Replies to post #12617 on Fannie Mae Preferred S (FNMAS)

[rosen62]

My interpretation of that paragraph is that it relates to the DTAs, specifically to the last sweep that is pending accountability. Government says "it hasn't happened yet, so no takings". So Epstein says that the whole point for the lawsuits is to stop "the transaction" before it takes place. Or risk having the government saying "too late to reverse" at a post-date.

Unbelievable the government states that they went for the sweep because they weren't sure Fannie and Freddie could pay 10% in dividends. More than anyone, they must have known what was coming (reversal of loss reserves, DTAs activation, recoveries, etc.). Heck, Bronte Capital, Gator and many others knew it years ahead!

Great read! Thank you.

[rosen62]

I think 5bagger is correct. The "ripe" issue is a reference to a particular case (Washington Federal). Check the link by Georgenips (thank you), section IV subs D1 and D2 "Plaintiffs’ Claims Are Not Ripe For Judicial Review".

Simply put, the question of whether the Government has “taken” or “exacted” any money from plaintiffs is not ripe because the issue is “contingent [on] future events that may not occur as anticipated, or indeed may not occur at all.”

The ultimate effect of the conservatorship and Stock Agreements on the Enterprises is unknown, and any loss of share value allegedly stemming from these actions is purely hypothetical and speculative.

At a minimum, the conservatorships must end before the plaintiffs’ claims can ripen.