Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
The government kept them alive unless -- investors to die so say some big institutional investment funds now suing the government over its handling of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
And no less than former solicitor general Ted Olson is leading their charge.
All this goes back to the financial meltdown with a government all the took over the mortgage lenders and place them into something called conservatives -- The idea was to prevent a complete real estate and banking meltdown but now these investors are saying -- but on our dying.
And there an eclectic -- some community banks and insurance companies to pension funds university endowments.
They all say it was their investment rights and tasks that were trampled and worse leaving aside you might feel about Fannie and Freddie.
Do these investors have a case challenging.
Housing and economic Recovery Act of that ran roughshod over them.
Matthew big -- one of the attorneys leading in this case Matthew very good to have you.
A lot of taxpayers that is you know say well we were -- so are your investors in a unique club.
Being exceptionally -- The taxpayers have not been burned they -- one of the amazing things about the Fannie and Freddie story is that.
Next year they taxpayers will be repaid with interest a 189.
Billion dollars plus in.
-- taxpayers have come out ahead in this deal it is the private investors who have been wiped out by the government.
You know this would not be the first time in my life that happen -- never indicates the auto companies that Chrysler right rescue that is the gym rescued two degree.
A bond holders who are typically first in line when everything hits the fan.
We're relegated that a back on the line did not off the line.
-- is that it's kinda what happened here.
Hit it it is and it isn't I think it's actually completely unprecedented for the government take to take ownership of of the company and without resorting.
To bankruptcy procedures completely wipe out the existing shareholders and that would hate to see and I'm certain that that would bankruptcy had to have changed that they would have been -- one way or the other.
Now -- you know 881 of the options available -- FHFA here was to put the companies into receivership rather than conservative shift it's an under receivership.
The FHA that their creditors and but also the equity holders would have had available to them a number of procedural protections.
But for its own reasons treasury in the FHFA chose conservative or ship and that obligates them to conserve and protect the assets of this company.
-- they are gonna raise this with angry -- of good AIG's fame who loses.
Who argued much the -- -- his company was treated her former governor was treated and in this.
In this rescue.
That in fast times frantic drive -- heated times mistakes might be made.
But but did the intent was to save taxpayers not investors.
Taxpayers and that your guys just got.
With the you know the -- -- the stick but it is what it is and we lived an unprecedented times it does deal what he said.
Well -- the irony here is that we're not in those fast times anymore it when we were -- in the frantic times of 2008.
Congress made decisions about how the government would intervene in Fannie and Freddie.
Sony did better you're saying they knew batted -- to turn contract -- -- it's that.
Well they they did know -- they told they told FHFA too.
If they're gonna do it -- -- or -- ship you have to conserve and protect the assets of the united don't do it this way it went in invaded it.
Well I think -- the president's.
That's before their 2014.
Budget tells the story.
We've got that president saying that over the next ten years they're gonna collect 240 billion dollars in profits.
From from Fannie and Freddie and it'll all go straight to treasury.
Well you're onto something big here -- says it's a herculean task ever trying to go after the government.
They're brilliant legal in behind it including -- we will watch very very closely thank you.
Filter by section