapidly (especially with relief granted by the SCOTUS) for the government and they will be forced to change their Nationalization approach of these two private corporations! So many smoking guns already discovered coupled with the blatantly obvious abuse of these two corporations by the August 17, 2012 3rd Amendment, I think the federal government is going to regret not settling this ugly Governmental overreach back in September 2019 after the 5th Circuit EnBanc Panel ruling!
Okay, you haven't used it in a while, where is he anyway, out of the courts jurisdiction, living well in a foreign sovereign?
Where's Mario Ugoletti?
"Number one, we're seeking
prospective relief so that in your hypothetical
the Senate-confirmed director would be enjoined
from making any future sweep dividend, approving
any future sweep dividend payment; and, number
two, we're asking to go back and have the
overpayments, over and above the 18.9 billion
dollars, to be treated as a pay-down of
principal. And that would essentially deem the government paid back."
JUSTICE ROBERTS: A minute to
wrap up, Mr. Thompson.
MR. THOMPSON: Yes, Your Honor.
For decades, federal conservators and
receivers have exercised powers under statutory
schemes that are indistinguishable from the one
at issue here. Yet no conservator or receiver
has ever been before -- before been permitted to
operate its ward for the exclusive benefit of
the federal government.
And so I will close with the words of
Mark Calabria, FHFA's current director: "Fair
and predictably applied insolvency rules allow
investors and creditors to judge the risks of
investing in a company. If that process can be
manipulated to favor one creditor, as FHFA has
favored Treasury, then there is no basis to
judge what could happen if a company fails.
Given the important role the government bodies
play in the resolution of many financial
institutions, it is essential that the
performance of this role assure all stakeholders
of fairness and predictability."
We'll have more clarity post Collins decision from the SCOTUS! I am pretty sure David Thompson was clear on two occasions, once with Justice Thomas and then with Justice Amy C. Barrett, that he's looking for the Liquidation Preference to be paid in full and a return of capital beyond the $18.9B/year dividend/interest payment. Of course the SCOTUS has so many different options as to what if anything it does.
We will all see increases in our jps and common if that happens but how much, who knows. Many are so sick of the proximity of this investment to the whims of political winds and the Government that many here will sell.
It seems from the Steele Memo and through extensive Discovery in the courts (did you get a chance to read TH'S AMICUS BRIEF) that Nationalization was the Government's plan pre 2008 takeover of the board of directors and that continues even with the 4th Amendment from less than 60 days ago.
As far as thin capital is concerned, their book of business has tremendous layers of protection and with the recent run up in housing prices is very safe. Tim Howard knows all about this and he likes to use the FDIC data and look how long they lasted with just $3B in capital under Watt, today it's $25B and rising.
My friend had chills the night after taking his 2nd dose (Pfizer) His wife is a medical doctor and she recommends taking Tylenol before taking the 2nd dose and after, he left me the bottle it's Tylenol Extra Strength Acetaminophen 500 mg each! Too late for you but maybe it will help someone else out!
On March 16 at 2 PM:
THE COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS will meet REMOTELY to conduct a hearing entitled, “Home = Life: The State of Housing in America.”
The witnesses:
Dr. Chris Herbert, Managing Director, Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies;
Ms. Diane Yentel, President and CEO, National Low Income Housing Coalition;
Ms. Nikitra Bailey, Executive Vice President, Center for Responsible Lending;
Mr. Edward J. Pinto, Director, AEI Housing Center; and
Mr. Ed DeMarco, President, Housing Policy Council.
Madison opined in the Federalist papers that “If Men were Angels” we wouldn’t need government. And yet, in Another Big Lie, Pagliara examines what happens when all three branches of government?executive, legislative, and judicial?fail, exposing the truth about the housing market, a corrupt legislative process in the Senate, and the various attempts that tried and failed to blame the financial crisis on the GSEs.
The reality of the perpetual conservatorship seems to be the Government wanting to: (a) keep $6.7T of Liabilities off the federal government balance sheet while (b) having total control over these two private corporations AND taking all their value through the LP and the 79.9% equity warrants. It seems that the idea of having 1st Loss Private Capital backing $6.7T in MBS is gaining some popularity (it's how LBJ set it up in 1968 and worked swimmingly until 40 years later) amongst some governmental decision makers, especially given their contributions to both Secondary Mortgage Market Stability and Federal Monetary Policy as the Federal Reserve attempts to try to influence the yield curve.
If you think that the courts will result in nada, you're holding your "free lottery tickets", as a hedge in case you are wrong?
