Quote: “ the $191B corresponding to the draws from UST (1:1 SPS LP) were repaid first thing in early conservatorship with the assessments sent to Treasury, ” End of Quote.

If what you are saying is the intended purpose of the Treasury why are the companies continuing to be held in conservatorship? UST repaid early would not enough capital exist for the companies return to the shareholders?

Read the foot notes. 'Capital Deficits'

Wiseman says it's accounting fraud because it is not included in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. The company hides it in a foot note. So, no money for Common Shareholders or Preferred unless the Treasury says so...

Fannie Mae: "Available capital for purposes of the enterprise regulatory capital framework excludes the
stated value of the senior preferred stock ($120.8 billion) and other amounts specified in footnote 2 to the table. Because of these exclusions, we had a deficit in available capital as of March 31, 2024 and December 31, 2023, even though we had positive net worth under GAAP of $82.0 billion and $77.7 billion as of March 31, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively.

We had a shortfall of $238 billion and $243 billion of our available capital (deficit) to the adjusted total capital requirement (including buffers) of $188 billion under the standardized approach of the enterprise regulatory capital framework as shown in the table below as of March 31, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively.

Page 105 Form 10 Q

https://www.fanniemae.com/media/51196/display

Freddie Mac: "Pursuant to the Purchase Agreement we issued to Treasury one million shares of Variable Liquidation Preference Senior Preferred Stock with an initial liquidation preference of $1 billion and a warrant to purchase, for a nominal price, shares of our common stock equal to 79.9% of the total number of shares outstanding. The senior preferred stock and warrant were issued to Treasury as an initial commitment fee in consideration of Treasury's commitment to provide funding to us under the
Purchase Agreement. We did not receive any cash proceeds from Treasury as a result of issuing the senior preferred stock or the warrant. Under the Purchase Agreement, our ability to repay the liquidation preference of the senior preferred stock is limited, and we will not be able to do so for the foreseeable future, if at all."

Page 101 2023 Form 10-K

https://www.freddiemac.com/investors/financials/pdf/10k_021424.pdf

You’re the rudest person on this board. I simply asked you to provide a link. I found it with no help from you.

Senior preferred 1,000

Page 143

Link: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/310522/000095013309000487/w72716e10vk.htm#127;

Not playing the fool. The company records the SPS issued for free, I did not find where the company took a charge.

Wiseman Quote “The $1 billion decrease to additional-paid-in capital to record the initial senior preferred stock issued to Treasury is reflected as a reduction to core capital. “ End of Quote

Was simply asking you to provide that link if you have it.

Quote: “We did not receive any cash proceeds from Treasury at the time the senior preferred stock or the warrant was issued.” End of Quote page 25 Form 10K December 31, 2008

link: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/310522/000095013309000487/w72716e10vk.htm#304;

Will you provide a link to this information in the 10k or 10q where the companies took a charge of $1 billion? Thanks

“The $1 billion decrease to additional-paid-in capital to record the initial senior preferred stock issued to Treasury is reflected as a reduction to core capital as of September 30, 2008.”

Donotunderstand, link to non-moderator political board…

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=174707427

Largest Budget Items are Medicare/ Medicaid, Social Security, Defense Spending and Interest on debt.

https://www.usdebtclock.org/#

The Interest on the Debt includes U.S. Treasury notes and bonds, Government
Account Series (GAS), (SLGs) and other special purpose securities.

The Major problem the budget deficit spending more than income, maximizing out the credit card in the amount of $1.8 Trillion. CANNOT BALANCE THE BUDGET ON $4.9 Trillion! …. US Federal Tax Revenue consists of The Income Tax, Payroll Tax,
Corporate Tax, Duties and Excise Taxes.
Source: Congressional Budget Office.

As I said, the Treasury should send the Fed the middle finger and tell them we’re not paying for the Treasury Securities, Federal Agencies and government sponsored enterprises mortgage-backed securities created out of thin air! That’s over 7 trillion knocked off the National Debt.

Page 3

https://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/files/combinedfinstmt2023.pdf

The fancy term ‘Quantitative Easing’…

Quantitative easing is counterfeiting it's theft and if private citizen's did it they would go to prison. Ignorant politicians consistently spend more money than they can raise and they borrow and worse create money with central banks. Doing that as a private citizen is a criminal offense. Financial regulations have become a shield to protect crooked bankers while politicians and central banks spend money they do not have by simply creating it.
They're stealing our money. Degrading our money is what the Federal Reserve does by degrading their debt but it degrades our savings. Massive money creation effectively produces inflation impoverishing those in society who should be helped. It's theft from the taxpayer and until central bankers and politicians are sent to prison for this theft it will continue.

Quote: “Whoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce... And when you realize that the entire system is very easily controlled, one way or another, by a few powerful men at the top, you will not have to be told how periods of inflation and depression originate.” End of Quote: James A. Garfield President of the United States 1881.
In Reply to this message by Donotunderstand

No Name, You mentioned “inflation/money supply/macroeconomics…

Here’s a start

Quote:
“the arithmetic makes it plain that inflation is a far more devastating tax than anything that has been enacted by our legislature. The inflation tax has a fantastic ability to simply consume capital. It makes no difference to a widow with her saving in a 5 percent passbook account whether she pays 100 percent income tax on her interest income during a period of zero inflation, or pays no income taxes during years of 5 percent inflation. Either way, she is 'taxed' in a manner that leave her no real income whatsoever. Any money she spends comes right out of capital. She would find outrageous a 120 percent income tax, but doesn't seem to notice that 5 percent inflation is the economic equivalent.” End of Quote Warren Buffet

Below is a writing I wrote several years ago trying to explain the difference between a ‘Federal Reserve Note’ and a ‘United States Note’... What most Americans do not understand is that our United States Treasury has stopped creating our money and this power to create money has been given to a private corporation and the name of this corporation is the “Federal Reserve” and it is owned by private shareholders...

