Flynnstone5

Author thinks Mnuchin might likely support Johnson-Crapo bill and says in a tweet his core view is that a phase-out is the much more politically viable. From what I've read, Johnson-Crapo would not work and certainly doesn't fit "reasonably quickly". When he says phase-out, isn't he basically referring to a liquidation. All I want to know is, where the hell is the writ decision? Seriously....wtf!?

+1 Well said

Could it really be true that he hasn't reviewed anything regarding the legal cases per his comments to Warner?

probably because that's what he was coached to say to maximize the chances of confirmation. remember there's heat on him for allegedly pumping his investment in the paulson fund so he has to defend his nov30 comments to some degree. he simply said he didn't comment on r+r, not that he doesn't support that. those hoping for some big bullish commentary on GSEs today are too short term oriented, as the goal today is confirmation and many in congress don't like the companies -- he has to thread the needle. You may be correct on threading the needle. The door is certainly open for Brown in this round.

Maybe there's a chance for additional clarity in round 2. Why would he say my comments were never that there should be recap and release? If you're not going to liquidate and they serve a vital role, well run, etc. what else is there besides R&R?

MR. MNUCHIN MR. MNUCHIN: “”LET ME BE CLEAR THAT I DID MAKE COMMENTS ABOUT THIS. MY COMMENTS WERE NEVER THAT THERE SHOULD BE RECAP AND RELEASE. I HAVE BEEN AROUND THE MORTGAGE INDUSTRY FOR 30 YEARS AND I HAVE SEEN THIS FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME. THIS IS AN AREA I BELIEVE I HAVE EXPERTISE IN. FOR VERY LONG PERIODS OF TIME I THINK FANNIE AND FREDDIE HAVE BEEN WELL RUN WITHOUT CREATING RISK TO THE GOVERNMENT AND THEY PLAYED AN IMPORTANT ROLEND THE MORTGAGE INDUSTRY FOR 30 YEARS AND I HAVE SEEN THIS FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME. THIS IS AN AREA I BELIEVE I HAVE EXPERTISE IN. FOR VERY LONG PERIODS OF TIME I THINK FANNIE AND FREDDIE HAVE BEEN WELL RUN WITHOUT CREATING RISK TO THE GOVERNMENT AND THEY PLAYED AN IMPORTANT ROLE — I KNOW YOU ARE RUNNING OUT Difficult to process this. Never that there should be recap and release, yet they are safe and serve a vital purpose. Also, elusive on agreeing to act only through congress.

Shouldn't be too long before Brown's up. Wow! Not a single FnF question.

Best of luck to you and everyone. I think he's going to get pushed hard on what he meant by his comments, views on government guarantee and how it all relates to benefiting Paulson.

Sorry to rehash. I honestly never paid any attention to the topic of damages or Treasury returning money as I thought it was just plain ridiculous.

ignore harrison. his argument that fnma common may = $15-22 is plausible; his argument that it could be worth $75-110 is not plausible. the guy provides no value add Appreciate the response. I entered this with the expectation of positive court ruling, warrants exercised at a higher strike per settlement and a pps of $20-$25 for common, par on prfd. Reading his article started me thinking about possible consequences if all documents were eventually released and were as damaging as many think.

Can anyone comment on the situation regarding statue of limitations with respect to what is and is not possible regarding the conservatorship? As I'm sure many have, I just read Charlie Harrison's new article on SA. I would love to believe much of what he proposes, but I'm not sure that what he's saying is even legally possible. In addition, the theory of treasury returning money to the gse's seems way far fetched. http://seekingalpha.com/article/4037336-fannie-mae-valuing-preferred-versus-common-trump-privatization-settlement?v=1484681981&commenter=1&comments=show

CNBC reporting Mnuchin hearing set for Jan 19th

Seriously!? What kind of a response is that. I'm a well educated individual investor with a successful background in medical products. I see you commenting here and on SA, your name is on both suits and I know the PwC suit was settled. How in the hell asking you to clarify is that considered wingnut? You sound like HRC back in the day responding to accusations against Bill as "the vast right wing conspiracy".

