Eye4Valu

Have not read this whole thread, so this might have been pointed out already, but...Gary Johnson is a libertarian candidate who used to be the governor of New Mexico I believe. Although he likely doesn't stand a chance, he appears to be a good candidate.

Even if Millet, at least CofA wants P and D to make their case again on these issues. I view that as a positive, even if I have no idea how they will ultimately rule.

Why are the Chinese still accepting a communist regime? Because they haven't been listening to the Guns n Roses' "Chinese Democracy" album. Axl and Slash will set them straight!

Based on everything the Treasury has done and alleged, I wouldn't count on anything being truthful in their motions, briefs, etc.

Bruce highlights that Washington's thinking is changing, slowly but surely. Dear Investor, Last week we witnessed further progress with respect to our investments in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation denied the government’s attempt to consolidate individual lawsuits from around the country. Cases brought in Delaware, Kentucky, Illinois, and Iowa will now proceed in their respective districts. The Court of Federal Claims continues to shine a bright light on the defendants’ misdeeds by unsealing dozens of incriminating government documents, and the Court is now focused on the remaining stash of 12,000 documents that the government has refused to turn over and that we believe will further prove our claims. Our Congress is waking up to the disingenuous behavior of the current Administration toward Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and its negative effects on all constituents. On June 1, 32 Congressional Democrats sent a letter to Federal Housing Finance Agency (“FHFA”) Director Mel Watt and Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew expressing their “concerns about your agencies’ policy of requiring Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to operate without adequate capital,” and emphasizing that the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (“HERA”) “includes a number of provisions expressing Congress’ intent that the GSEs be operated in a safe and sound manner … The fact that the GSEs are currently in conservatorship, and that Congress has not enacted further legislation post-HERA, does not justify an agreement between FHFA and the U.S. Treasury to ignore HERA’s mandate.” The court of public opinion is beginning to understand Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's outstanding performance during both good and bad economic times – when the companies are allowed to function without political interference. It is outrageous that two profitable shareholder-owned companies remain captive in the longest government conservatorship in history, one in which the government has usurped over $250 billion from the conservatees and threatens to destroy what many believe is the most productive credit market in the world. You can't make this up. In the coming weeks, we anticipate further legal developments in the D.C. Court of Appeals and U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, among others. We also expect Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to continue their progress in sensibly serving residential mortgage markets and homeowners. The facts, law, and common sense dictate that we will win this fight. Kind regards, Investor Relations To view the Order Denying Transfer linked above, please use the following website address: http://www.fairholmefundsinc.com/Documents/Order20160602.pdf To view the Letter from Congressional Democrats linked above, please use the following website address: http://www.fairholmefundsinc.com/Documents/Letter20160601.pdf Fairholme Funds, Inc. 4400 Biscayne Blvd. 9th Floor Miami, FL 33137

Todd's been smoking the hopium. I think the WaPo article reflects Washington's thinking at the current moment.

I missed the one about him partying with strippers.

This kinda goes without saying, but I think if they win some of these cases, we'll see a substantial rally. Glad they weren't consolidated, trust me. I have a pretty penny in FNMAS/FNMA.

I guess my point is that it's beneficial but not a dispositive outcome. A reason for a rally, but not a substantial rally. Appreciate your points though Christian, they are good as always!

I don't see why the share prices in either would rally substantially based off the ruling. The ruling is better than a ruling for consolidation would have been, but it's not that big of a deal either.

When a person/entity purchases a share of common and/or preferred stock from another person/entity, they succeed to their economic and/or contractual rights as successors in interest. Doesn't matter when you purchased it or they sold it.

We need some "fair and balanced" reporting on the issue from the WSJ. I won't hold my breath.

I wonder if Fairholme will provide a transcript or provide a replay of the call? From what I gathered from David Thompson, he seemed to think there was a decent chance of reversal on appeal. He mentioned that too many people are focusing on the oral arguments, as opposed to the amicus briefs. He mentioned Krimminger's amicus brief as particularly relevant in light of the fact that HERA is predicated on the exact same language as the act governing the FDIC. Mentioned that Krimminger had experience with over 1,000 conservatorships. I came away from the call very positive on the whole situation. Crucial thanks to Fairholme. Thompson made the point that without Fairholme's case in the Court of Claims, nobody would have ever seen these documents.

Surprised that Dick Bove didn't ask better questions on the conference call. He seems to have a good grasp on this epic saga.

I was impressed by David Thompson. Seems to be the right man at the right time in the right place.

With regard to a takings claim, wouldn't the damages suffered be liquidation value for the junior pref? Or would it be what they were trading for in 2012? I doubt Fairholme would be knee deep in the junior pref if it were the later.

I think Elizabeth got gored by her own unicorn!

Obama wants to hand the mortgage business to the TBTF banks and leave his low income constituents out in the cold. WSJ defends liberal government and supports taking of private property. The conservator gives away all of the company's money. Treasury places $$ in the general fund and spends it as it sees fit, bypassing Congressional appropriations. Is hell about to freeze over? Should I be selling parkas?

Can't imagine what is in the remaining 11,000 documents. Must be explosive stuff!

A conservatorship is a conservatorship. It's not whatever the U.S. wants it to be. I think many are skeptical because they know the U.S. is an 800 pound gorilla. I respect your prudence. What I admire more is your willingness to back what is right. I look forward to celebrating with this board when this wrong is made right. I don't think this is a speculation. I think this is a bet on America. I'm going short John Carney. I'm going long the USA. Nothing but respect to our Canadian friends and friends from other countries. Like Buffett says, don't bet against America!

To sum up the multiplicity of comments from the board's pro bono legal team, the legal team believes there is a decent probability that the case gets remanded so that a full administrative record can be produced. My question for the legal team is what then? What does the team anticipate will be produced as part of the administrative record? Would this allow any other discovery to go on in the Perry case? Let's assume the motion to compel in the federal claims court is decided upon following a remand in the Perry case and it is a favorable ruling, as many now suspect it may be considering the release of McFarland's depo testimony. How would that play into the Perry case if they were able to utilize information gleaned? Could that be utilized to supplement the administrative record? Or show it to be incomplete? The government doesn't exactly have the best reputation for being forth coming, or for producing all of the relevant record.

Greek Banks.

Christian: Would you reveal your sources/methods under seal for us? JK!

The more I think about this situation, the more I agree with Bruce B. that the eventual outcome here will be similar to AIG. I think everyone finally comes around to the conclusion that Fannie and Freddie cannot be replaced. Perhaps the legal outcomes help get us there, but I don't think the eventual outcome rests solely on the legal issues. In this regard, I anticipate both the prefs and common going higher. I don't think this is as speculative as most people think. How can it be speculation when the entities in question have no substitute?

Why read the tea leaves when you can just read their ruling in a few months?