Our opponents have been unusually quiet as of late. After being allowed to run the tables for years our efforts at exposing their lies and motives, have largely silenced them. John Carney at the WSJ, perhaps the most vocal opponent grossly overreached when he published his bizarre valuation of the GSEs on Nov. 7th claiming that even if the sweep was overturned they are basically still worthless. I confronted him via Twitter at the time and told him “Your entire analysis is based on the flawed idea that they will be left in conservatorship forever? Good luck with that theory.” We then witnessed the events surrounding the Senate Banking hearing which brought the idea of release into the public realm. Fannie is up 13% since the WSJ published their analysis and Carney seems to have been pretty much muzzled since. It is also refreshing to see the shareholder bashing absent from the dialog. I do have to say it was getting bizarre hearing typically conservative press like the WSJ using populist arguments in articles that one would usually find in “Revolution” type socialist papers. Demonizing the “billionaire hedge funds” is exactly how all Soviet Style nations get their start. America is a nation governed by the rule of law, laws that are meant to apply equally to rich and poor alike.
The gross injustice that we witnessed in the decision not to indict the New York police officer involved in the lynching of Eric Garner for “illegally selling cigarettes” has put the spotlight on the uphill battle that black Americans face in trying to gain justice and respect. This brutality must stop, and we are committed to providing whatever support is requested to bring this to an end. This issue has played a pivotal role in rallying support for Fannie and Freddie as they are critical to ensuring that injustice does not dominate the US housing market as it surely would in their absence. In the absence of the protections that Fannie and Freddie bring we always get the same result: predatory lending and high-risk business practices. These schemes have always led to the same result utter financial collapse.
On the legal side of things:
The timeline for a ruling on the motion to stay in the “Fairholme lawsuit ” depends on a few things. The biggest is if Judge Sweeney wants to hear oral arguments or not. If she does, the soonest that will happen is December 19th due to the plaintiff’s scheduling issues. It could then take a few weeks for Judge Sweeney to make a decision. Also, Washington Federal has until Dec. 5th to file their Amicus. We feel that Judge Sweeney may rule against the motion to stay without oral arguments because the decision is that obvious. Without oral arguments, we might see a decision by 12/19. If she does hear oral arguments that will put us right in the middle of the big holiday delay so I wouldn’t expect a decision until the first or second week of Jan. at the earliest.
We also want to note a few things concerning the governments reply in support of their motion to stay. This reply was in response to Fairholme sealed response objecting to the stay yet what is notably absent is any attempt to address the protected portions of Fairholme’s response. This is a very interesting strategy, they obviously are hoping that she makes her decision without considering the certainly damaging facts presented there. As I have said all along, that discovery was sure to produce very incriminating evidence concerning the governments scheme and there will be no defense for this. Their refusal to even address the protected portions confirms that I was correct to assume the government is indeed out of aces.
Rather than address the elephant in the room, the government try’s to argue that just because Fairholme felt so desperate that they filed for an injunction that they should be forced to forfeit the full trial they deserve. Remember the injunction is far different from the full blown trial we are witnessing in Sweeney’s court. The limited amount of evidence that can be introduced in an injunction severely limits the opportunity to reveal the truth. The injunction was filed to stop more quickly the looting of all of Fannie and Freddies profits but the trial is the only way we will unravel all of the governments lies.
I actually took a little time and reread the Lamberth decision in the “Perry injunction”, I don’t recommend that anyone without a legal background even attempt to unravel his distorted logic.I had to suspend all legal reasoning while trying to follow his trapeze act. What Judge Lamberth essentially said is that no one ever should have trusted the U.S. government to keep its word. That our great nation has finally slipped so low that we can not believe a word they say. I challenge that misguided decision and I am certain the Appeals court will as well.
In closing, I just want to say that everything is proceeding very well, and things look great from our view. We continue to be very impressed at the dedication to the truth that our readers display.As you can see by the progress we have made over the last few months this is not in vain. I must say that I am amazed so few believe what is unraveling right before their eyes. I attribute this to two reasons: one is the absolute distrust that people have in our leaders and two, the wishful/delusional thinking on the part of our opponents. Believe it or not this is proving to be very beneficial at this stage of the battle.
This post was delayed as I searched for an appropriate song, I will continue searching and update once we have decided. Keep the faith
Our reader KM requested that we share this song by the Doors “every time I read this blog I got that song running through my head” he said. I have to admit that considering the wild ride we are on it is rather fitting.The lyrics say quite a bit if you listen closely. Thanks KM, here you go: