I had a post all ready to go yesterday where I dissected Treasury official Mary Millers Statement line by line, but I decided that I would no longer dignify the governments lies with such an immediate and detailed response. I would also like to take a minute and address the Obama administration and all those in DC, who are wrapped up in this bizarre scheme. People from all over the world are following my blog and this ever unfolding saga. I remind you this in the hopes that at some point you realize how pathetic and embarrassing it is for the entire world to see the most powerful nation in the world behave like a two bit con man. Yes, it is that obvious.To those of us who are forced to watch and dissect your bizarre/haphazard scheme I must say it can be both sickening and chilling to watch. There’s that word again, I know how much you love it. Did it ever occur to you that when someone finds it necessary to use the word chilling when describing you, you might want to thoroughly analyze your behavior and motives? The way you lie and twist the truth to fit the moment has turned this into a truly Orwellian odyssey. I often say the government has repeated the same tired old lies but its actually worse than that. You have a huge variety and often grossly contradicting stories when it come to Fannie and Freddie. It depends on what agenda you are trying to promote that day. Back in March when you were desperate to fill budget gaps created by the forced budget cuts you projected the GSEs (Fannie and Freddie) would produce around 163.8 billion in revenue to the government over the next 10 years. But when you are essentially trying to con people into letting our profits keep rolling your way you quickly switch gears and paint a doom and gloom message about our future. Finally, I have to ask all the “Mary Millers” in the administration, how much does one have to pay you to lie for a living? How far will you push this? At what point do you realize the damage that you are doing to the integrity of our great country?
I want to remind everyone that when the government and others carelessly throw around the idea that somehow the taxpayers are still on the hook for possibly more losses, this is so far from the truth its almost comical. The 187 billion that Fannie and Freddie borrowed from the government included about 50 billion in interest payments that they paid the government. The 187 billion has been more than paid back by 26 billion. So the reality is the government and taxpayers have already made a 76 Billion dollar return on their investment in Fannie and Freddie. If they were simply to reform and release Fannie and Freddie, they would make another three to four times what they have made to date as well. I would love to be “on the hook” for a 226 billion dollar profit. This is all part of their Orwellian effort to maintain the false narrative.
Though I rarely comment on share price fluctuations, I know many are concerned with the steady decline we saw this week. I want to remind everyone again that this is a very volatile situation. Whenever a company is in such a great state of flux with so many variables price fluctuations are the norm. Remember on March at 18 we were sitting at $3.06 per share we are up substantially in just over 3 months. The bottom line is until DC changes their tune which, by the way, behind the scenes we are gaining momentum, everything relies on our legal cases. To me the day to day price is almost irrelevant, regardless of where the price is the day prior to a favorable judgement we will enjoy extraordinary gains the day after. It is up to each and every one of you to determine your own course of action based on your appetite for risk and what you determine to be the odds for great rewards. I would like to thank everyone for the spirited and informative comments, the letters from your representatives in DC are very enlightening! Keep the Faith!

I am posting this morning to ensure that my second post last night doesn’t overshadow my first. The PLAINTIFFS’ RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER in the Fairholme lawsuit is big news. I am going to re-copy and paste one item I added there last night.

“Government’s assertions, backed by sworn declarations, that the financial markets could be destabilized”by public disclosure of the Government’s internal “projections of the future profitability
of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (or lack thereof) under a range of economic, business and policy scenarios,” Watt Decl. ¶ 7, raise this all but inevitable inference: either the Government’s
public reporting of precisely this same type of information has been misleading, or its alleged concerns about market destabilization are a pretext for some other reason(s) to conceal the requested
information. Moreover, FHFA and Treasury officials have publicly disclosed their decision to wind up the Companies and not permit them to rebuild capital and exit the conservatorships.
5 The financial calamity the Government predicts has not come to pass.”

Note they start off by pointing out that the Mel Watt has offered these brazen lies in sworn testimony. Remember this excerpt from my post on May 31st in regards to the governments motion for a protective order in the Fairholme lawsuit- “I have many thoughts on what I have read but first and foremost I must remind the government that if they had not chosen to commit securities fraud they would not have to produce anything at all. They have entrapped themselves in their own web of lies and now are begging the Judge to wave a wand and magically release them. I can not wait to see Fairholmes response to their many pathetic arguments. Again and again they grossly contradict themselves. One of the most alarming arguments is that somehow by producing factual documents investors may be spooked into not buying Fannis and Freddies bonds. Think about this for a moment, imagine if the CEO of Bank of America or any big financial institution was caught saying something like this? Basically, they are admitting that they have withheld information and have been misleading investors into buying their bonds? I have honestly to wonder if mel Watt is trying to sabotage the governments case completely, his arguments are that bizarre.”
The government is now descending into Bernie Madoff territory here. It is almost incomprehensible that they are pushing it to this point. Make no mistake that my confidence in our victory has grown increasingly as this progresses. My point, last night, was simply to point out what I consider to be investment 101 principles. I said early on that this is a very volatile, unprecedented situation. I am sure that 90 percent of you understand this, but my post was intended for the ten percent who may think that you can stand to make returns of three to seven hundred percent with no risk at all. Keep the Faith!