What most Americans do not know. It's not that most Americans can't know it's the simple fact that most have not taken the time to know...
The difference between a United States Note and a Federal Reserve Note is that a United States Note represented a "bill of credit" and was inserted by the Treasury directly into circulation free of interest. In other words a United States Note was created by the United States Treasury. The United States Note also known as “greenbacks” ended in 1971.

The Federal Reserve Note is created by the Federal Reserve and upon creation the Federal Reserve makes a profit of 6% as defined as a statutory dividend. In other words instead of the United States Treasury creating the money supply at no cost to the United States Taxpayer the Federal Reserve is creating the money supply and charging the United States Taxpayer 6% on money creation.

What most Americans do not understand is that the Federal Reserve is not the United States Government. The Federal Reserve is a corporation owned by private stockholders which are international bankers. What's deceptive in giving an appearance of impression different from the true one is the wording “Federal,” Certain words and phrases can be misleading. Example: Federal Express (Fed Ex) The word “Federal” in the business model of Federal Express has nothing to do with the Federal Government.

Now how would you like to own a business where you could create money out of nothing and receive a 6% dividend ? And what's amazing the Federal Reserve not only creates money out of nothing but also controls the value of the money that's created. (value: purchasing power). And the poor ole American worker is caught in this system of payment (Federal Reserve Note) which is being devalued by a minimum of 2% per year. (2% Fed target rate of inflation).

On average the American worker gives 40 hours of his or her life every week to receive the U.S Dollar as compensation. Think about that for a moment. On average 40 hours of your Blood, Sweat, and Tears to receive compensation paid in the amount of U.S. Dollars and at minimum the U.S. Dollar is being devalued at a rate of 2% per year. This calculates the U.S Dollar will lose 20% of it's purchasing power in a 10 year period of time ! THIS IS ALARMING.

Former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan made the statements;

Quotes: “In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value.” …

“The Fed is a Privately Held Agency, Completely Independent of U.S. Government-no other agency of government can overrule its actions.” End of Quotes

Definition: Bill of credit is a phrase from Article One, Section 10, Clause One of the United States Constitution. It refers to a document, similar to a banknote, that is issued by a government representing its indebtedness to the holder and typically designed to circulate as money.

This writing was back in 2018 a survey I conducted.

Quote: “The past several years I have taken a survey from customers here at my business. I have asked the question, “Do you realize, that we the American people, are in debt in the amount close to 20 Trillion Dollars?” (at this present time over 20 Trillion): Almost everyone has answered “ Yes.” .... NOT ONE PERSON, could answer my next question,... “Do you know what that money was spent on?”

QUANTITATIVE EASING FACILITATING THEFT

The large scale purchase of Treasury Securities, Agency Mortgage-Backed Securities and Agency Debt by the Federal Reserve, commonly known as quantitative easing (QE), is one of the most dramatic events in history of the United States. At the start of late November of 2008, the Federal Reserve started buying Mortgage-Backed Securities and continuing these purchases to 29 October 2014 and at the end of this bond-buying program the Federal Reserve had purchased an astounding $4.5 Trillion from banks in newly created U.S. Dollars at the expense of the United States Taxpayer.” End of Quote

National Debt, Ha

The Treasury should send the Fed the middle finger and tell them we’re not paying for the Treasury Securities, Federal Agencies and government sponsored enterprises mortgage-backed securities created out of thin air! That’s over 7 trillion knocked off the National Debt.

Page 3

https://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/files/combinedfinstmt2023.pdf

EnoughAlready! I would think the next question after reading the two other post in this thread would be… Well, what part of the law did FHFA / Treasury violate ? I’m glad you asked.

Published October 9, 2023

FINANCIAL SERVICES
Committee

Committee Members
118th CONGRESS

The purpose of this letter is to bring attention to the Committee violations by the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) violating of the Charter Act, and the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness act of 1992 (FHEFSSA); Both as amended by the HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2008, (HERA). The Charter Acts are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's enabling statutes. FHEFSSA and HERA are regulatory statutes, governing the companies' regulators. All are laws passed by Congress.

The conservatorship of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac has continued for over 15 years. I am not sure if Committee Members understand the history of the takeover of the companies and pray the Committee will of your clemency hear me in a few words.

Before the take down of the companies Treasury Secretary Paulson was unaware that the FHFA Regulator had sent both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac letters saying the companies were safe and sound and exceeded their regulatory capital requirements. Paulson told FHFA Director Lockhart that he had to change his agency’s posture on the two companies, and FHFA did exactly that. FHFA sent each company an extremely harsh mid-year review letter, and two days later, Paulson, Lockhart and Fed chairman Bernanke met with the companies’ CEO's and directors to tell them they had no choice but to agree to conservatorship.

When Paulson met with the directors of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to inform them of his intent to take over their companies, neither entity met any of the twelve conditions for conservatorship spelled out in the newly passed HERA legislation. Paulson since has admitted he took the companies over by threat.

HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2008 Page 2734 Twelve Conditions
APPOINTMENT OF THE AGENCY AS CONSERVATOR OR RECEIVER
Link: https://www.congress.gov/110/plaws/publ289/PLAW-110publ289.pdf

The FHFA freely admitted the companies were adequately capitalized.

SECOND QUARTER CAPITAL RESULTS

Minimum Capital
Fannie Mae’s FHFA-directed capital requirement on June 30, 2008 was $37.5 billion and its statutory minimum capital requirement was $32.6 billion. Fannie Mae’s core capital of $47.0 billion exceeded the FHFA-directed capital requirement by $9.4 billion.

Freddie Mac’s FHFA-directed capital requirement on June 30, 2008 was $34.5 billion and its statutory minimum capital requirement was $28.7 billion. Freddie Mac’s core capital of $37.1 billion exceeded the FHFA-directed minimum capital requirement by $2.7 billion.

Link: https://www.fhfa.gov/Media/PublicAffairs/Pages/FHFA-Announces-Suspension-of-Capital-Classifications-During-Conservatorship-and-Discloses-Minimum-and-RiskBased-Cap.aspx#:~:text=During%20the%20conservatorship%2C%20FHFA%20will%20not%20issue%20a,submit%20capital%20reports%20to%20FHFA%20during%20the%20conservatorship.

The FHFA forced Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into a contract with the United States Treasury by Senior Preferred Stock. The Senior Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement is not a law: The SPSPA is an illegal contract between Treasury and FHFA as conservator of the two companies. The Charter Act, FHEFSSA and HERA passed by Congress is the supreme law of the land that governs the two companies.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's regulatory guidelines would have prohibited the companies form paying dividends to the Treasury while severely under-capitalized, but the FHFA suspended those guidelines because the regulator wanted the companies to have to draw more senior preferred stock from the Treasury to pay the annual dividends in cash, ballooning their outstanding senior preferred stock and increase their required annual dividends. FHFA and its Director are executive branch entities and can not make changes to federal laws. Only Congress can change the law. Neither the Charter Act nor did HERA authorize the Treasury to charge a commitment fee.

When Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were taken over by the FHFA no emergency existed and the FHFA had no authority granted by Congress to take over the companies, no authority written in the Charter Act that gave the FHFA right to take down the companies.

Charter Act: SUBSECTION (g) TEMPORARY AUTHORITY OF TREASURY TO PURCHASE OBLIGATIONS AND SECURITIES; CONDITIONS.— EMERGENCY DETERMINATION REQUIRED. Page 16

Under this subsection no emergency existed.

This leads to the question, who authorized the appropriation of taxpayer debt to provide the 200 billion commitment? Certainly not Congress. Treasury took it upon themselves and authorized a 200 billion commitment available in exchange for One Million Shares (1,000,000) with an initial liquidation preference of $1,000 per share. Shares of senior equity illegal and unconstitutional.

Page 5

Link: https://www.fhfa.gov/Conservatorship/Documents/Senior-Preferred-Stock-Agree/FNM/SPSPA-amends/FNM-SPSPA_09-07-2008.pdf

Charter act prohibits the commitment fees (Seniors, warrants, variable liquidation preference). More importantly the actions of Treasury to appropriate 200 billion in taxpayer debt, take non regulatory control of the companies through the SPSPA (require Treasury permission at least 10 separate times) and ownership of more than 50% of the companies requires them under the GAO act and the CFO act to consolidate the GSEs onto the nations balance sheet. The fact that that hasn't happened means the Treasury has violated the 14th amendment to the Constitution by repudiating the 5 trillion plus in debt the Treasury has acquired through their actions since 2008. Their actions have resulted in a takings of the entire enterprise value of the formerly private companies. These actions have necessarily turned the GSEs back into agencies of the executive branch as they were originally created. This is the definition of a major question and also a separation of powers problem since Congress did not authorize the actions Treasury took and continues to take.

In addition 'Deferred Tax Assets' the Treasury forced the companies to write down and record these non-cash expenses making the companies appear bankrupted. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were no where near bankrupted.

Mr. Howard wrote below,

Quote: “Between the time Fannie and Freddie were put into conservatorship and the end of 2011, well over $300 billion in non-cash accounting expenses were recorded on their income statements. These non-cash expenses, most of which were discretionary, eliminated all of the Companies’ capital and forced them, together, to take $187 billion from Treasury. But because accelerated or exaggerated expenses cause losses that are only temporary, Fannie’s and Freddie’s non-cash losses began to reverse themselves in 2012. Coupled with profits resulting from a rebounding housing market, the reversal of these losses enabled both Companies to report in August 2012 sufficient second quarter income to not only pay their dividends to Treasury but also retain a total of $3.9 billion in capital. As soon as it became apparent that a large percentage of the non-cash accounting losses booked during the previous four years was about to come back into income, Treasury and FHFA entered into the Third Amendment to the PSPA. The Third Amendment substituted for the fixed dividend payment a requirement that all future earnings—including reversals of accounting-related expenses incurred earlier—be remitted to Treasury. From the time the Third Amendment took effect through the end of 2014, Fannie and Freddie paid Treasury $170 billion, $133 billion more than they would have owed absent the Amendment.” End of Quote


The United States was not obligated after 1968 to back debt of Fannie Mae. The United States Taxpayers became obligated when the government took over the two companies.

