Replies to post #531054 on Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[obiterdictum]

Hi YanksGhost,

Thanks very much for your reply. There have never been any easy solutions to resolve much of anything since 2008!

You are welcome.

1. One additional request, if you would be so kind. The SPSP Agreement most all of us have seen is the version signed by Treasury and FHFA. So far rulings have been that under HERA that "contract" is not "self-dealt" and thus illegal. I think most all of us understand that position, whether we agree with it or not remaining a separate issue.

Yes.

2. My question is in your earlier work are you aware of any predecessor agreement that may have been signed by the Boards of Directors prior to their being discharged and replaced?

No.

3. My reason for asking is that so much information was revealed during the Sweeney Court's lengthy slog through discovery that offers potentially damaging refutation to the "normal" context of the terms in the Agreement that a possible conspiracy case might be brought, say under RICO provisions, alleging a criminal conspiracy that radically affected investor's in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

As you know, The RICO Act is concerned with racketeering and criminal enterprises. The RICO Act directly involves the offices of the Attorney General and federal investigators and prosecutors who must bring a criminal indictment based on actual evidence. See: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-96. Without substantial, credible evidence of racketeering or criminal enterprise that violates the statutes of the RICO Act, nothing can be done.

4. I'm not asking you tp detail the merits or mechanics of such a filing (which I know would be difficult and possibly impossible), just the possibility that the boards may have signed the SPSPA in some fashion, even as a deal sheet as took place in AIG/Starr, which would render any such further action moot. If no Board executed affirmation of the Agreement was executed. at least the possibility of a new action seems viable.

Not aware of any incriminating evidence of that type.

Thanks, again, for your contribution to all of us here.

You are welcome.