This is it folks all of our hopes and dreams now lie in the hands of two judges. We can only hope that they are courageous and impartial enough to overturn this purely criminal scheme that our government is trying to get away with. The politicians in DC on both sides of the aisle have made it more than clear that they feel they are entitled to every dime of the profits from Fannie and Freddie. Many have outright made these claims and the silence from the others speaks volumes. It is truly sickening, but these are the facts. All of the money you have invested in these companies hinge on these two cases. I highly suggest you study these two cases in depth and if you have any doubts as to our chances for success you should act accordingly. I personally do not see any way that we could lose both cases, but that does not mean we can’t. I currently place the odds on motion for summary judgement in the Perry injunction case at 7 to 1 in our favor. Up until recently I had this motion at 3-1 in our favor. I am awaiting more data as we speak. The Fairholme lawsuit I would place at 10-1 in our favor. I have received many requests as to my feelings on this so there it is. There are no 100 percent guarantees which are why we are currently trading at $4.50 per share and not $20.00. I will say that if Judge Lamberth grants the motion for summary judgement in the Perry case you will never have a chance to buy at these levels ever again we could quite possibly double in price so rapidly you would not be able to fill even in the ascent. Basically, what I am saying is that if you feel as strongly as I do, time may be very short to get in but if you disagree with me time may also be short to get out. If we lose on the summary judgement its by no means over, but we will likely take a big hit. In the Fairholme lawsuit, I highly doubt Judge Sweeney will side with the government on the protective order but if she does it will be a very bad sign. I hate to discourage anyone from missing out on what may be a gigantic opportunity to make extraordinary gains, but I can not with a clear conscience recommend that anyone invest any money they can not afford to lose. I can assure you I will be with you to the end as this is about far more than making a quick buck in the stock market to me. If we were to lose these cases, it would rock our great nation at its core. America will be forever changed, and the least of our problem will be the dollars we lost on our trades. It is for these reasons that I have devoted a vast amount of time and resources to do everything I can to prevent our country from stepping into this abyss. Keep the Faith!

The following was filed in the Fairholme lawsuit. I have attached a pdf. There is a tremendous amount to analyze here. I will add to this post within an hour. There is a wealth of information in this response. The Appendix is a literal treasure trove. I will copy and paste a few key items here but will be offering more commentary in the coming days. I would like to thank those that have taken the time to add to our discussions in the comments sections. I encourage you to study this and future legal documents and post clips you find important and even offer some commentary. These issues can be very complex, and I know we have some keen legal minds participating here. My favorite clip so far us this one, sound familiar? I warned the government officials weeks ago to be careful about their testimony, this reeks of perjury Mr. Watt. Keep the faith

“The Government’s assertions, backed by sworn declarations, that the financial markets could be destabilized by public disclosure of the Government’s internal “projections of the future profitability
of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (or lack thereof) under a range of economic, business and policy scenarios,” Watt Decl. ¶ 7, raise this all but inevitable inference: either the Government’s
public reporting of precisely this same type of information has been misleading, or its alleged concerns about market destabilization are a pretext for some other reason(s) to conceal the requested information.”

Another great clip-
“A hypothetical example helps illustrate why the protective order sought by the Government is premature and would enable it to withhold responsive nonprivileged materials. Suppose
that Secretary Geithner sent an email to several of his subordinates at Treasury on August 18, 2012 explaining that he had signed the Third Amendment the previous day to use the Companies’
profits to reduce the federal deficit and ensure that existing shareholders will not have access to any such profits. Such an email would be directly relevant, at a minimum, to the Companies’
future profitability and the reasonableness of Plaintiffs’ investment-backed expectations at the time of the Net Worth Sweep—two of the subjects on which the Court authorized discovery.
And it would not be protected by the deliberative process privilege because it post-dates the Third Amendment, the only policy decision discussed. See Judicial Watch, 449 F.3d at 151 (A
document is pre-decisional only “ ‘if it was generated before the adoption of an agency policy.’ ”). Yet the relief sought by the Government would allow it to withhold that probative email.
The Court should reject the Government’s blanket assertion of the deliberative process privilege and make clear that the Government cannot rely on the privilege without providing a
privilege log that explains why each document is properly withheld. Without a log, it is impossible for Plaintiffs or the Court to assess the adequacy of the Government’s privilege claims.”
Is this really “hypothetical”?

