And Bill, I do want to start off
particularly with the investigation of
course that you brought to light, that
Bloomberg Reports brought to light prior
to that and the documents that are at
the center of that and where exactly
those mortgage documents originated from
and how they got to your desk.
Well, those are public documents.
Anybody who uh frankly can do some
research with Google and get to county
websites can easily find these
documents. you know, the media,
including yourself, it sounds like, are
going to try to make this into some kind
of witch hunt or something like that.
Quite the contrary. Uh, this is
self-evident. This is black and white
stuff. And frankly, the fact that the
media and so many people are asking
questions in the elite class about this
goes to show that people think that
there are rules for some people and
rules for other people. Mortgage fraud
is prosecuted every day in this country.
And I'm sorry to say, not really,
though, that a politician uh or a public
official in this case is now the subject
of mortgage fraud. Normal people have to
deal with this nearly every day in this
country. This is nothing new. Defrauding
people is nothing new. And now all of a
sudden that you have somebody very
powerful. Now people have to question
it. It doesn't make any sense to me. Uh
and I believe that I believe that she
committed mortgage fraud. When you look
at the documents uh that you have, the
publicly available documents, I am
curious if whether anyone whether you or
anyone at your agency uh had a chance to
actually speak to Lisa Cook, her lawyers
or any representatives about what you
found in those documents.
Obviously, while I respect the question,
uh anything that has to do with the
federal investigation, I am not going to
comment on. Uh however, I would say what
is within the confines of the of the
referral letter of which I'm willing to
speak about. What is your involvement in
the investigation, Bill?
Well, as you know, I'm the regulator of
Fanny and Freddy as well as the
conservator of Fanny and Freddy. And so,
this is right in the bullseye of what my
job is. I promised before the Senate
before I was confirmed by the Senate
that I would investigate mortgage fraud.
And I'm not going to be intimidated by
anyone. I'm not going to be intimidated
by the media, the politicians. They can
say whatever they want. If it's a
Republican who's committing mortgage
fraud, we're going to look at it. If
it's a Democrat, we're going to look at
it. if it's a wealthy politician or a
lawyer, um, we're going to look at it.
So, we're not just looking at everyday
people. And I'd say the one thing, Roma,
which is that we refer every we refer
people almost every day. I refer people
every week on a minimum uh, to the
Department of Justice for mortgage
fraud. This is literally what I am
required to do underneath the Housing
and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, which
is to ensure the safety and soundness of
the mortgage market. When you say you're
referring, you're talking about just
rank and file people going through your
own docu agency documents. Is that a
routine process or is this something uh
that has been very specifically started
over the last uh you know few weeks or
months?
We look at fraud generally. We say look
if everybody and anybody who knows about
mortgage fraud, they can go to fraud
tips at fhfa.gov.
We will take in all of the requests and
all of the submissions that people have.
We've poured through many of these tips.
We have seen just an insane amount of
tips on mortgage fraud. Mortgage fraud
is a huge issue in this country. So, we
get it from fraud tips at fhfa.gov. We
get it through traditional other means
whether it be by mail or what have you.
Uh and also there's stuff there's stuff
in the media all the time as it relates
to mortgage fraud. So, we will take it
from anywhere and everywhere. And again,
our main focus is on the safety and
soundness of the mortgage market.
Okay, that makes sense. So, I guess my
question to you, Bill, is was there some
kind of tip off uh to look into Lisa
Cook's documentation specifically?
As I have said publicly, there was a tip
that we received. I do not comment on
the source identity or any other means
that we use during a federal
investigation as it pertains to things
that are outside of the referral letter.
Uh you can imagine that uh if we start
exposing whether it be on this
investigation or other investigations,
where we receive tips from, where we get
whistleblowers from, this is a very
serious thing. And so when people are
trying to, in my view, intimidate
whistleblowers, intimidate tipsters. Uh
I strongly condemn that. And if people
have mortgage fraud, I encourage them to
go to fraud tips at fhfa.gov and send us
those mortgage tips. Bill, have you been
looking into any other Fed officials or
any other government officials on
something like this? Have there been any
tips um to look into those?
Again, I'm not going to comment on any
specific uh investigations other than
the ones that uh either have been made
public by other people or that we feel
comfortable uh speaking to and that
pertains to things within the confines
of the referral letter. uh when we talk
about that referral letter and you know,
Bill, you you've seen the push back on
this and we should kind of point out
here that part of the concern right now
isn't so much whether she or anyone else
out there committed fraud, but I think a
lot of people would like to know whether
there is more of a coordinated.