"Regarding organizations or corporations, a statutory or regulating authority creates the conservatorship. In reference to government control of private organizations or corporations, such as in the case of Fannie Mae (FNMA) and Freddie Mac, conservatorship implicates authority that is temporary. The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) acts as a conservator for these two agencies. The conservatorships, established in 2008, allow government intervention in response to financial pressures from the deterioration of the housing market."
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/conservatorship.asp
Can you cite any actual cases or do you remember any cases we can look up to see exactly how it is done? I remember Judge Sweeney? discussing it in one of her cases but it escapes me at the moment.
Congress has billions of reasons PER YEAR to look the other way! Besides, doing the right thing is for the legislated not the legislator.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/09/jordan-gaetz-point-to-britney-spears-in-request-for-conservatorship-hearing.html
"Given the constitutional freedoms at stake and opaqueness of these arrangements, it is incumbent upon our Committee to convene a hearing to examine whether Americans are unjustly trapped in conservatorships,” Jordan and Gaetz wrote."
Well, I think we both can agree that the government has acted horribly here and so far have taken ZERO responsibility for their misdeeds and continue with their perpetual conservatorship with really no capitulation in sight. Let's hope the SCOTUS ends the nws and LP.
There is a natural conflict between jps and common since a quick recap favors jps at the expense of the common and vice versa, so no surprise that people take sides, but the nws has got to go!
I just don't see the courts trying to enforce the segregation of pre and post 2008 shares, it would be a nightmare.
"If the government really did act in bad faith in 2008", KThomp, if YOU believe that, I can only imagine what the Government thinks! Do you realize your zero coupon jps maturity date would be extended through the end of litigation if they continue to refuse to settle and a Judge sets this up for trial? As the years go by, that will result in lower annualized returns as the maturity date continues to be extended.
Unlike AIG, THERE WAS A PREMEDITATED INTENT TO NATIONALIZE THE GSES PRIOR TO HANK PAULSON'S "OFFER YOU CAN'T REFUSE" TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS!
The Government's bizarre structuring of the PSPA can easily be explained by two things: (1) 80% or more ownership of the gses results in $6.7T landing as LIABILITIES ON THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BALANCE SHEET. (2) The perpetual conservatorship gives the Government the total control they would have had if they owned the companies.
Do you really believe that the government didn't act in bad faith in 2008? Did you see the Steele Memo?
Didn't seem to concern the "CONSERVATOR" to have only $3B in capital under Mel Watt, did it, but suddenly after 12.5 years of pilfering and depleting their capital, the government CONSERVATOR is going to force them to raise billions of new common shares! Got it!
"It's the possibility of FnF sustaining enough losses to more than wipe out their book equity that is the true danger here. Such balance sheet insolvency really would impose losses on the lowest levels of the debt structure (in addition to wiping out all shareholders), something Calabria said should have happened in 2008."
More capital coming:
March 9 (Reuters) - Federal National Mortgage Association :
* FANNIE MAE ( FNMA
Loading...
Loading...
) - BEGAN MARKETING NINETEENTH SALE OF REPERFORMING LOANS AS PART OF CO'S ONGOING EFFORT TO REDUCE SIZE OF RETAINED MORTGAGE PORTFOLIO
* FANNIE MAE ( FNMA
Loading...
Loading...
) - SALE CONSISTS OF NEARLY 25,000 LOANS WITH UNPAID PRINCIPAL BALANCE OF ABOUT $3.5 BILLION Source text for Eikon: Further company coverage:
Probably Friday afternoon after their conference ends they will issue the release date of next weeks opinions if any.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/
https://www.inquirer.com/business/bailout-pensions-jobs-retirement-richard-neal-wendell-young-guild-20210308.html
Political payoff for some of their biggest and consistent campaign contributions! Does your local carpenters union have a troubled pension fund?
I think the biggest conflict for the last several decades is the detereration of real income for a vanishing middle class! With inflation running at 1% to 2% per year, private corporations are constrained in raising their prices (and paying above market rates for unskilled labor). The housing market is getting hit from record low supply and record high demand with housing prices running 3 to 4 times the growth in family income.
The 08-09 housing crisis demonstrated the folly of giving home loans to anyone with a pulse. I think one possibility for the future is an increase in funding for LIHTC'S and perhaps more funding for HUD. We'll see what happens.
The latest from the Chair of the Senate Banking Committee:
Home
Newsroom
Press Releases
MARCH 9, 2021
BROWN: WALL STREET TREATS THE MARKET LIKE A GAME – A GAME THEY ALWAYS WIN
WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) –Chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs – delivered the following opening statement at today’s hearing entitled “Who Wins on Wall Street? GameStop, Robinhood, and the State of Retail Investing.”