Originally, Fannie Mae had an explicit guarantee from the United States government; if the entity got into financial trouble the government promised to bail it out. This changed in 1968. Fannie Mae became a private stockholder owned company. Fannie Mae securities received no actual explicit or implicit government guarantee. This is clearly stated in the securities themselves, and in many public communications issued by Fannie Mae.

Quote: “Although we are a corporation chartered by the U.S. Congress, the U.S. Government does not guarantee, directly or indirectly, our securities or other obligations. We are a stockholder-owned corporation, and our business is self-sustaining and funded exclusively with private capital. Our common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange and traded under the symbol “FNM.” Our debt securities are actively traded in the over-the-counter market.” End of Quote.

Information from: Fannie Mae form 10K Dec 31, 2007
part I, page 1, item 1.

https://www.fanniemae.com/sites/g/files/koqyhd191/files/migrated-files/resources/file/ir/pdf/quarterly-annual-results/2007/form10k_022708.pdf

Where is "maximize profits for taxpayers" written in the Charter Act? Specifically, in this provision entitled Fee Limitation of the United States:

Neither the Charter Act nor did HERA authorize the Treasury to charge a commitment fee on a line of credit to be paid by the Enterprise. The United States prohibition on assessment or collection of fee or charge to Fannie Mae, (section 304 Fee Limitation). Only Federal Reserve Banks are authorized to be reimbursed of fees, (section 309).

SEC. 304. SECONDARY MARKET OPERATION

Fee Limitation

Quote: “(f) PROHIBITION ON ASSESSMENT OR COLLECTION OF FEE OR CHARGE BY UNITED STATES.—Except for fees paid pursuant to section 309(g) of this Act and assessments pursuant to section 1316 of the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, no fee or charge may be assessed or collected by the United States (including any executive department, agency, or independent establishment of the United States) on or with regard to the purchase, acquisition, sale, pledge, issuance, guarantee, or redemption of any mortgage, asset, obligation, trust certificate of beneficial interest, or other security by the corporation. No provision of this subsection shall affect the purchase of any obligation by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to subsection (c) of this section.” End of Quote. Page 16

Only Federal Reserve Banks are authorized to be reimbursed of fees, (section 309).

SEC. 309. GENERAL POWERS OF GOVERNMENT NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION AND FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION

Federal Reserve Banks to Act as Fiscal Agents (Fannie Mae and GNMA)

Quote: “(g) DEPOSITARIES, CUSTODIANS, AND FISCAL AGENTS.—The Federal Reserve banks are authorized and directed to act as depositaries, custodians, and fiscal agents for each of the bodies corporate named in section 302(a)(2), for its own account or as fiduciary, and such banks shall be reimbursed for such services in such manner as may be agreed upon; and each of such bodies corporate may itself act in such capacities, for its own account or as fiduciary, and for the account of others.” End of Quote. Page 29


Link:

FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION CHARTER ACT
As amended through July 25, 2019

link: https://www.fanniemae.com/sites/g/files/koqyhd191/files/migrated-files/resources/file/aboutus/pdf/fm-amended-charter.pdf

The Senior Preferred Stock, with a variable liquidation preference outlined in the SPSPA and its amendments and share certificates is a new product for the purposes of the Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 as amended by HERA.

Congress directed the Director of FHFA to apply the Administrative Procedures Act to the new products sold to Treasury. The FHFA did not follow the administrative procedures congress required in the plain language of the safety and soundness act.

The Director of FHFA as regulator violated the safety and soundness act and the administrative procedures act by not following the statutory duty to approve new products issued by the GSEs to Treasury for the purpose of stabilizing the secondary mortgage market.

The law required the publication in the federal register of the SPS with their variable rate liquidation preference tied to the commitment. It requires a public comment period, and a rule making process to make the SPS legal. It is the same law that required the capital rule. And the same law that required FHFA a year ago issue the new products law for MBS products. They have ignored this requirement for 15 years.

Director Lockhart Regulator, and Director Lockhart Conservator. Holding both positions as Regulator and Conservator; Conservator Lockhart is required by law to file notice to himself as Regulator.

The Safety and Soundness Act required Director Lockhart as regulator not conservator to approve a new product issued by Director Lockhart acting as conservator FHFA-C (SPS with variable liquidation Preference) to Treasury under the terms of the SPSPA for the purpose of carrying out the secondary mortgage market. He was required as regulator to file notice in the federal register, seek public comment and issue federal regulations for the new product we call the Senior Preferred shares sold to Treasury.

HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2008
Page 2689
SEC. 1321. PRIOR APPROVAL AUTHORITY FOR PRODUCTS.
Link: https://www.congress.gov/110/plaws/publ289/PLAW-110publ289.pdf

The CFO act requires the Treasury department based on published accounting standards to determine if their actions of funding through appropriations, ownership of 100% of the GSEs net worth and non-regulatory control of the GSEs through the SPSPA require the consolidation of the GSEs liabilities onto the nations balance sheet. Do the actions of Treasury under the SPSPA require such consolidation under the plain language of the Chief Financial Officers Act?


The Congressional Budget Office publication states, “Federal Government effective ownership of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.”

The Enterprises have been Nationalized by the Government according to the CBO: The liabilities have not been added to the National Debt nor have the Shareholders been compensated by U.S. Law of the 5th Amendment.

Congressional Budget Office
From: Estimates of the Cost of Federal Credit Programs in 2023

Page 1, Foot Note 1.

