Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Donotunderstand]

WOW

I wonder if say 50% of that (role of conservator - some prior cases - limit on FDIC) was not in the original plaintiff brief and is being repeated BUT TO NEW EARS

At same time - it almost seems like Lamberth ruling as he did woke up these attornies and got them mad and I bet they dug up more prior cases to support their arguments

At same time - now these attornies can argue here is what the Judge did ---- if you follow that then for example the FDIC can eat up all the capital of every bank in the country..... (may be an exaggeration but it is a reasonable extrapolation of how Perry states the Judges logic)

QUESTION to those who read and read and attornies

A. Was a lot of this in the original plaintiff motion

B. What is seriously new and cool

C. HELP me understand --- did not Perry file an appear with the DC Circuit Appeals court ? And if so - have we seen it? And why would it be different than this fun to read piece

(I myself agree with a lot - and even with my money on the table I can see where our attys have stretched -- but that is their job - and as I understand if Lamberth is wrong ONE place - it goes back for a redo -- maybe by a three judge panel)

AMEN - thanks for the link