Ok. Were you a party to that suit? Did you settle? What did you receive in order to agree to settle? FHFA filed a motion to find just that. And you think he can disclose this publicly? lol. Didn't know FHFA filed motion so I get that. Just trying to understand what is going on with these other cases including motives of some of the P's. Lots of $$$ on the line.

Ok. Were you a party to that suit? Did you settle? What did you receive in order to agree to settle? http://gselinks.com/Court_Filings/PWC/Complaint.pdf http://www.glenbradford.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Deloitte-Fannie.pdf Just trying to establish what happened and why, fact from fiction. You could just provide a clear answer.......just saying.

Anyone see this from yesterday? https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/491?r=23

I don't know who Rob Schain is, but I do know that you were one of the P's in the PwC case. As an individual investor with a large investment in common and prfd, I have researched everything imaginable with FnF and continue to question my bias daily. You received money as part of the PwC settlement, the suit ended and no other shareholders received anything of value. So I think it's a valid question for anyone not directly involved in the major litigation to ask, is it possible that a settlement is made in the major suits that doesn't benefit all shareholders? After all, this is exactly what happened in your case. If I'm not mistaken, you're also involved in the case against Deloitte? Please explain to me how your participation in a suit and then receiving money while no shareholders benefit nor do they obtain any materials that could be used in other cases has any benefit to myself or any other shareholder not directly involved? For the record, I posed the question on the board given there are some extremely knowledgeable attorneys here, but since you responded, I'm asking you directly so please don't disregard my question to you as "trolling". http://investorsunite.org/federal-judges-listened-carefully-investors-pressed-case/ Clarified at 38:00. I still don't see how your particular situation had any benefit to shareholders.

money honey is not dumb. if she cant figure out GSE reform, then i think that bodes well that most senators will not feel strongly...just crapo (who is in favor of mnuchin), johnson and corker. and corker seems like he is with the trump program as he has been trying to help out tillerson as head of foreign relations committee... Complete speculation, but knowing that he is going to be attacked and drawn into specifics relating to FnF, wouldn't his best course of action be to blame the current admin. (very Trump style) that they have drained off all profits and capital buffer through the NWS, put taxpayers at enormous risk and completely ignored/trampled on the rights of shareholders (avg. Americans not just HF)? This would unite republicans and put democrats on defense, which fits perfectly with the Trump mantra.

Anyone see the GSE discussion of FnF on Fox Business about an hour ago? I can't find the video yet and only saw the tail end. James Freeman of WSJ calling for FnF to be wound down and liquidated, protecting taxpayers, CBO estimates moving to pure private would only add small increase to mortgage rates, FnF caused the crisis, etc. He later made additional comments that he hopes at Mnuchin's confirmation hearing, senators will ask him directly if he finally plans to shut down these two behemoths. Bartiromo replies, well that's exactly what he said he was going to do. http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/5279352704001/?#sp=show-clips I continue to see multiple stories now regarding Paulson and the FnF stake. Without a doubt he gets grilled on this ,which IMO is going to send the stock soaring or has the potential to destroy recent gains. I also saw that Paulson owns common shares, which I did not realize. I thought he was in prfd. So the million dollar question aside from a Perry decision in the immediate future is, how does he respond to these questions and what future plan does he provide?

Would prfd shareholders like Fairholme and Perry really sell shares at these prices with the end finally in sight? Doesn't make sense to me at all. They are in a great position (being in prfd) with close ties to a friendly admin. I don't see Mnuchin having any problems getting through. I think what's weighing on share prices is the definite uncertainty over court decisions; and there is a great deal of talk lately about litigants possibly settling with no benefit to shareholders not directly involved in the suits like PwC. I don't have the legal expertise to know for example, can Ackman, Berkowitz, Perry, etc. structure a deal that benefits only them? Will other hedge funds come in and offer a recap strategy that screws current shareholders and allows them to walk away with the newly restructured entities? I continue to find that every time that I gain optimism on this investment, it always reverts to so many negative concerns. The documents being made available is essential imo and I can't help but wonder if they ever make their way to P's attorneys. Mnuchin will certainly be questioned on FnF and how his plans could benefit hedge funds friends, etc. The perfect answer to these accusations would be to raise the document issues, the extraordinary use of privilege, the NWS and profitability. Will he bring any of this up or does he say the wrong thing and devastate recent pps gains? Nobody is selling. All shares are consolidating in a high level pennant, a continuation pattern. Typical after a huge run. Some back and filling, profit taking... waiting for the next leg up. We go higher from here. Any opinion on above and non-class action shareholders getting left out in the cold?