Quote: “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have been in federal conservatorship since September 2008. CBO treats the two GSEs as government entities in its budget estimates because, under the terms of the conservatorships, the federal government retains operational control and effective ownership of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. For more discussion, see Congressional Budget Office, Effects of Recapitalizing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Through Administrative Actions (August 2020), www.cbo.gov/publication/56496; and Congressional Budget Office, The Effects of Increasing Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s Capital (October 2016), www.cbo.gov/ publication/52089” End of Quote

Link: https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2022-06/58031-Federal-Credit-Programs.pdf

The United States Treasury in violation of the Charter Act has failed to treat as public debt the transactions of the United States when the FHFA placed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into conservatorship. This obligation was never recorded as public debt as required by law.

The Charter Act the Law of the Land.

Charter Act SEC. 304. SECONDARY MARKET OPERATIONS
(c) Terms and Rates

Quote: “All redemptions, purchases, and sales by the Secretary of the Treasury of such obligations under this subsection SHALL BE TREATED AS PUBLIC DEBT TRANSACTIONS of the United States.” End of Quote Page 14

Link: https://www.fanniemae.com/sites/g/files/koqyhd191/files/migrated-files/resources/file/aboutus/pdf/fm-amended-charter.pdf

IF THE FHFA / TREASURY are allowed to continue with the violations discussed in the above writing, and the illegal contract of the SPSPA agreement is allowed to stand the Committee should give consideration to the FHFA Breach of Contract Bad faith and Unfair Dealings actions of the government in litigation that took place in Judge Lamberth's Court. It took 8 random DC Jurors only 10 hours of deliberations to see right through the Government's false narratives.

It’s bad faith and unfair dealing when the Regulator is authorized to pay down the Senior Preferred Stock and sent the Net Worth without the pay down option. The FHFA Director doesn’t need the Treasury approval to pay down the Senior Preferred Stock the Director has the authority from Congress written in HERA:

HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2008

RESTRICTION ON CAPITAL DISTRIBUTIONS.— page 2731
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—A regulated entity shall make no capital distribution if, after making the distribution, the regulated entity would be undercapitalized. The exception.

Quote: “Page 2732

EXCEPTION.—Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the Director may permit a regulated entity, to the extent appropriate or applicable, to repurchase, redeem, retire, or otherwise acquire shares or ownership interests if the repurchase, redemption, retirement, or other acquisition— ‘‘(A) is made in connection with the issuance of additional shares or obligations of the regulated entity in at least an equivalent amount; and ‘‘(B) will reduce the financial obligations of the regulated entity or otherwise improve the financial condition of the entity.’’.

NOTE: REPURCHASE, REDEEM, RETIRE...

WILL REDUCE THE FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS OF THE REGULATED ENTITY.

Link: https://www.congress.gov/110/plaws/publ289/PLAW-110publ289.pdf

In essence allows the trustees of Fannie and Freddie to go to the market at any time to raise new capital, including new capital with lower dividend coupons, to buy back the Treasury’s senior preferred. Any loyal conservator of Fannie and Freddie would take advantage of this refinancing option to end the bailout arrangement, by paying off the senior preferred in full. The Treasury did not take a Perpetual Equity Investment in the enterprises, the Treasury stated a temporary investment period!

The calculation of the pay down of the liquidation preference of the Senior Preferred Stock, I am asking this committee to apply the law written in the HERA legislation passed by Congress.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/15978NWfDcTtuClMBnwgWFmoPnwK94vWn/view

The liquidation preference has been paid and the Senior Preferred Stock should be canceled.

The law actually exists! FHFA and its Director are executive branch entities. They can not make changes to federal laws. Only Congress can change the law.

Therefore, the U.S. Congress did not give DeMarco the power to take all the future profits of their wards in conservatorship into perpetuity, thus Nationalizing the GSES, based on an Incidental Power in HERA: The Net Worth Sweep.

The U.S. Congress would have given the FHFA more explicit instructions to do so than merely drafting in the HERA to do whatever it feels is in its best interests. DeMarco, this non-elected bureaucrat, has been allowed to steal the companies for the Treasury.

The SCOTUS upholding the NWS does not change the fact the liquidation preference can be paid down and the Senior Preferred Stock redeemed under the terms of the law of HERA. The money kept by the Treasury by the NWS should be applied to principle and 10% interest and over payment should be returned to the companies. $301 billion is more than enough to pay the liquidation preference and redeem the Senior Preferred Stock.

Again, my understanding is any new lawsuit has to prove the FHFA / Treasury broke the law. The mistake of the current lawsuits the attorneys are going after the conservator! The lawyers failed to mention Federal Law. Treasury and FHFA violating Federal statutes. The Federal statutes are the Charter Act, the Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, as amended by HERA, Administrative Procedures Act, and potentially the Chief Financial Officers Act. None of the current litigation makes any claims of violation of these acts. They all challenge the actions of the Conservator and attempted to squeeze the APA and the 5th amendment takings into the Actions of the FHFA-C within the terms of the SPSPA. all have failed to this point.

The SPSPA is a contract between two government agencies which Fannie and Freddie had no say so. The only legal contract is the one with the U.S. Congress, called the Charter Act.

Charter Act, and the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness act of 1992 (FHEFSSA); Both as amended by the HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2008, (HERA).

The Charter Acts are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's enabling statutes. FHEFSSA and HERA are regulatory statutes, governing the companies' regulators. All are laws passed by Congress.