That is the issue because we've spent
that is the issue because you've been
interviewing me now for two minutes and
you keep asking me about all of these
tangential issues instead of asking
about, you know, did she sign these
documents? I believe she did sign these
documents. But is it is it is it
mortgage fraud to say that you live in
one area and not another area? Yes, it
is mortgage fraud. So, you're not
focusing on the fraud. You're focusing
on the investigators for purposes of
trying to undermine what it is that she
did allegedly and what it is that
mortgage fraud and the risk that
mortgage fraud poses to the system. And
we're not going to be intimidated. I
mean, we we swore an oath and we are
going to continue to prosecute mortgage
fraud. It doesn't matter whether it's a
Republican, a Democrat, a public
official or Joe Blow on the street.
Absolutely. We are in agreement for
that. But what we are doing here is we
are actually focusing on both issues,
both the potential for fraud, and we are
digging deeper into that. And we should
point out that Bloomberg has made
concerted efforts to reach out to Lisa
Cook and her representatives, to the
Fed, as well as folks in the White House
and administration beyond you. At the
same time, Bill, we also have raised
concern about whether this might be a
weaponization of your office, a
weaponization of the White House. And I
am curious if there has been direct
I don't know guidance from the White
House to pursue this.
We discovered this within the confines
of our uh charter that Congress has
given us. We continue to receive tips
within the confines that Congress has
given us. Uh, as I said, people can go
and email us. They can send us tips. We
encourage that to happen. Uh, and that's
how this was sourced and it's going to
continue to be sourced. And, you know,
we're just because now, you know,
somebody said to me, uh, earlier today,
they said, you know, this is mortgage
fraud is, uh, being controversial by
some people in the media because you've
really hit on power. And that struck me
because I'm like, you know, shouldn't
power be against mortgage fraud? It just
doesn't make sense to me now that you
have somebody who's in this type of
position and now it's controversial and
maybe now mortgage fraud isn't mortgage
fraud. I mean, you saw the Federal uh
reserve president from Kansas City. That
was quite an odd exchange that he had
about, you know, uh blaming the forms
and stuff like that. Let's call it what
it is. People have a responsibility and
people in power especially have a
responsibility to read legal documents
before they sign them. Uh well, I mean
to that point here, I mean we we there's
been a lot of talk about a report that
the Philadelphia Fed put out uh I think
back in 2023 specifically on this issue
uh of owner occupancy fraud. Basically,
the idea of putting on a mortgage
application that you're going to use
something at your primary residence and
get to get a lower mortgage rate. What
is that which is seems to be at the
heart of the documents that you uh
posted with regards to Lisa Cook. Um it
was a pretty high number, something like
a third. And in that report, they
specifically used the phrase that this
type of practice is quote broad-based
across the US. Now, that's back in 2023.
I am curious as to what measures uh the
authorities, whether your agency or
other agencies can take to actually
reduce that trend of owner occupancy
discrepancies.
We are working very actively on it. I
appreciate the question. And if you look
at my Twitter feed, uh if you look at my
testimony, uh we have made mortgage
fraud a huge priority since the
beginning. I didn't know any of these
people were committing mortgage fraud
when I, you know, came on the job. I
mean, I had heard about, you know,
different public reports and stuff like
that, but I, you know, the amount of
referrals I am shocked now that I'm in
office with how much mortgage fraud has
gone on. So, uh, we have taken I saw Ted
on another network. Hold on, let me
finish. Hold on, let me finish. We we we
I heard on another network they said,
"Well, can't you use AI to do this?"
That's exactly what we did. Okay? We did
months ago. We went and we we partnered
with Palanteer at Fanny May. We held a
massive press event and we said, "Look,
everybody beware. We are looking for
mortgage fraud. We brought in Palunteer.
We have made tremendous efforts globally
across the population, across the data
set, across the data set of loans from
Fanny May."
Yeah. And it's startling to me that
because you have one Fed governor, you
know, you try to make an excuse for it
instead of saying this is wrong and this
is prosecuted every day of the week for
other people.
How many referrals have you made for
some sort of criminal investigation?
