JSmith5
12 hours ago
and the USG Govt changed the rules on him and wiped him out
Thanks FOFreddie - sounds really interesting - the transfer to a JB judge sounds really crappy.
I see where the IGs were fired - without the 30 day notice and not even the 2 minute warning to the IGs themselves. This may sound kind of sick on my part, but when I read this, the first thing I thought of was - that's how we will get released. Suddenly, in the middle of the night - without warning. We will wake up and it will be a done deal.
I guess in dealing with the Gov't for the foreseeable future you are going to hear 2 things repeated over and over:
"Hey - he can't do that!!" and
"You can't make this stuff up!" (and you can't!).
I want to be IG of the State Department as I can go on vacation to some great places under the guise of Official Travel. Or the IG of Treasury where maybe I could take home some samples. On second thought, forget State. I had a chance to go to their IG years ago, but everyone at State dresses like they are about to be received at the Court of Saint James's. I had to turn the job down as I didn't have the clothes for it as Nats was/is not what you would call a slave to fashion.
Now, unfortunately, I am probably going to wake up in the middle of each night and check the news to see if we got released. So I hope it comes soon.
Nats
Lite
12 hours ago
GROK2: Are employees of FHFA, Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae allowed to purchase stock while GSEs are in conservatorship?
Employees of the FHFA (Federal Housing Finance Agency), Freddie Mac, and Fannie Mae are generally not allowed to purchase stock in these entities while they are under conservatorship. Here's the reasoning based on available information:
- **FHFA Oversight**: The FHFA, as the conservator for both Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, has significant control over the operations of these government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs). This includes oversight on executive compensation and stock-related benefits. During conservatorship, the FHFA sets guidelines to ensure stability and alignment with public interest, which often means restricting or closely monitoring stock transactions by employees to prevent conflicts of interest or undue benefits while the GSEs are under government oversight.[](https://newbagehot.yale.edu/docs/rescue-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac-module-b-senior-preferred-stock-purchase-agreements/)
- **Stock Purchase Agreements**: Historically, amendments to the Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements (PSPAs) between the FHFA and the U.S. Department of the Treasury have focused on ensuring an orderly release from conservatorship and have not directly addressed employee stock purchases. However, these agreements reflect a cautious approach to any financial transactions involving the GSEs' securities, including employee compensation in stock.[](https://www.nahb.org/blog/2025/01/fannie-mae-freddie-mac-conservatorships)[](https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy2767)
- **Public Sentiment on X**: Posts found on X indicate that while stock-related benefits can be offered to executives with FHFA approval, this is under strict conditions aligned with compensation guidelines and existing stock plans. This suggests that ordinary stock purchases by employees might be restricted or at least subject to stringent FHFA oversight.
In summary, while specific rules might vary, the overarching principle during conservatorship has been to limit or regulate the purchase of stock by employees to maintain control, prevent conflicts of interest, and align with the GSEs' mission under government supervision. However, for current and definitive rules, direct consultation with the latest FHFA guidelines or legal advice would be necessary.
NeoSunTzu
12 hours ago
The following from Tim Howard is what needs to go on and be read on Reddit. It completely answers the nonsense that has been repeated for years regurgitated once again by Carney.
As far as Reddit is concerned, in general, and in particular the thread Rick recommends there is TOO MUCH NONSENSE and repitition of all the nonsense that's been debated here for the past 15 years - with multiple know-it-all Carney and KT types - best to ignore it!
The ONLY people of substance to listen to, from our persepectve, are Tim Howard, Bill Ackman, Joshua Rosner, Alex Mazo, and David Fiderer. And the ONLY actions of substance will come from Trump, Ackman, Bessent, or Pulte. Reddit is full of wanna-be stock heroes who have NO CREDENTIALS and for the most part are Johnny-come-lately's to this entire saga. Reddit is very good for widerspread exposure, but not much else.
Here is Tim Howard's latest in response to the Carney article. For those who are new Tim Howard is the former Fannie Mae CFO. This is the link to his blog: https://howardonmortgagefinance.com/2024/12/09/release-2-0/#comments
We will see many more articles like this, from sources that earn their living by writing pieces that advocate for, and assert the inevitability of, whatever it is the Financial Establishment wants. Banks benefit from higher interest rates on the mortgages they hold in portfolio as a result of originators having to build in non-economically high guaranty fees to their primary market mortgage quotes; MBS issuers and investors want to use exit from conservatorship as a lever for getting Congress to agree to an explicit government guaranty on Fannie and Freddie MBS (which will never happen), and Wall Street and the investment community are more than happy to have the companies remain under FHFA control in conservatorship, issuing CRTs that (along with CIRTs and ACIS done with mortgage insurers) cost over $2 billion per year in interest payments while potentially transferring only a small fraction of that amount in credit losses to CRT buyers (who earn very attractive returns as a result). These all are very powerful constituencies.