SENIOR PREFERRED STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT (this “Agreement”) dated as of September 7, 2008, between the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY (“Purchaser”) and FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (“Seller”), acting through the Federal Housing Finance Agency (the “Agency”) as its duly appointed conservator (the Agency in such capacity, “Conservator”). Page 1

Link: https://www.fhfa.gov/sites/default/files/2023-07/FNM-SPSPA_09-07-2008.pdf

PUBLIC LAW 110–289—JULY 30, 2008
HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT

HERA is public law not a contract, the Senior Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement is a contract not the law.

FHEFSSA

Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 was amended to establish the Federal Housing Finance Agency. HERA amended certain parts of both FHEFSSA and the Charter Act. AMENDED not to do away with. Safety and Soundness still exists just as the Charter Act still exists.

Page 9 Title I
Establishment of the Federal Housing Finance Agency

FHFA is now the Regulator by reason of HERA.

Links:

FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION CHARTER ACT
As amended through July 25, 2019

link: https://www.fanniemae.com/sites/g/files/koqyhd191/files/migrated-files/resources/file/aboutus/pdf/fm-amended-charter.pdf

HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2008

Link: https://www.congress.gov/110/plaws/publ289/PLAW-110publ289.pdf

SENIOR PREFERRED STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT
Dated September 7, 2008.

link: https://www.fhfa.gov/sites/default/files/2023-07/FNM-SPSPA_09-07-2008.pdf

ALL THE AGREEMENTS

link: https://www.fhfa.gov/Conservatorship/Pages/Senior-Preferred-Stock-Purchase-Agreements.aspx

Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992

https://www.congress.gov/bill/102nd-congress/house-bill/6094/subjects?overview=closed

This is my understanding: Statute of limitations would rely on DOJ guidance for recurring claims due to material changes introduced in the letter agreements. For example, the new increase of liquidation preference for free introduced within the last 6-years. The FHFA / Treasury continue to change the contract, letter agreement dated January 14, 2021, So, the Statute of Limitations are not up. PAGE 6 Liquidation Preference increases dollar for dollar for all the retained earnings of the enterprises.

Link: https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/Executed-Letter-Agreement-for-Fannie-Mae.pdf

I said “Typo error on my part. I should have said, “would have allowed” I know Trump couldn’t fire Watt. ”. Read the whole thread.

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=174682473

Typo error on my part. I should have said, “would have allowed” I know Trump couldn’t fire Watt. Thanks Guido

Anyone new to the board link below…

The Honorable Rand Paul United States Senate Washington, D.C.

Dear Senator Paul,

DONALD J. TRUMP November 1, 2021
Thank you for talking to me about the need to privatize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, two great American companies, and about the question the Supreme Court has raised about what I would have been able to accomplish if I had been able to fire the incompetent Mel Watt from day one of my Administration.

Another Obama/Biden scam in legal trouble was when they allowed the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) to steal the retirement savings of hardworking Americans who had invested in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court has recognized that my Administration was denied the ability to oversee the work of FHFA in violation of the Constitution. The Supreme Court's decision asks what I would have done had I controlled FHFA from the beginning of my Administration, as the Constitution required. From the start, I would have fired former Democrat Congressman and political hack Mel Watt from his position as Director and would have ordered FHFA to release these companies from conservatorship. My Administration would have also sold the government's common stock in these companies at a huge profit and fuly privatized the companies. The idea that the government can steal money from its citizens is socialism and is a travesty brought to you by the Obama/Biden ad ministration. My Administration was denied the time ti needed to fix this problem because of the unconstitutional restriction on firing Mel Watt. It has to come to an end and courts must protect our citizens.

Link: https://assets.realclear.com/files/2021/11/1921_trump_letter_to_rand_paul.pdf

The SCOTUS decision enabled Trump to fire Mel Watt that’s the reason Mark Calabria got the job. The Trump letter to Rand Paul explained it.

Who in their right mind would not agree with Barron’s statement…. “They should have nullified all the decisions done up to that point by unconstitutional single directors and sent HERA back to the drawing board at Congress. Congress should have required an independent commission be created and appointed conservator of a GSE. Imagine if the Commission had to vote on accepting Treasury’s corrupt terms and conditions for its purchase agreements? It would be like just about every other independent agency and would only have needed to be independent when acting as a Conservator.”

Barron was a former state regulator had written regulations and so he is somewhat familiar with the process and what the law usually allows agencies to do. I appreciate the man for taking the time by sharing his knowledge and experience with this board.

Yes, it's a blow to the power of federal agencies. FHFA and its Director are executive branch entities. They cannot make changes to federal laws. Only Congress can change the law. Therefore, the U.S. Congress did not give DeMarco the power to take all the future profits of their wards in conservatorship into perpetuity, thus Nationalizing the GSES, based on an Incidental Power in HERA: The Net Worth Sweep. The U.S. Congress would have given the FHFA more explicit instructions to do so than merely drafting in the HERA to do whatever it feels is in its best interests. DeMarco, this non-elected bureaucrat, has been allowed to steal the companies for the Treasury.

Wise Man is a smart aleck but it’s worth noting what he said…. “ these SPS issued for free” …

The question I had was the SPSPA consummated when no cash changing hands?


