There is your LIE! In plain view.
2008 F&F had 40 billion in capital, before the conservator took over.
by end of 2008, 47 billion plus the 40= 87 billion write down! actual losses in 2008 were 10 billion! Now no matter who you are why would F&F pay 10% interest on money they didnt need? Only way that happens is if the FHFA who told F&F to write down 70 billion more was in charge, NO CEO would ever take on that debt when it was not needed and then increase the liquidation preference by 70 billion, or 7 billion a year in payments to the treasury. Maybe they were just being cautious for the next quarters coming up? NO! they had a backstop of basically unlimited funds. F&F could of only took what the actual loss was for the quarter and borrowed it after the loss occurred! The FHFA had to show F&F were bad! FHFA chose to force them to write down more than the loss! F&F while in conservatorship HAD ZERO CHOICE but to do as told!. THERE is your story for the WSJ crap editor! LIARS, all of them.
truth is in the wide open! There is NO ONE telling the truth in the Media or in congress. Free Press is a lie in America, just as it is in Russia.
Where is the BANKS subprime today? gone, zero. F&F did not buy subprime mortgages or deal in them at all! fact. ONLY thing they bought were "bonds" with AAA ratings from banks! Those bonds were Fraud sold to them under a lie of good investment grade mortgages! They were not! Banks again!
Take a look at the fallout! Prime is the only mortgages F&F can deal in! The rest were your banks!
Prime loss was about 5% there is your F&F!
Agency is F&F! NON-agency is BANKS!
as you can see during the melt down of 2007, BANKS went belly up! TARP saved them. F&F were fine and had enough capital to not need a bailout at all!
F&F= Agency, how can F&F be the cause of the melt down of 2008, when its clear they had only $100 billion in MBS from banks, and banks had $700 billion in the same paper? The answer is it cant! As you can see in 2008 PLS is dead! $700 billion had to be absorbed by the system. The FHFA and Treasury pinned it on F&F when the real culprit was PLS, aka Banks.
compare 5.5% delinquency to PLS crap the banks sold to Fannie Mae as AAA rated MBS securities!
and more PLS garbage
Then you have the Department of justice in court twisting the law HERA to fit the actions of FHFA.
I would argue, the DOJ does not understand law? crazy right?.
(a) Appointment of the Agency as conservator or receiver
(2) Discretionary appointment The Agency may, at the discretion of the Director, be appointed conservator or receiver for the purpose of reorganizing, rehabilitating, or winding up the affairs of a regulated entity
(2) has NO POWER, only what (a) allows, which is an APPOINTMENT.
FHFA and Treasury have stated it is a conservatorship! Winding up affairs is not a power given in (a)(2). power is given in section
(b) Powers and duties of the Agency as conservator or receiver
No matter the wording in (a) it only gives Appointment of one or the other, NO DUTY.
DUTY is given in (b)
(2) General powers (A) Successor to regulated entity The Agency shall, as conservator or receiver, and by operation of law, immediately succeed to-- (i) all rights, titles, powers, and privileges of the regulated entity, and of any stockholder, officer, or director of such regulated entity with respect to the regulated entity and the assets of the regulated entity; and . . . (B) Operate the regulated entity The Agency may, as conservator or receiver-- (i) take over the assets of and operate the regulated entity with all the powers of the shareholders, the directors, and the officers of the regulated entity and conduct all business of the regulated entity; (ii) collect all obligations and money due the regulated entity; (iii) perform all functions of the regulated entity in the name of the regulated entity which are consistent with the appointment as conservator or receiver; (iv) preserve and conserve the assets and property of the regulated entity; and (v) provide by contract for assistance in fulfilling any function, activity, action, or duty of the Agency as conservator or receiver. …
(D) Powers as conservator
The Agency may, as conservator, take such action as may be-- (i) necessary to put the regulated entity in a sound and solvent condition; and (ii) appropriate to carry on the business of the regulated entity and preserve and conserve the assets and property of the regulated entity.
Its only powers as conservator.
The Agency may, as conservator, take such action as may be--
(i) necessary to put the regulated entity in a sound and solvent
(ii) appropriate to carry on the business of the regulated entity
and preserve and conserve the assets and property of the
DOJ says the may is a may if FHFA wants, but can do the opposite too.
no! the may is can do (i) or (ii) or a little of both. as may be!
ugg, DOJ is really twisting it!. in law may and shall are different, but shall is must do. may is must do within the framework. Not may do what FHFA wants.