InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 4
Posts 402
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 06/26/2023

Re: kthomp19 post# 791318

Monday, 04/08/2024 7:11:46 PM

Monday, April 08, 2024 7:11:46 PM

Post# of 802411
"It is absolutely the point. Treasury faces no liability from the implied covenant lawsuit over the NWS, and would face no liability from any future implied covenant lawsuit"

OMG...😖 Do you have a comprehension problem?? Nobody is saying Treasury will be liable from an implied covenant lawsuit. What I said was Treasury and the FHFA were not operating at arm's length and they constructed a predatory agreement. Do you disagree with that statement? Seriously?

"Notice that FHFA, even as a defendant in the implied covenant case, faces no liability at all. The entire jury award will be paid by the companies."

It is very difficult to successfully sue a government agency. However, this does not mean it is impossible as we have now seen. If the FHFA makes another egregiously bad agreement while in bed with Treasury, I expect FHFA will be sued... again. Whether it's successful or not, or how long it takes is another story. But the self-serving action will be MUCH MUCH more visible the second time. Because FHFA doesn't pay a cent does NOT mean they have carte blanche to making additional agreements that violate the GSE covenant with shareholders. Breaking a law and having someone else pay the damages, so they can just keep doing it? It's still illegal every time they do it. They have been put on notice, so if FHFA does it again - the courts may grant a contract remedy instead of or in addition to monetary?

I don't know that current/future FHFA Directors will have the balls to pillage on the same scale as they have done previously. Politics and visibility (or lack of) is what got us to where we are. Politics and visibility will be what gets them out.