Guest cherzeca Posted July 24, 2017 Share Posted July 24, 2017 How recently were the documents that Gretchen Morgenson referenced released? My suspicion is that some P counsel fed it to her immediately upon release from seal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynnstone5 Posted July 24, 2017 Share Posted July 24, 2017 Some incredibly damaging info, which Josh Rosner is posting all over Twitter. What is it going to take for this to finally become a prime time media story? Perjury, fraud, cover up, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke 532 Posted July 24, 2017 Share Posted July 24, 2017 Some incredibly damaging info, which Josh Rosner is posting all over Twitter. What is it going to take for this to finally become a prime time media story? Perjury, fraud, cover up, etc. Rosner is a must follow on Twitter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke 532 Posted July 24, 2017 Share Posted July 24, 2017 Gretchen Morgenson article out just now... U.S. Foresaw Better Return in Seizing Fannie and Freddie Profits https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/23/business/fannie-freddie-treasury-lawsuit.html?smid=tw-share https://howardonmortgagefinance.com/2017/06/26/the-right-choice-on-capital/comment-page-1/#comment-3927 jtimothyhoward July 24, 2017 at 9:09 am "There are a number of newly unsealed documents that make it unmistakably clear that Treasury entered into the net worth sweep because it knew Fannie and Freddie were about to begin reporting outsized profits, and believed that if they were allowed to retain the resulting capital it would weaken the case for winding them down and replacing them, which was Treasury’s objective. The new documents also reveal that in August 2008, BEFORE Fannie and Freddie were put into conservatorship, Blackrock wrote to FHFA saying that Freddie’s “long-term solvency does not appear to be endangered–we do not expect Freddie Mac to breach critical capital levels even in stress case.” This statement by a credible and knowledgeable third party (which had been a consultant to Freddie for years) calls into question the legitimacy and legality of FHFA’s decision to set up a reserve for Freddie and Fannie’s deferred tax assets in the third quarter of 2008 on the grounds that they would not be sufficiently profitable in the future, and it also explains why FHFA was so aggressive in boosting the companies’ loss reserves based on its own estimates of future losses, which turned out to be wildly inflated. And of course if Treasury and FHFA knew that Fannie and Freddie’s post-conservatorship losses were artificial, they also knew those non-cash losses would reverse at some point. Treasury’s public story about both the conservatorship and the net worth sweep is now publicly crumbling." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
undervalued Posted July 24, 2017 Share Posted July 24, 2017 Is this the turning point for FNMA/FMCC? Is this a point where it's safe to go all in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
investorG Posted July 24, 2017 Share Posted July 24, 2017 Is this the turning point for FNMA/FMCC? Is this a point where it's safe to go all in? imo to call anything safe we need a judge or someone in DC who can influence things to take decisive action rather than just retweet flooding. people are selling the sh*t out of these securities every day at these low prices, I assume some at least have good reasoning why this makes sense even if it's not apparent to the rest of us. just thinking out loud but does the news today regarding the initial 08 bailout actually lower the odds of a settlement because it's unlikely that anything besides a whole reversal of HERA (which is unlikely) would prevent future lawsuits from flying? Mnuchin could just keep the blinders on pushing for his favorite solution without regard to the lawsuits? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waynepolsonAtoZ Posted July 24, 2017 Share Posted July 24, 2017 The IU post has hotlinks to some of the docs, easier to read then the twitter stuff. http://investorsunite.org/documents-proof-scheme-illegally-pilfer-fannie-freddie/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waynepolsonAtoZ Posted July 24, 2017 Share Posted July 24, 2017 Fannie freddie secrets (Investors Unite). http://fanniefreddiesecrets.org/resources/ I think there are 33 or so documents that were released on July 12, 2017. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunrider Posted July 24, 2017 Share Posted July 24, 2017 @cherzeca I've not gone through all the docs but much seems to be made by IU of the talk by Treasury officials of 'winding down' F&F. Given the recent ruling (which for now stands) that FHFA can choose to act as a conservator or liquidator as it sees fit (and switch in between), these revelations don't really mean much legally, do they? What's your take on this re impact on the various cases? Thank you. C. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cherzeca Posted July 24, 2017 Share Posted July 24, 2017 @cherzeca I've not gone through all the docs but much seems to be made by IU of the talk by Treasury officials of 'winding down' F&F. Given the recent ruling (which for now stands) that FHFA can choose to act as a conservator or liquidator as it sees fit (and switch in between), these revelations don't really mean much legally, do they? What's your take on this re impact on the various cases? Thank you. C. My view is that while circuit court gave fhfa/treasury a lot of latitude and found the preserve and conserve language to be optional, would the court find that government could act within this broad conception of authority and simply justify that act with a fraudulent justification. In other words is the justification completely unnecessary? Much of the perry majority opinion sought to exonerate government action based upon its alleged purpose to staunch the bleeding. If government can no longer justify it's action based on this purpose, is the action no longer authorized by statute? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ValueMaven Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 There is a lot of damning evidence here at a minimum…Nice to see the Preferred’s rallying smartly on this news. Still 3-1 upside. One has to wonder why only the NYTimes article is the ONLY press on this news…I found the Blackrock Solutions analysis very interesting…Would be interesting to know what others thought? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rros Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 There is a lot of damning evidence here at a minimum…Nice to see the Preferred’s rallying smartly on this news. Still 3-1 upside. One has to wonder why only the NYTimes article is the ONLY press on this news…I found the Blackrock Solutions analysis very interesting…Would be interesting to know what others thought? damning evidence... yes, but not so much. In my view, this is a close tie. Given the rulings against us, a tie favors us. Solving the draw-death-spiral via a NWS is clearly stated within the 17 page document. This weakens our position. But just as much, statements about Treasury knowing windfall profits were on the way helping Treasury enrich itself even more than with the fixed dividends weakens the government position. There's the tie. But as said, given the rulings against us weakening the government position makes this tie almost a win for us. It undermines and removes credibility from their main argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke 532 Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 Yesterday... "Largest financial crime in the history of the United States" Both Dick Bove and Joshua Rosner said it in this interview, after documents were released last night proving the government lied, committed fraud, perjured themselves, etc. http://www.cnbc.com/video/2017/07/24/freddie-mac-going-anti-home-owner-by-investing-in-rental-property-rafferty-capitals-dick-bove.html Today... joshua rosner @JoshRosner 28m28 minutes ago Recognizing there is more to discuss on GSE docs, @CNBCClosingBell was gracious enough to ask me to come back this afternoon to discuss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnarkyPuppy Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/taibbi-government-misled-public-on-fanniefreddie-takeover-w494007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midas79 Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 While a Clinton presidency would have contained many negatives for us, mostly due to a continuation of Obama administration policy and anti-GSE personnel being put in key places, there are also specific positives to Trump being in office. He does not hesitate to attack Obama policies for political gain, so if he sinks his teeth into the GSE issue we will have public, vocal support from the most powerful player possible. These documents seem to hand him that opportunity on a silver platter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnarkyPuppy Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 While a Clinton presidency would have contained many negatives for us, mostly due to a continuation of Obama administration policy and anti-GSE personnel being put in key places, there are also specific positives to Trump being in office. He does not hesitate to attack Obama policies for political gain, so if he sinks his teeth into the GSE issue we will have public, vocal support from the most powerful player possible. These documents seem to hand him that opportunity on a silver platter. Seems plausible, but could argue he's had enough info for a while and has stayed silent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoCitiesCapital Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 While a Clinton presidency would have contained many negatives for us, mostly due to a continuation of Obama administration policy and anti-GSE personnel being put in key places, there are also specific positives to Trump being in office. He does not hesitate to attack Obama policies for political gain, so if he sinks his teeth into the GSE issue we will have public, vocal support from the most powerful player possible. These documents seem to hand him that opportunity on a silver platter. Seems plausible, but could argue he's had enough info for a while and has stayed silent I don't feel too strongly about this one way or another, but there is a very LARGE difference in the motivation to do so once the information is public. Did Trump have this all along and stayed silent? Maybe. Will he continue to remain silent on it now that the information is public? I do not know, but the prior silence is not a guide since the playing field is changed with the public dissemination of the info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midas79 Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 While a Clinton presidency would have contained many negatives for us, mostly due to a continuation of Obama administration policy and anti-GSE personnel being put in key places, there are also specific positives to Trump being in office. He does not hesitate to attack Obama policies for political gain, so if he sinks his teeth into the GSE issue we will have public, vocal support from the most powerful player possible. These documents seem to hand him that opportunity on a silver platter. Seems plausible, but could argue he's had enough info for a while and has stayed silent I don't feel too strongly about this one way or another, but there is a very LARGE difference in the motivation to do so once the information is public. Did Trump have this all along and stayed silent? Maybe. Will he continue to remain silent on it now that the information is public? I do not know, but the prior silence is not a guide since the playing field is changed with the public dissemination of the info. Yes, this is what I was thinking. If the public outcry gets large enough, I think we will see at least a tweet by Trump. Publicity is what we have needed all along. