Replies to post #387945 on Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[whipstick]

Interesting opinion piece that contradicts itself a few times over. I'll take the other side of that, thanks!
Do you have any Carney or Joe Light pieces you'd like to add for your case?

Arguments for why the government will lose are not based on any solid data, but on the fact that these cases will be tried in the court of public opinion, and that, in the best of all possible worlds, “justice” and “common sense” will triumph.

Courts tend not to like it when defendants supply false testimony. This is more of a court thing than a court of public opinion thing. I mean I'm not a lawyer but I've heard that lying to the courts is frowned upon by said courts.

Justice and common sense aside, the most compelling defense argument the government has is that it had a right to take the profits in the first place. It was not “stealing” from investors; it was using its own property.

Except it wasn't justified in taking them over at all. See here.

The evidence showing that the government lied about Fannie’s and Freddie’s financial condition in 2012, portraying it as much worse than it was, certainly opens the door for a settlement. But it does not mean the government will lose its case. And any bet that it will do so is profoundly misguided.

This is also a self contradictory statement.

OK so your hit piece is a contradiction filled pile of trash - would you like to try again?