6:10:14PLAINTIFFS’ RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER 2

Judge Sweeney has made her order in regards to the proposed briefing schedule in the Fairholme lawsuit. It is basically a repeat of the proposed briefing schedule. I have attached a pdf file of it as well.
Stay tuned later today,it will be a big day here. Fairholme lawsuit news as well as potential key Perry injunction information. This may be blowing wide open. Keep the Faith!

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
No. 13-465 C
(Filed: June 9, 2014)
*************************************
FAIRHOLME FUNDS, INC., et al., *
*
Plaintiffs, *
*
v. *
*
THE UNITED STATES, *
*
Defendant. *
*************************************
ORDER
On June 6, 2014, the parties in the above-captioned case filed a joint status report with a proposed briefing schedule regarding defendant’s motion for a protective order. In light of this proposal, plaintiff’s response to defendant’s motion shall be filed no later than Tuesday, June 10, 2014, and defendant’s reply, if any, shall be filed no later than Tuesday, June 17, 2014. Oral argument regarding defendant’s motion will be held on Thursday, June 19, 2014 at 11 a.m.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Margaret M. Sweeney
MARGARET M. SWEENEY

Order-briefing schedule 2

I know for good reason there has been much confusion in regards to the legal cases involving Fannie and Freddie. I am going to attempt to provide a little clarity on this issue. Followers of this blog know that I have covered the Fairholme lawsuit presided over by Judge Sweeney. I have chosen to cover the Fairholme lawsuit till now for many reasons some of which I can not share at this time some I will. One reason is that until recently I felt that the Fairholme lawsuit was by far our best chance of unraveling and ending the governments scheme to defraud us with the net worth sweep. There are essentially two main legal cases The Perry case and the Fairholme case. When the Perry lawsuit was filed, it was accompanied by an immediate request for injunctive relief. They are foregoing a full blown trial for now and strictly want Judge Lamberth to stop the net worth sweep. The Fairholme case is a full-scale lawsuit. These are completely different legal vehicles, and the trial will take far longer to get a verdict than an injunction. To simplify things I will refer to either the Perry injunction or the Fairholme lawsuit. There are several other legal cases as well, and many of them have been joined with these two. These are the only two we need to be concerned with though. The Perry injunction is Presided over by Judge Royce C Lamberth in the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.An interesting note here is that Judge Royce C Lambert was appointed in 1987 by none other than Ronald Reagan, I doubt he looks kindly at the government sweeping private profits into the treasury. The way I viewed these 2 cases were that in the Perry injunction, they were going for the 80 yard hail mary touchdown pass and the Fairholme lawsuit was more like a hard fought 80 yard touchdown drive. Due to recent developments I no longer think of it as a hail Mary pass. I will be creating a new link on the top of our home page entitled “Perry injunction.” Here I will post legal documents beginning with Perry’s original complaint. In the near future, I will attempt to bring people up to speed on the Perry injunction.
Both cases are at critical points and have progressed far faster than I ever imagined. Things will be moving quickly, and it may not be long before we have another major breakthrough in either case.
The confusion regarding the legal matters has been widespread. There have been numerous news articles that severely mix these two cases up. Some times information from both cases is combined as if there is only one. Other times I have seen hastily prepared articles implying to be about our cases when in fact they contain nothing relevant to our current legal status. It is critical that people understand that there are 2 distinctly separate cases.
I must say that after talking to many people on both sides of the political spectrum I must say that if Judge Royce C Lamberth does not side with Perry in the Perry injunction it will be looked at historically as the day conservatism died in America. I do not believe he will let this happen. America is too great of a nation to go down the failed road of the Soviet Union,Russia or Hugo Chavez. Keep the faith!

Here is the proposed briefing schedule in regards to the Motion for protective order.I have attached a pdf file as well. The big show down is scheduled for June 19th, stay tuned and Keep the faith!

