Replies to post #784545 on Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Barron4664]

Sorry Blown, that wasnt supposed to be a reply to you. My bad.

[The Man With No Name]

Better to listen to the Barron. The Barron has described novel strategies that any shareholder could try in their own District Court based on the little tucker act and the continuing claims doctrine.

As the saying goes...."you've done the easy part".

Put up or shut up. Go file your suit. You will drown in attorney's fees and be tossed shortly thereafter. Then you'll be liable for the government's attorney's fees. Federal Court isn't a place to be toyed with.

[kthomp19]

On one hand we have kthomp with his disciples who knows everything and advocates for a cramdown

Wrong. I do not advocate for a cramdown. I predict that it has a 75% chance of happening.

transferring the wealth and property of existing owners of the company to his comrades

Wrong. The existing "owners of the company" (by which I assume you mean the legacy common, even though you're wrong about that too) have about $2B worth of wealth: 1.8B outstanding shares times around $1.30/share in market value.

because he says Treasury’s job is to make a profit

Wrong. I did not say that.

Three strikes in a row. You're approaching ano levels of wrongness here. That's some pretty terrible company.

The Barron has described novel strategies that any shareholder could try in their own District Court based on the little tucker act and the continuing claims doctrine.

Strategies that nobody, not even yourself, have actually tried. Hypocrite.

1: Treasury used the Charter act to purchase $225 Billion of MBS on the secondary market. Why? Definitely illegal.

It's not what you know, it's what you can prove in court. You saying something is illegal doesn't actually make it illegal.

2: Fed purchased even more and continue to hold 2.4 Trillion of MBS

Irrelevant.

3: Gov accountants in their official meeting minutes refer to SPS and warrants as a Treasury action taken under the Economic Stabilization act. If true the LP attached to the seniors is an illegal and fraudulent act. And also violates the Charter Act.

See my first signature line.

4: a jury ruled the NWS violated common contract law.

Only the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and the verdict was only for money damages.

Barron doesnt know what any of this means but barron does know that none of these facts support the fantasies being bandied about on this board.

None of them support any lawsuits either because if they did those lawsuits would have been filed by now.

Barron’s guess is since the whole 15 year ordeal was caused by a stroke of the pen in a federal government agreement with itself, then the solution will be through the same mechanism for political capital in an election year. That would make all those inconvenient facts disappear.

Why would that necessarily make you any money?