Seeking Alpha

Blitztour

Blitztour
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View Blitztour's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Fannie And Freddie's End [View article]
    Interesting


    http://yhoo.it/1xJdCRY
    Jan 8, 2015. 11:33 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Fannie Mae: An Analysis Of The Cases And Statutes That Require Judge Lamberth To Be Reversed On Appeal [View article]


    http://yhoo.it/1xJdCRY
    Jan 8, 2015. 11:30 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Fannie Mae: An Analysis Of The Cases And Statutes That Require Judge Lamberth To Be Reversed On Appeal [View article]
    This is exactly what it's gonna take. keep emailing your reps to give it back to the shareholders.

    "Senator Calls For FHFA to End Fannie, Freddie Conservatorship
    10:34a ET November 19, 2014 (Dow Jones) Print

    Senator Calls For FHFA to End Fannie, Freddie Conservatorship
    By Joe Light
    Sen. Tim Johnson (D, S.D.) called on Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Melvin Watt to "engage with the Treasury Department in talks to end the conservatorship" of mortgage-finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac if Congress doesn't proceed with housing-finance reform.
    "Everyone agrees that conservatorship cannot continue forever, so I hope my colleagues will keep working toward a more certain future for the housing market," Mr. Johnson said Wednesday at a Senate Banking Committee hearing. "However, if Congress cannot agree on a smooth, more certain path forward, I urge you, Director Watt, to engage the Treasury Department in talks to end the conservatorship."
    Nov 19, 2014. 11:04 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Fannie Mae: The Rafter/Pershing Square Voluntary Dismissal Has No Bearing On The Perry Capital Appeal [View article]
    Once again, I tell you as the most unsophisticated of investors and one with absolutely no legal background, this is a 14th Amendment case and should be argued as such. It's about Equal Protection under the law.
    Section 1.
    "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

    The Fed shored up the banks, then handed them back when they paid off their debts. The covered AIG and then handed it back. They covered GM and then handed them back!
    Now, will someone please explain to me what is the difference between the kind of GSE backing that Fannie and Freddie enjoy and banks or major insurers don't? Does tthe FDIC not guarantee $250k per depositor in the event of a failure and doesn't that make Banks a GSE as well?

    And, when the Fed bails out private entities like GM (a 61 percent equity stake in preferred shares & loan resulting in an $11.5 billion loss) or AIG (a 79.9% equity stake in the form of warrants called equity participation notes) they assume the exact same position in ownership as they have with our property. And yet, the shareholders of the Banks, AIG and GM are enjoying their profits and dividends (where applicable) and we just watched the Fed sweep another $6.4 billion of our profits into the treasury. WHER ARE WE BEING TREATED DIFFENTERLY!

    The dismissal of suits in the Lambreth case in the absence of full discovery constitutes a failure of due process. The Gov seizure of a privately held company that has repaid it's debt and owes NOTHING constitutes a unconstitutional denial of property. So, if you're gonna buy in and bail out banks, insurance co and auto manufacturer and then hand them back to shareholders, you gotta do the same for us!

    Charlie, can this argument be made...or am I nuts?
    Nov 7, 2014. 10:57 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Fannie Mae: The Rafter/Pershing Square Voluntary Dismissal Has No Bearing On The Perry Capital Appeal [View article]
    Maybe they withdrew because the Dept of Justice is on Judge Sweeney to delay her discovery case due to the overlapping suits . They want her to issue a temporary stay until they get a read on the Lambreth dismissal appeal. If Judge Sweeney wont do it, the government will move to dismiss and argue the District Court’s decision legally bars the investors from bringing similar cases in the Court of Claims.
    Nov 3, 2014. 04:27 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Fannie Mae: An Analysis Of The Cases And Statutes That Require Judge Lamberth To Be Reversed On Appeal [View article]
    User,
    You're preachin to the choir, boss. I don't disagree with any observation or opinion, that this is a total crock! And yet, a Federal Judge took a good look and dismissed 2 major suits as "without merit" Now their trying to put discovery on hold, indefinitely!

    The one's who can turn this around the quickest would be Congress! (IMHO)
    At this point, I have little or no confidence in the courts to return my property
    Oct 30, 2014. 06:34 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Fannie Mae: An Analysis Of The Cases And Statutes That Require Judge Lamberth To Be Reversed On Appeal [View article]
    Nasha,

    yesterday from Carney @ WSJ

    "A shadow has fallen over the brightest hope of shareholders attempting to wrest control of profits at Fannie Mae FNMA -6.76% and Freddie Mac FMCC -6.45% from the government.