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
)
FAIRHOLME FUNDS, INC., et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) No. 13-465C
) (Judge Sweeney)
THE UNITED STATES, )
)
Defendant. )
)
JOINT STATUS REPORT REGARDING PROPOSED BRIEFING SCHEDULE
Pursuant to the Court’s order dated June 4, 2014, the parties have agreed on a proposed
briefing schedule for resolution of the Government’s pending motion for protective order. Plaintiffs
will file their response to the Government’s motion on or before June 10, 2014. The United
States will file its reply on or before June 17, 2014. In order to accommodate plaintiffs’ counsel’s
longstanding plans to travel out of the country on June 20, the parties agree and propose
that oral argument on the motion be held on June 19, 2014.
Date: June 6, 2014 Respectfully submitted,
STUART F. DELERY
Assistant Attorney General
s/ Robert E. Kirschman, Jr.
ROBERT E. KIRSCHMAN, JR.
Director
s/ Kenneth M. Dintzer /
by Gregg M. Schwind
KENNETH M. DINTZER
Acting Deputy Director
Commercial Litigation Branch
U.S. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 480 Ben Franklin Station

Briefing Schedule 6:14 2

Here is Judge Sweeneys order from today in regards to the governments Motion for Protective order. I have attached a pdf file as well. Commentary to follow. Keep the Faith!

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
No. 13-465 C
(Filed: June 4, 2014)

*************************************
FAIRHOLME FUNDS, INC., et al., *
*
Plaintiffs, *
*
v. *
*
THE UNITED STATES, *
*
Defendant. *
*************************************

ORDER

On May 20, 2014, defendant filed a motion for a protective order in the above-captioned
case. As indicated in open court during the June 4, 2014 status conference, the parties shall file a
joint status report suggesting a briefing schedule regarding defendant’s motion no later than
Friday, June 6, 2014.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Margaret M. Sweeney
MARGARET M. SWEENEY

Order briefing schedule 6:4 2

My post today could be one word, Icahn! This is great news. The fact that Icahn has purchased such a large position will certainly entice even more big guns to enter. I find it very amusing that the government caused this news to break by the one question they asked Fairholme to answer in discovery. The government learned the hard way why you never ask a question you don’t know the answer to. I doubt the government inadvertently left this information out in the first submission. It is more than clear that they wanted the Icahn insider trading news to get fully covered all weekend before they were forced to break the news that Icahn is investing heavily in Fannie and Freddie. They are now resorting to Vladmir Putin style tactics to try and intimidate investors and activists from getting in their way. It is chilling that our own government is continuing to use Soviet/Russian style tactics in their effort to sweep private investors money into the US treasury. Carl Icahn and Bill Ackman have very different investment philosophies as evidenced by their Herbalife rivalry. The fact that they are both in Fannie and Freddie now speaks volumes. Without revealing specific details I have made it clear that large buyers were and continue to buy up our shares, I hope most of you reacted accordingly.
The first thirty pages of corrected appendix to the motion for a protective order is simply a re-submission of the three declarations. On page thirty-one we find the Plaintiffs’ First Set of Requests for Production, dated April 7, 2014. This is followed by the Defendant’s Response To Plaintiffs’ First Set of Requests for Production, dated May 2, 2014. This is a wealth of information, and I will take some time to analyze this in detail and consult with others as well. The final section Fairholme Funds, Inc. and the Fairholme Fund’s Answer to Defendant’s First Interrogatory, dated May 7, 2014 is where the government inadvertently let the cat out of the bag with the Icahn news. I have attached the new documents in yesterdays post. We anxiously await Fairholmes response to all of this. Fairholme will have to respond, and Judge Sweeney will need time to disseminate what is already a colossal amount of information before she can issue a judgement on this.
Keep the faith!

New documents commentary to follow. Inadvertently left out? This is getting interesting Keep the faith!
UNOPPOSED MOTION TO CORRECT APPENDIX
TO DEFENDANT’S
MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER
Pursuant to Rule 7(b) of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims, defendant, the United States, respectfully requests that the Court grant this motion to correct the appendix attached to Defendant’s Motion for Protective Order (Dkt. 49), filed on May 30, 2014. Three documents were inadvertently omitted from the appendix: Plaintiffs’ First Set Of Requests For Production, dated April 7, 2014, Defendant’s Responses To Plaintiffs’ First Set Of Requests For Production, dated May 2, 2014, and Fairholme Funds, Inc. and the Fairholme Fund’s Answer To Defendant’s First Interrogatory, dated May 7, 2014. Plaintiffs Fairholme Funds, Inc., et al. do not oppose the requested correction. The corrected version of the appendix is appended hereto.
Respectfully submitted,
Corrected appendix

Motion to correct