As to the substance of Carney’s article, he puts forth his own (speculative) theory that HERA allows FHFA to put Fannie and Freddie into conservatorship but not take them out. But that flies in the face of common sense. Regulators place regulatees into conservatorship if they think they can be rehabilitated; if they can be they exit conservatorship, and if they can’t be they go into receivership. Fannie and Freddie clearly have been “rehabilitated,” and then some. FHFA conservatorship is not a roach motel (you can go in but you can’t get out).
The rest of Carney’s article is just a “checking of the boxes” of all the standard criticisms: mortgage rates will rise if Fannie and Freddie are privatized without any government support (that’s not what’s being contemplated); their securities must have an explicit government guaranty to avoid rating agency downgrades (I counter this one in my January 15 response to the Parrott-Zandi article); cancelling the Treasury senior preferred stock and its liquidation preference is a giveaway of taxpayer money (it’s not; as discussed in the current post and in An Easy Way Out, the best way for Treasury to maximize the value of its claims on the companies is to cancel the senior preferred and liquidation preference, then recapitalize them on an economic basis and release them, making the value of its warrants for 79.9 percent of their common stock more valuable); and executing a plan similar to what Bill Ackman has proposed would result in a windfall to hedge funds for which the Trump administration would be punished politically (ordinary investors own more Fannie and Freddie common and preferred stock than the hedge funds do, and Treasury would make four times as much money on ITs holdings of Fannie and Freddie common than all of the other existing common shareholders, including the hedge funds, would.) But Carney and others are going to keep repeating these arguments, because that’s how they put food on the table.
Wingsjr
12 hours ago
We will get our Treasury and FHFA pic.
With the approval of the ones so far, Bessent and Pulte will skate right in. Let’s end the FUD on one talking point, Fannie and Freddie HAS BEEN REFORMED!!! They have been in their transition period for 6 years. Anyone saying it will take time, just say, you’re right, and it’s been 6 years so far that they have been existing. Monday, we will be back to $7+.
Rodney5
15 hours ago
What’s amazing about this whole situation is how the FHFA / Treasury apparently can get away with violating Congressional Law. Our friend Barron has been diligent about pointing out the Federal Statutes that govern Fannie and Freddie. Several post are worth repeating and if you’re a new investor to this board I encourage everyone to read the numerous writings exposing the many violations of our government. We’re a nation of law how can the FHFA be allowed to steal the companies for the United States Treasury?
Question, no one challenged Treasury Secretary Paulson’s action why?
Barron4664
01/09/25 9:06 AM
Post #811074 on Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)
You are correct, I hope you and all other shareholders understand that the issuing of these warrants to Treasury breaks at least 2 federal laws. HERA is not one of them. This fact exposes Sandra Thompson, and Treasury to the APA. Recent Court decisions have clarified that under the APA, the Statute of Limitations begins when the harm accrues, not from the initial agency action. Once these warrants are executed lawsuits should occur. This is all my opinion and is just words until tested in court, however, no one on this board has refuted this claim that FNMA common shares cannot be issued without receiving appropriate capital. And that the director's statutory duty is to prohibit capital distributions when under capitalized except for specific enumerated exceptions. HERA did not amend the safety and soundness duties of the director, just changed the name of the agency. Furthermore, the statute clearly states that the agency is not the director. The director can appoint the Agency as Conservator, the Director is still responsible for the safety and soundness of GSEs and that whether run by a board of directors or the Agency as Conservator, the Director has a statutory duty to ensure the GSEs comply with their Charters and the safety and soundness act. Unlike a takings claim or Illegal exaction, a succesful APA lawsuit could force an unwinding of everything done. That means a cancellation of the SPSPA and a refund of hundreds of billions of dollars back to the Corporations and Patswells or Rodneys pps estimates. If any posters think I am wrong, please refute this. So far all I have heard back is Gov can do anything they want. Yes they can and will until their actions are corrected.
Link: https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=175642070
Trade like a pro: Leverage real-time discussions and market-moving ideas to outperform.
trunkmonk
5 hours ago
Clark6290
7 hours ago
bradford86
9 hours ago
Ace Trader
12 hours ago
Patswil
15 hours ago
RickNagra
15 hours ago
Hot Features
Premium