A lot. A lot. I I do sometimes I do
multiple per day and certainly multiple
per week. and my agency along with the
inspector general in my agency works
handinand with the department of justice
has done it under the Biden
administration did it under the Obama
administration uh did it under the first
Trump administration mortgage fraud is
prosecuted every day in this country and
as long as I'm in this seat we're going
to continue to eradicate fraudsters
wherever we find them
so it sounds like mortgage fraud is I
don't want to say uh common but it's not
uncommon either do you think there's a
plausible reason for your findings
people do move and they don't always
have a chance to update paperwork and so
paperwork gets left behind or is out of
date. Do you think that that's a
possibility here?
I'm not sure. I totally understand the
question. I mean, as a general matter
matter, I believe that occupancy fraud
is wrong. I believe that when people
sign a piece of paper and they go to a
bank and they say that they represent to
a bank uh that they're going to do
something and then they do something
different, I believe that that is bank
fraud. I believe that that potentially
is wire fraud and I believe that that is
in the case of mortgages often mortgage
fraud. So, uh, you know, we have rules
in this country and I just say this, you
know, what is the point of laws if
they're not going to be followed in this
country? And if people don't like the
laws that are on the books, well then go
and change the law. But if we have laws
and if I promised, which I did promise
the Senate to uphold the laws and follow
the law and the statute, we have to
follow the law and the statute always.
Bill, I want to transition now to uh
Fanny May and Freddy Mack and the
possibility of an IPO of these uh
government sponsored entities. Um what
assurances? Well, first of all, can you
give us an update on where things stand
with this potential IPO?
Well, the president uh decided many
years ago to not sell this asset. It was
one of the best decisions that's ever
been done in my opinion from the
presidency as it relates to assets that
the US government has had. Why? because
people wanted to sell it to investors
for 100 billion, 150 billion. I think
that number is north of a 500 billion
now that these assets are worth since
taking office. Not just focusing on
mortgage fraud and other systemic issues
like safety and soundness mandates like
we just spent the last 10 minutes on.
Um, but is also focused on driving value
and treating Fanny May and Freddy Mack
as if they're businesses, taking cost
out of these businesses that is
redundant and unnecessary. uh and also
making sure that we are uh always
thinking about how do we within the
confines of the law and in the best
interest of the American people run
these things as businesses. So if people
aren't performing, we get rid of them.
We don't keep them around for years and
years and years and decades just because
they're politically connected. And so I
think that this has enabled the Fanny
May and Freddy Mack story to really uh
with President Trump's help unlock a lot
of value for the American people. And
it'll be very interesting to see what
the president decides to do in this
regard.
Well, with regards though, I mean I mean
I was looking at the video that you guys
put out. I think it was came through the
White House's account uh about the great
American mortgage company. So basically
the combination of these two also what
does appear to be a re rebranding of
your agency uh and this US uh financial
technology segment which I guess would
sort of help with regards to the
securization. Now is would is the idea
all of that bill would be under the same
umbrella and I assume that you would be
uh at the helm.
Well, we'll see. I mean, you know, these
these companies are in conservatorship
as you know, which basically means that
the president uh is in charge of these
companies. Uh and there was a Supreme
Court ruling which made that very clear.
Uh I would say that any and all options
are on the table. One of the things that
I've been focused on Roma has been since
getting in the seat is on creating
value. Now what the president ultimately
decides to do with that value is
entirely up to him. But we had a thing
called common securization solutions.
Nobody understood what this thing was
you know generally out there. And so we
decided to rebrand it as US fintech and
really focus on what it is which is
financial technology. I believe this
business is worth billions and billions
of dollars. Uh it was previously
neglected in my view. Fanny May and
Freddy Mack have put almost a billion
dollars into this platform and so we're
unlocking value there. And then with
Fanny and Freddy, we'll see. We'll see
if the name has changed. We'll see if
these things are there. But we're trying
to aspire to a new tomorrow. You know,
Fanny May and Freddy Mack were these
once nearly bankrupt assets or bankrupt
assets many people would say. Uh and
we're trying to revitalize those. These
should be great American icons. We are
the greatest economy in the world and we
have a great president and we are going
to use these assets to benefit the
American people and get the most value
out of these assets that we can. Do do
you have any sense of a timetable of
maybe when we'll uh that will either get
done or at least we'll get a little bit
more guidance the public will get more
guidance on when that will be done.
That'll entirely be up to the president.
The only one who knows that it is in his
brain and so I'll let him decide on
timing of course. Uh, but I would say
that uh, you know, the president's very
interested in this issue and it's very
nice to have a president who cares about
Fanny May and Freddy Mack.