I have read and re-read Mnuchin's comments several times and none of the inference indicates he favors selling or otherwise eliminating the GSEs. He clearly stated a goal to see them as safe and protected from ever being taken over again. That posture could, obviously include Fannie and Freddie sharing the playing field with other parties, but that is consistent with the alternatives revealed going back to Geithner's report to Congress back in early 2012 and the 3 options to which the politicos never responded. I do not view this outcome as detrimental to shareholders of any class of stock.
Calabria, on the other hand, could be toxic for common shareholders. Yes I have read his stuff condemning FHFA and actions taken that were not consistent with HERA and his intent with the law that he helped craft. But remember that his view for years is that government should play NO role in housing which should be wholly returned to the private sector. I think his selection for a senior post in the new administration could be helpful to some of the pending lawsuits, explaining why Investors Unite might promote some of his views. But that might be more beneficial to plaintiff litigants than to any class action sort of settlement that might benefit all common shareholders.
You can draw a clue from the Miami settlement concerning Freddie Mac and PWC. They may have received some $$$, but did anyone else? NO! When things start to get down to who gets what, multi-party settlements always seem to devolve into a round-robin chorus singing the refrain from a Blood, Sweat & Tears classic: "Hi de ho, hi de hi; going to get me a piece of the pie." A Calabria pick under a novice Ben Carson could leave shareholders like many of us standing in line at the soup kitchen.
I'm not a big fan of eating gruel.
JMHO.