    After a U.S. District Court last month dismissed a handful of Fannie and Freddie investor lawsuits, focus turned to similar actions before the Court of Federal Claims. Now, Justice Department lawyers are urging Judge Margaret Sweeney to put those cases on hold. In a filing Tuesday, government lawyers argued the lawsuits overlap so much that Judge Sweeney should issue a temporary stay to see how things shake out on the appeal of the District Court’s dismissal. If Judge Sweeney doesn’t stay the litigation, the government says it will move to dismiss the case on grounds the District Court’s decision legally bars the investors from bringing such a similar case in the Court of Claims.

    The filing means Judge Sweeney will have to weigh in on the District Court’s decision. That could push a resolution of the case off for quite some time, awaiting a decision on the appeal. Or it could dash hopes of investors at Fannie and Freddie"

    I think we both agree, these are the type of maneuver that cause great concern about trusting this to the courts. I mean, the Gov has some pretty smart people on their side too! There has to be some influential voices in the House and Senate raising the red flag about seizing public property and profits and after the fact amendments to justify them. All shareholders should be bombarding their reps to repeal this sweep as unconstitutional... which it clearly is.
    Oct 30, 2014. 12:33 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Fannie Mae: An Analysis Of The Cases And Statutes That Require Judge Lamberth To Be Reversed On Appeal [View article]
    Remember gang, I'm long on Freddie and have been in and out since 2008. But, once again I see everybody ready to drink the Kool-Aid. So lets get past the Lambreth decision and take a hard look at what the appeals process holds for the shareholders.
    From the US Courts page:
    "A litigant who files an appeal, known as an "appellant," must show that the trial court or administrative agency made a legal error that affected the decision in the case. The court of appeals makes its decision based on the record of the case established by the trial court or agency. It does not receive additional evidence or hear witnesses. The court of appeals also may review the factual findings of the trial court or agency, but typically may only overturn a decision on factual grounds if the findings were "clearly erroneous."

    Now, somebody cite for me the portion of Judge Lambreths ruling that would compel the Applet Ct to overturn that decision, cause I ain't seeing it.

    He based his ruling on the law as it currently exists and short of somebody proving a conspiracy to defraud the shareholders, I can't see a reversal.
    Could it happen? Absolutely! I mean I'm still shell shocked by the Lambreth ruling and don't believe that happened...BUT IT DID!
    As for everyone hoping for some damning discovery from Judge Sweeney's Ct in the future...another big ?

    Congress gave the Fed extraordinary powers when they instituted the sweep to do with our property what they will. This is gonna have to be undone by Congress!

    HOUND YOUR REP'S BEFORE THE MID TERMS!!!
    Oct 21, 2014. 11:35 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Opportunity In Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae [View article]
    "There is, of course, an immense risk of the agencies being scrapped and the government left unharmed"

    WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT!

    Again, this is an EQUAL PROTECTION ISSUE.

    Meanwhile all this "drink the kool aid" crap does is lure more small investors to by an essentially worthless stock to be prayed on by institutional day traders.

    We can all speculate as to what the stock’s value will be "if". But then "if" my Aunt had testicles, she'd be my Uncle...she isn't! Nor is this stock going to be worth anything unless "we" the shareholders compel the Fed into action via the dweebs that imposed this sweep in the first place.
    If I’ve learned anything in this saga, it’s that you can’t always depend on the courts to do what’s right and the only people who are gonna end up rich in this play, are the lawyers!
    You want a swift resolve and a return of our property, WRITE TO YOUR CONGRESSIONAL REP every stinkin day!
    Oct 9, 2014. 12:17 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Fannie Mae: Judge Sweeney Wants Discovery On Whether FHFA Was Directed To Enter The Sweep Amendment [View article]
    Lambreth thought it sucked too!

    "Distinct Judge Royce C. Lamberth expressed sympathy for the investors, saying it was “understandable” for the sweep to “raise eyebrows or even engender a feeling of discomfort.” But “a sense of unease” over the government’s actions was not enough to reverse course.
    Congress gave Treasury the power to take “unprecedented steps to salvage” the mortgage finance industry, so investors should take up their grievances with lawmakers, the judge said. He found that Treasury and FHFA were well within their rights, as dictated by Congress."
    And yet, he found it completely kosher!

    That said (and as a holder of many shares of this company) I too would have loved to see Lambreth say, yep, I'm going to back these claims and return this property to it's rightful owners. But it didn't happen that way I do not see a reversal on appeal or the ability of anybody to prove a Government conspiracy to defraud shareholders...and that's what this is going to take.

    IMHO, the only persons that are going to come out ahead here are the attorneys!

    I really, truly believe this is gonna take Congress to say, we need to look at this again because we have a lot of voters absolutely LIVID about the dismantling and plundering of a profitable, private company that they invested in and we're sweeping all their profits. We made a bad decision!
    Oct 7, 2014. 09:26 AM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Fannie Mae: Round One To The Government [View article]
    Agreed, Carney is no booster of shareholder rights and seeing the transcript in that context is diffidently less sever that the WSJ article.

    But I think the point I'm trying to make is, if Judge Lambreth (who's clearly expressed discomfort with the Sweep Amendment and the sprit in which it was imposed) can dismiss these suit in good conscience, that leaves me a little nervous about what Judge Sweeney will or will not do and exactly what that effect will be.
    Oct 6, 2014. 12:39 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Fannie Mae: Round One To The Government [View article]
    Charlie ,
    The section I referenced in the WSJ article read:
    "Judge Sweeney described Judge Lamberth as someone "that I esteem and admire greatly." She added that he spoke at her investiture, the swearing in ceremony for federal judges. That isn't exactly the best setup for a case in which attorneys need to argue Judge Lamberth got the law wrong in his case."

    I've read up on Judge Sweeney for 7 months and looked at her record since her appointment trying to gauge what she'll do in March.
    I find no indication that this Judge has any difficulty speaking her mind and if she thinks Judge Lambreth "screwed the pooch" she'll politely say so!

    And while we're talking about Judge Lambreth, he's well documented as finding the sweep amendment troubling but found himself hamstringed by the letter of the law. The Attorneys representing Perry presented no mitigating circumstances to compel a decision contrary to what the amendment claimed, that being, we can do what ever the hell we want with the profits. And that ruling is based on the original terms of conservatorship which told the stockholders from day one, your stock is now worthless!
    So, the question now is with the 2012 revision that allowed for the wholesale plundering of our profits and what discovery will produce.

    But if you look at Judge Sweeney's comments (highlighted below) I start to question what exactly we're all (myself included) hinging our hopes on:

    "With respect to defendant’s claim that the court lacks the authority to affect the exercise of the FHFA’s powers or functions, the court agrees with the case law of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which states that the “FHFA cannot evade judicial review. . . simply by invoking its authority as conservator."

    "Indeed, "Congress did not intend that the nature of the FHFA’s actions would be determined based upon the FHFA’s self-declarations . . . ." Leon County, 700 F.3d at 1278."

    "Here, defendant has not provided a privilege log explaining why documents identified as responsive to plaintiffs’ discovery requests would be protected. Indeed, defendant admits that even it has not reviewed some of them, and yet claims that the documents are privileged."

    "Without more detail regarding the content of the documents, or the opportunity to review them, the court cannot make a finding that they fall under the privilege."

    "However, even as it is difficult to evaluate the likelihood of the fallout from disclosure that defendant describes, out of an abundance of caution, the court will exercise care in attempting to avoid the dire consequences that defendant claims will occur. Accordingly, as outlined in the June 19, 2014 hearing, the court has fashioned a solution to balance the parties’ competing needs, and to comply with the dictates of the deliberative process privilege."

    "Jurisdictional discovery in this matter will proceed in phases. In the first phase, defendant shall respond to discovery requests regarding information from: April 1, 2008, up to and including December 31, 2008; and from June 1, 2011, up to and including August 17, 2012. Defendants shall prepare a detailed privilege log for all documents from these respective time periods that it asserts are privileged. In addition, defendant shall respond to discovery requests for non-privileged information from August 18, 2012, up to and including September 30, 2012, regarding topics other than the future profitability of the enterprises or whether and when the conservatorship might end. Subsequently, plaintiffs shall inform the court as to whether they believe that discovery for documents created after these time periods are necessary."