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cherzeca Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 Trump and mnuchin had more pressing legislative issues than housing and still do. Letting have congress a turn at bat on housing is inaction but smart if congress comes up with nothing. Then administration can propose and dispose and the more information that comes out that is odiferous the better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunrider Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 Politics aside - this guy seems to be a narcistic, volatile, know-it-all who is just as happy taking shots at people in his own team than at the opposition (real or imagined) ... how long do you suppose he will last ... or more importantly, how long do you think the people on the team that we believe are competent, fair-minded, and with the right motivations ... how long will they stick around under friendly fire? ... just saying ... While a Clinton presidency would have contained many negatives for us, mostly due to a continuation of Obama administration policy and anti-GSE personnel being put in key places, there are also specific positives to Trump being in office. He does not hesitate to attack Obama policies for political gain, so if he sinks his teeth into the GSE issue we will have public, vocal support from the most powerful player possible. These documents seem to hand him that opportunity on a silver platter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnarkyPuppy Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 http://www.breitbart.com/economics/2017/07/25/fannie-secrets/ lol this guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hardincap Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 im not clear on how the docs help us other than in getting media attention, given that perry judges ruled that justification is irrelevant also, for those who thought sessions would help us, its looking quite likely he'll resign soon. rex is also reportedly considering resigning. will mnuchin last? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cherzeca Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 Politics aside - this guy seems to be a narcistic, volatile, know-it-all who is just as happy taking shots at people in his own team than at the opposition (real or imagined) ... how long do you suppose he will last ... or more importantly, how long do you think the people on the team that we believe are competent, fair-minded, and with the right motivations ... how long will they stick around under friendly fire? ... just saying ... While a Clinton presidency would have contained many negatives for us, mostly due to a continuation of Obama administration policy and anti-GSE personnel being put in key places, there are also specific positives to Trump being in office. He does not hesitate to attack Obama policies for political gain, so if he sinks his teeth into the GSE issue we will have public, vocal support from the most powerful player possible. These documents seem to hand him that opportunity on a silver platter. As long as he doesn't throw mnuchin under bus I'm ok with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waynepolsonAtoZ Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 I think the reality is that The Donald isn't super relevant. The problem is that the guys like Cohn and Mnuchin are more or less free to do whatever they want, and that isn't likely to be good for FnF or, by extension, equity investors in FnF securities. Recap obviously makes sense for America, but not for the guys that have made their careers out of hating FnF. Mnuchin, arguably, falls into that category as he was involved in private label MBS at GS. Watt is OK though, but he's said he won't act on his own, although he might be rethinking that. Also, some of the litigation might end up diminishing his independence and ability to do something supportive of recap. Lots of court of appeals cases going on. Maybe 2 out of three judges on one of the panels will agree with Judge Brown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cherzeca Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 im not clear on how the docs help us other than in getting media attention, given that perry judges ruled that justification is irrelevant also, for those who thought sessions would help us, its looking quite likely he'll resign soon. rex is also reportedly considering resigning. will mnuchin last? I don't think circuit court said justification is irrelevant. It said preserve and conserve was optional. I'm not saying these docs are outcome determinative but usually courts don't like it when a reasonable proffered justification turns out to be fraudulent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now