Would prfd shareholders like Fairholme and Perry really sell shares at these prices with the end finally in sight? Doesn't make sense to me at all. They are in a great position (being in prfd) with close ties to a friendly admin. I don't see Mnuchin having any problems getting through. I think what's weighing on share prices is the definite uncertainty over court decisions; and there is a great deal of talk lately about litigants possibly settling with no benefit to shareholders not directly involved in the suits like PwC. I don't have the legal expertise to know for example, can Ackman, Berkowitz, Perry, etc. structure a deal that benefits only them? Will other hedge funds come in and offer a recap strategy that screws current shareholders and allows them to walk away with the newly restructured entities? I continue to find that every time that I gain optimism on this investment, it always reverts to so many negative concerns. The documents being made available is essential imo and I can't help but wonder if they ever make their way to P's attorneys. Mnuchin will certainly be questioned on FnF and how his plans could benefit hedge funds friends, etc. The perfect answer to these accusations would be to raise the document issues, the extraordinary use of privilege, the NWS and profitability. Will he bring any of this up or does he say the wrong thing and devastate recent pps gains?

Who knows? He says "it's fixable" and "don't make it binary", which to me translates into fix FnF and don't just say that we need a whole new system fwiw.

Anyone have the full Politico article or comments from Hensarling, Recap the GSE's? "Not my preferred approach".

FYI - Tim Howard's response to my earlier post: Duffy’s taking the chairmanship of the Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance and Government-Sponsored Enterprises (under the House Committee on Financial Services, chaired by Jeb Hensarling) doesn’t change my views on the prospects for getting mortgage reform done administratively. The Republicans in positions of leadership in both the House and the Senate have long been solidly anti-Fannie and Freddie (and most of them pro-bank); the fact that a few of them change seats on occasion doesn’t have any real significance, and doesn’t change the overall alignment of forces. As I tried to say in my piece, what’s new–and I think very positive–is that fact that Mnuchin wants to address the Fannie and Freddie issue “reasonably fast” (unlike Congress, which has been doing it “excruciatingly slowly”). To do that, he’ll have to settle the lawsuits against the net worth sweep, and when he starts to negotiate with the plaintiffs, he’ll learn the facts about Fannie and Freddie, and the causes of the financial crisis. Fortunately, Mnuchin (or Trump) doesn’t need to go through Congress to get Fannie and Freddie out of conservatorship; the Bush Treasury put them in without Congress. It’s a virtual certainty that leading Republicans in Congress–Hensarling, Duffy, Corker, Shelby et al–will object to “recap and release.” But THEIR problem is they don’t have an alternative. If they try a version of their fables about Fannie and Freddie causing the crisis and being a “flawed business model,” Mnuchin will have the facts to shoot that down. And it they tell him to try a bank-centric alternative, say the Urban Institute’s “Promising Road to GSE Reform,” based on fake risk-sharing securities, give me–or any other knowledgeable and objective housing finance professional–five minutes with Mnuchin, and he’ll say, “well, that won’t work; what else have you got?” Again, as I said in response to an earlier question, getting reform done won’t be a layup. But once you introduce facts into the dialogue–which have been kept out of the Congressional debate for eight years, but an administrative process will let in–the “good guys” have much the better hand. We’ll have to see how they play it, but I like their chances.

Agree that Corker makes no sense nor does Crapo. Meph - I too think your point on loyalty is a very valid one and has been clearly demonstrated so far with the exception of Giuliani, who I think may have had some prior business issues that posed a problem. Side note - it's been a month now waiting on the writ decision....wtf!?