Wise Man
Re: Rodney5 post# 753028
Tuesday, 04/18/2023 2:08:20 AM
15 years later, you wonder what $1B SPS was about, on day one of conservatorship.
Also, these SPS issued for free (all others, increased) are an essential evidence of the accounting fraud with today's SPS increased for free, because FnF, in 2008, posted a charge on the Additional Paid-In Capital account (shareholders' pocket) to reflect that they were securities issued for free.
Today, with the APIC exhausted, it's debited from the Retained Earnings account (Core Capital and Common Equity too).
But FnF now don't post the gifted SPS on the Balance Sheets, in order to don't post this offset and peddle the big lie of "FnF build capital".

Playing the fool is not an option, Mr. Pro Se, after 10 years messing around in the U.S. courts. It's called abuse of court process.
Can't wait to see the penalties.

Thanks Barron,

I found the discussion.

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=171709055

Rodney5
Re: None
Monday, 04/17/2023 9:10:47 PM
I have a question, when the SPSPA took place did any money change hands from the Treasury Department on to the balance sheet of the companies? Recorded in the amount of $1 billion?

Bryndon
04/17/23 9:34 PM
#753030 RE: Rodney5 #753028
I'm pretty sure it was a non-cash activity.

Fannie Mae's December 31, 2008 10-K:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/310522/000095013309000487/w72716e10vk.htm#304;

“Treasury Department bought 1million shares of Senior Preferred Shares for $1,000 per share or $1 billion dollars.”

I’m pretty sure no money ever changed hands from the Treasury to the companies. We had this discussion several months back.

amended (past tense) · amended (past participle)
make minor changes

The Charter Acts are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's enabling statutes. FHEFSSA and HERA are regulatory statutes, governing the companies' regulators. All are laws passed by Congress. Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 was amended to establish the Federal Housing Finance Agency. HERA amended certain parts of both FHEFSSA and the Charter Act. AMENDED not to do away with. Safety and Soundness still exists just as the Charter Act still exists.

It was explained to you yesterday.

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=174654110

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=174653835

A ‘Contract’ by definition is a written agreement in the English language; but I do understand your reasoning when suggesting using only the wording written in the SPSPA.

I will not stop using the word contract. It sounds more convicting to speak, illegal ‘Contract’ than to speak illegal Agreement. Face it man the FHFA sold the Shareholders to the Treasury and paid us nothing.

Let’s visit your wording “SEPARATE ACCOUNT FOR THE REPAYMENT OF PRINCIPAL”. This statement is confusing the reader ‘Separate Account’ … I suggest the term, deem the Net Worth Sweep paid in full and cancel the Senior Preferred Stock: more in line with reality of the self dealing between the two government agencies.

JOoa0ky, I say this as humbly as I know how. I want you to know not casting any stones at you. After reading your post a scripture came to my remembrance.

“ Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.” Proverbs 26:4-5

Here’s your answer to your post. I encourage you to repent and quit promoting theft from the shareholders. Best Regards

Hey Lady, there’s not an obsession the fact is Barron is one of the few on this board that has actually provided a way out of this prison sentence. The repeated information I keep posting is for anyone new on this board that’s in the dark. Do you get it?

You can return now to your cheerleading for the cram-down, anyone paying attention on this board knows you’re a fraud.

SPSPA which is a contract. 4617f bars courts from questioning the actions of a conservator. The stockholders’ statutory claims are barred by the Recovery Act’s strict limitation on judicial review. See 12 U.S.C. § 4617(f).

Our friend Barron brought this to our attention. You have to prove FHFA / Treasury broke the law.

Notice: the argument doesn’t include the conservator at all. The argument is the FHFA / Treasury violation of the law.

Barron said, “ I propose claims alleging illegal exaction due to Treasury and FHFA violating Federal statutes that any district court has jurisdiction over. The Federal statutes are the Charter Act, the Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, as amended by HERA, Administrative Procedures Act, and potentially the Chief Financial Officers Act.

None of the current litigation makes any claims of violation of these acts. They all challenge the actions of the Conservator and attempted to squeeze the APA and the 5th amendment takings into the Actions of the FHFA-C within the terms of the SPSPA. all have failed to this point.”

Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992

https://www.congress.gov/bill/102nd-congress/house-bill/6094/subjects?overview=closed

This is my understanding.

PUBLIC LAW 110–289—JULY 30, 2008
HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT

HERA is public law not a contract, the Senior Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement is a contract not the law.

FHEFSSA

Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 was amended to establish the Federal Housing Finance Agency. HERA amended certain parts of both FHEFSSA and the Charter Act. AMENDED not to do away with. Safety and Soundness still exists just as the Charter Act still exists.

Page 9 Title I
Establishment of the Federal Housing Finance Agency

FHFA is now the Regulator by reason of HERA.

Links:

FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION CHARTER ACT
As amended through July 25, 2019

link: https://www.fanniemae.com/sites/g/files/koqyhd191/files/migrated-files/resources/file/aboutus/pdf/fm-amended-charter.pdf

HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2008

Link: https://www.congress.gov/110/plaws/publ289/PLAW-110publ289.pdf

SENIOR PREFERRED STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT
Dated September 7, 2008.

link: https://www.fhfa.gov/sites/default/files/2023-07/FNM-SPSPA_09-07-2008.pdf

ALL THE AGREEMENTS

link: https://www.fhfa.gov/Conservatorship/Pages/Senior-Preferred-Stock-Purchase-Agreements.aspx

Charter Act, and the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness act of 1992 (FHEFSSA); Both as amended by the HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2008, (HERA).

The Charter Acts are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's enabling statutes. FHEFSSA and HERA are regulatory statutes, governing the companies' regulators. All are laws passed by Congress.

