Replies to post #825742 on Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Barron4664]

 Don't forget about my plans. After establishing standing and prudential standing, expect to see APA claims for "Failure to Act", "Dereliction of Duty", "Contrary to law", and of course illegal exaction under the little tucker act. And the best part is that this mainly targets regulatory failure under 4513(a)1 not conservator actions under HERA. So no issue preclusion and no commity. All brand spanking new laid out for a district court judge to ponder. Of course if wrrants and SPS are canceled, then no need to file. 

[DaJester]

Yes, but being wrong about this one is potentially catastrophic if one's common investment thesis hinges on the idea that lawsuits will prevent Treasury from pursuing a senior pref conversion

Well it's a good thing I'm diversified. 😄 And it's not just lawsuits that can prevent it. So can change in directive from Executive branch, so can political will and optics, so can compromise for release expediency, and so can plain ol' imperfect decision making.

The issue here is that all the surprises so far have been to the detriment of shareholders (original SPSPAs, NWS, Collins ruling), whereas owning the common now is a bet on a positive surprise occurring, one inconsistent with all past government actions.

Past government actions were directly aligned with the attempted dismantling of the GSEs and preventing them from ever exiting Conservatorship. If you think future government actions will be restricted to follow along those lines, you are intentionally ignoring the shift in government focus. This is not a "surprise" coming.

Judge Lamberth said the NWS "permanently alienat[ed] shareholders from the profits of the GSEs". That's the opposite of temporary.

You and I, and everyone else KNOWS he is not saying the Conservatorship is permanent, nor is the NWS.