Sen. Brown’s remarks, as prepared for delivery, follow:
Last February, as the world came to the collective realization that we were confronting a global pandemic, the U.S. stock market suffered its fastest drop in history, plummeting 34 percent in 33 days.
That was followed by the fastest stock market rebound in history, recovering all of those losses by mid-August.
It was clear what most working people had suspected for a long time: that the stock market is detached from the economy and the reality of most Americans’ lives.
The coronavirus was spreading, widespread testing wasn’t available, and we didn’t know if the hope of a vaccine was months or years away.
Unemployment soared, reaching 23 million jobs lost by April. Almost one year later, only about half of those jobs have been recovered. Families and small businesses had no certainty about what their lives would look like in a few weeks, let alone next year.
But the stock market continued to go up and up, and those lucky enough to own investments reaped the profit.
To some, this looked like a new development. But to millions of workers who have watched the stock market reach new heights while their own paychecks never kept up, it looked pretty familiar.
Families haven’t been too surprised by this state of affairs – a whole lot of them never recovered from a foreclosure or losing their savings during the last crisis, but watched Wall Street pocket its bailout and go on to record highs a few short years later.
That’s because when you look at who truly benefits, it’s clear that the stock market’s gains funnel wealth to a tiny sliver of people, often at the direct expense of American workers. We discussed this last week in our hearing Wall Street vs. Workers.
According to Federal Reserve data, the wealthiest one percent hold 53 percent of stock and mutual fund investments, and the bottom 90 percent own less than 12 percent.
Between workplace retirement accounts and personal investments, about half of American households have at least one financial account tied to the market, but only one in six directly own stocks.
And none of this reflects the actual makeup of the country. Only 31 percent of Black families and 28 percent of Hispanic families own any stock investment.
The wealthy are far more likely to have these accounts than middle-class families, who in turn are far more likely to be in the market than working-class or poor families.
So when the stock market soars, most people barely notice. They’re just trying to keep up with the cost of living within their paychecks.
In recent years, the growth of fintech in financial services has given rise to trading platforms that offer free stock trades. Firms like Robinhood and others claimed to “democratize” stock trading with flashy marketing and easy-to-use features.
And in one sense, it worked – they attracted millions of customers, many of them young and new to investing.
The frenzied stock trading this January, when shares of GameStop Corporation went from $18 to over $400 in a matter of weeks, showed how millions of retail investors could engage with each other and create a sensation.
But it also lays bare serious risks.
There are real people who got caught up in the frenzy who suffered real consequences. If the people who are busy working, watching their kids, or living their lives can’t make sense of the stock market’s booms and busts, they’ll continue to lose faith in the market. And hedge funds and insiders will continue to reap the vast majority of the profit.
That’s bad for everyone in the long run.
Robinhood tried to blame its decision to cut off its customers from being able to purchase GameStop and other stocks on industry-wide standards for processing stock purchases. Of course, the SEC and others should examine and consider how to reduce risk in the financial system by cutting the time it takes to complete stock purchases. Everyone would benefit.
But it’s become clear that firms like Robinhood were founded on a model that exploits small investors by encouraging fast and loose trading, and then sells their trades to big market players.
In a few short years, Robinhood violated the law, failed to respond to customers when they needed help, and when it got in trouble, cut off customers to save itself. Robinhood attracted new customers to investing, encouraged them to trade, profited off of them, and then broke their trust –precisely when they needed the company to have their backs.
It is also obvious that the David versus Goliath story we first heard in January was not the whole picture. Well-funded, sophisticated hedge funds made big profits alongside the people trading at home, and we know they always had better access and information than any of us ever will. No one thinks that’s fair.
Some have tried to blame the small-time investors. They scold people just trying to make some extra money in the worst job market we’ve seen in most of our lifetimes.
Because of the Robinhood business model, we’ve all learned the new term “gamification”.
But let’s be clear: We’ve seen Wall Street treat the markets as a game for decades – a game they always win, at the expense of pretty much everyone else.
Wall Street has never been friendly to the little guy. Surely this time is no different.
Yes, some regular people have had success. But fundamentally, the system is set up to funnel more wealth to the already-wealthy. Just like in Las Vegas, the House always wins.
The economy and the markets should work for everyone, not just the well-connected. And they should reflect the economy we all want – with broadly shared prosperity, and a growing middle class that all workers can join.
When that happens, people will have confidence the markets will actually work for them, not just Wall Street. And we’ll see more Americans save and invest for the future.