    All I see in these comments, is the Judge telling the Fed, you can't just say we (the Fed) don't need to produce documents cause the law already say's we can do what we want. And what I see the lawyers saying is, these document are gonna prove that there was malicious intent in imposing the sweep and that equates to conspiracy to defraud shareholders?

    Now, I'm just a janitor, not the most sophisticated investor and the first to admit my lack of education on corporate law. But I can read and I don't see that argument flying in any way, shape or form!

    If I were representing the shareholders, I would be arguing that this is a violation of "Equal Protection" plain and simple. Demonstrate the "Sweep" to be extraordinary in the treatment we received as opposed to other privately held entities that were bailed out as well.

    If you're gonna bail out GM, Aig and a host of banks only to return them to the public after they repay their debt, you gotta do it for Fannie and Freddie shareholders, too! Why are we not sweeping profits and dividends from everyone else. Once you prove that point, then the rest of the argument falls into line. Is that gonna take congress? You tell me.

    So when you say "Look more at what Judge Sweeney has said about her own case, then decide what you think she will do" trust me I have, and at this point, I'm not sure what she's gonna do.

    But I can tell you this much, I ain't sellin any stock! ; )
    Oct 5, 2014. 12:45 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Fannie Mae: Round One To The Government [View article]
    Another good article and analysis. I too remain long on this stock and have been in and out of both Fannie and Freddie since 2008.

    I knew dismissal of the suits was a possibility but not without some consideration of the circumstance by which this sweep was imposed on the shareholders, and frankly, I'm amazed!

    The appeal avenue is wide open but as we all know, it will be a long process and who knows what will happen. Yes, the discovery ruling coming in March offers hope.

    However, taking into consideration Judge Sweeney's comments in the WSJ following Judge Lamberth's decision, I'm not holding out much hope of that court rendering a decision that would totally contradicts Judge Lamberth's.

    Lamberth did give the stockholders a clue to resolving this issue to the satisfaction of all parties when he said "the fight is not with the courts, it's with Congress"

    It's going to take a lot of emails to our Congressional Reps before the mid terms next month to let them know, we will won't vote for any legislator who thinks seizure and plundering of private property is OK as long as it benefits the taxpayer.

    Because if that the way we've gonna operate, than lets nationalize the oil companies and start sweeping their profits as well. I'd love to be paying $0.65 a gallon for premium again!
    Oct 3, 2014. 10:07 AM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Fannie and Freddie plunge after investor lawsuit dismissed [View news story]
    I don’t think it’s an overreaction. I mean, lets face it, it’s bad news and I completely understand why everyone is jumping ship.

    But this is far from over and as usual, the financial Press who’ve dubbed this “the end” have no clue as to where this process is headed.

    Regardless of the Lambreth ruling at the end of the day, the Fed still violated the Fifth Amendment, broke the law, rewrote a contractual agreement and stole our profits! They will be made to restore OUR property.

    So, while investors wait for Judge Sweeney to finish her discovery process, I've already written my Congressional rep that I will not vote for any candidate that supports the sweeping of profits from the 401k's of nurses, firefighters, police and millions of other hard working Americans who invested in these entities.
    I seriously doubt this issue will be left to congress to decide. But a little investors arm twisting before the mid-term elections, couldn't hurt.

    So, unfortunately, this will take a bit longer to settle but at the end of the day, stockholders will prevail.
    Oct 1, 2014. 12:33 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Bank Of America: Mortgage Mess Resolved, Now Up To $20? [View article]
    My comments from 7/4 RE: BOA The Big Denial Post

    "Please, more articles like this to drive the price down! I need to acquire more shares cause this is a $25 to $30 per share stock in less than 14 months.

    The DOJ settlement is going to be far less sever than anyone is predicting and there's no way the FED is going to destabilize this juggernaut over the accounting screw up with the economy still sitting on a teeter board.

    Heads will roll and resignations are already in the works with new blood on the way in.
    And yeah, there they'll be some painful monetary consequences.

    But the day's of idiots running the show at BOA done and the once this storm is past, this is gonna be a powerful institution again, generating great dividends and good value for those who had the balls to buy in and hang tough!
    IMHO! : )"
    ...and I say BOA is gonna hit $25 + per share before Easter 2015!
    Aug 23, 2014. 09:54 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
67 Comments
95 Likes