This hearing will examine not only the volatile activity in a dozen stocks early this year, but also the practices that encouraged that activity. We will see how it affects our economy in the long term, and who benefits and who loses from this “tech induced” stock market volatility."
And to think the beginning was old Hanky and his making an offer the BOD couldn't refuse! Yesterday was the 12 and 1/2 year mark of the temporary "Conservatorship". With the Liquidation Preference in the 4th Amendment, the charade continues, ugly indeed!
Is Liquidation Preference another term used to keep the gses NATIONALIZED? I think the courts and most importantly the SCOTUS has figured that out. Do you think it is good Governmental Policy to offer "bailouts" during times of economic stress to private corporations with the intent to Nationalize them? What would be the negative implications of such a policy? Wouldn't that possibly cause private enterprises to refuse a government bailout and further cut jobs and expenses thus causing their vendors to cut jobs and expenses and so on aggravating future Financial Calamities?
What types of restructurings have you seen involving a corporation making $1B per month that can borrow money at rates equivalent to what the federal government borrows money for?
What do you think about this comment from "Gentle Guy" over at yahoo board: "If you want to make some money, put $100,000 in FNMAS. If you want to get rich, put $100,000 in FNMA. I have $248,000 in it."
That's a great idea, but foia requests are processed in a centralized location I believe. I once met a guy who worked in the foia request department for the federal government and they really do a lot of work to make sure they are following the rules. Sierra Club may provide some clarity but not very bright lines drawn in the law sometimes.
If MC stays you won't have to update your photo on ihub! But if he does replace MC, which political figure will be next? Did you know that in 2019 there was almost 900,000 foia requests?
It will likely get ugly for the government to have to expose the truth in a big blown out trial, maybe that's why SM set up the 4th Amendment the way he did.
Yes, but significantly, the SCOTUS could rule that the Net Worth Sweep shall be set aside as required under the APA for the Constitutional violation. Would they need to decide on the direct versus derivative question as well as the Succession clause question? Probably so to clarify for other shareholder cases making their way throughout the Federal Courts. Also MC will likely become fireable at will by POTUS.
I think Seirra Club was more about the majority following precedence than ideological viewpoints (e.g., Sears case).
I think it might be 5-4 or 6-3, with Roberts and the conservatives in the majority (although hearing Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan? utter Nationalization had me grinning from ear to ear!). I think Kagan will lead the Dissent with Sotomayor and Breyer and possibly Roberts. ALTHOUGH GIVEN THE 12.5 YEAR "CONSERVATORSHIP" AND THE ASSOCIATED COERCIVE AND ABUSIVE GOVERNMENTAL BEHAVIOR A UNANIMOUS DECISION WOULDN'T SURPRISE ME AT ALL!
I am pretty sure that Thomas and Gorsuch will want to utilize the bulldozer since they appear to be staunch advocates of drawing clear lines with the SEPERATION of Powers doctrine! But will Alito, Kavanaugh, Roberts, and ACB join?
The Sierra Club case seemed to dive deeper into the minutae of how 4th Branch Administrative Regulations are developed, a subject I bet Nats1 might find interesting.
For a so called FREE AND OPEN DEMOCRACY, there sure are a lot of roadblocks for the citizens who want to take a look behind the curtain of Governmental Power and decision making!
Foreshadowing for the form of relief and remedy sought by Collins, et. al, in todays Majority opinion written by Justice Thomas in an 8-1 opinion: "Justice Story reasoned that
“[t]he law tolerates no farther inquiry than whether there
has been the violation of a right.” Ibid. Justice Story also
made clear that this logic applied to both retrospective and
prospective relief. Id., at 507 (stating that nominal dam-
ages are available “wherever there is a wrong” and that, “[a]
fortiori, this doctrine applies where there is not only a vio-
lation of a right of the plaintiff, but the act of the defendant,
if continued, may become the foundation, by lapse of time,
of an adverse right”)."
That's right, hard to believe Hashim polished off his old "Death Spiral" argument after it had been discredited through Discovery Documents. He likes it because it fooled so many lower court judges and underpins his business judgment rule arguments that flow from that premise! Given the tremendous litigation costs involved with getting the government to turn over the various "smoking gun" documents coupled with Mario's perjury, a deep dive trial would be unpleasant for the government. We'll see what happens.
No more for today, but now we know nominal damages alone are enough to satisfy the redressability issues for Constitutional violations of our rights! Collins is seeking more than nominal damages for their Constitutional violations.
Loved how David Thompson quoted MC in his closing argument! I don't think I will ever forget that one! Pretty sure JB is going to wait for Collins before he makes a move.