SENIOR PREFERRED STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT (this “Agreement”) dated as of September 7, 2008, between the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY (“Purchaser”) and FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (“Seller”), acting through the Federal Housing Finance Agency (the “Agency”) as its duly appointed conservator (the Agency in such capacity, “Conservator”). Page 1

Link: https://www.fhfa.gov/sites/default/files/2023-07/FNM-SPSPA_09-07-2008.pdf

The SPSPA is a contract between two government agencies which Fannie and Freddie had no say so. The only legal contract is the one with the U.S. Congress, called the Charter Act.

In 1969, the median home sale price in the United States was approximately $27,900. It’s interesting to note that housing prices have significantly increased since then. If we consider inflation, the difference in value between 1969 and 2024 is quite substantial. In fact, housing prices are 974.33% higher in 2024.

I would think that’s a lame argument you wrote.

The obsolete $2.25B limit at the time created had as much purchasing power as the $200B limit today? In 1969 what was gas maybe 0.40 cents a gallon, new car $3,500?? The $2.25B is the price Congress was willing to put up for providing a public service. Factoring in inflation $200B is not a lot for $7 Trillion today.

It’s been done. I’m not a lawyer as I said, I do not know how to proceed in filing a lawsuit. I put the man in contact with the person that does. Thanks for asking

Yes, much simpler way just increase the amount of the government backstop that was already in place. But that would not have provided the door to kill the companies, the SPSPA provided that door.

Clarence, I’m not sure if you realize in exchange for their Public Mission Congress provided $2.25B. Why didn’t Congress update the obsolete $2.25B limit to the amount of $200B? Absolutely no need for the SPSPA contract.

FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION CHARTER ACT
PURCHASE OF OBLIGATIONS BY TREASURY; CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS

The Secretary of the Treasury shall not at any time purchase any obligations under this subsection if such purchase would increase the aggregate principal amount of the Secretary’s, then outstanding holdings of such obligations under this subsection to an amount greater than $2,250,000,000. Page 14

Charter
Link: https://www.fanniemae.com/sites/g/files/koqyhd191/files/migrated-files/resources/file/aboutus/pdf/fm-amended-charter.pdf

ewtrader, I also noticed the conflicting reporting in volume. Either way taking the larger number Fannie Mae’s common stock outstanding 1,158,087,567… Friday’s 14,750,452 million shares traded calculates 1.28 percent less than 2 percent of all shares outstanding not a large number.

Maybe, the Market Maker took the stops out in order to fill a large order? I’ve read the MM’s will run the price up to sell and bring the price down to buy. For whatever reason that’s a significant difference in price at the end of the day.

In exchange for their Public Mission Congress should have updated the obsolete $2.25B limit in the amount of backup. But that’s not what happened Paulson wanted to kill the companies. And this attempt to kill off the companies was through the illegal contract the SPSPA by creating the SPS.

The SPSPA itself states that the SPS are authorized by section 304…

SENIOR PREFERRED STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT
dated as of September 7, 2008

Page 1

B. Purchaser is authorized to purchase obligations and other securities issued by Seller pursuant to Section 304(g) of the Federal
National Mortgage Association Charter Act, as amended (the “Charter Act”). The Secretary of the Treasury has determined, after
taking into consideration the matters set forth in Section 304(g)(1)(C) of the Charter Act, that the purchases contemplated herein are
necessary to (i) provide stability to the financial markets; (ii) prevent disruptions in the availability of mortgage finance; and
(iii) protect the taxpayer.

Link: https://www.fhfa.gov/sites/default/files/2023-07/FNM-SPSPA_09-07-2008.pdf

Fannie Mae’s common stock outstanding 1,158,087,567

5 million shares traded calculates 0.43 percent less than 1/2 percent of 1 percent of all shares outstanding.

That’s a bald face lie!

Quote: “ The reality is that due to the c-ship rules, the govt can't cancel any existing equity under c-ship.” End of Quote WRONG

Apply the law lady…

It’s bad faith and unfair dealing when the Regulator is authorized to pay down the Senior Preferred Stock and sent the Net Worth without the pay down option. The FHFA Director doesn’t need the Treasury approval to pay down the Senior Preferred Stock the Director has the authority from Congress written in HERA:

HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2008

RESTRICTION ON CAPITAL DISTRIBUTIONS.— page 2731
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—A regulated entity shall make no capital distribution if, after making the distribution, the regulated entity would be undercapitalized. The exception.

Quote: “Page 2732

EXCEPTION.—Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the Director may permit a regulated entity, to the extent appropriate or applicable, to repurchase, redeem, retire, or otherwise acquire shares or ownership interests if the repurchase, redemption, retirement, or other acquisition— ‘‘(A) is made in connection with the issuance of additional shares or obligations of the regulated entity in at least an equivalent amount; and ‘‘(B) will reduce the financial obligations of the regulated entity or otherwise improve the financial condition of the entity.’’.

NOTE: REPURCHASE, REDEEM, RETIRE...

WILL REDUCE THE FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS OF THE REGULATED ENTITY.

Link: https://www.congress.gov/110/plaws/publ289/PLAW-110publ289.pdf

In essence allows the trustees of Fannie and Freddie to go to the market at any time to raise new capital, including new capital with lower dividend coupons, to buy back the Treasury’s senior preferred. Any loyal conservator of Fannie and Freddie would take advantage of this refinancing option to end the bailout arrangement, by paying off the senior preferred in full. The Treasury did not take a Perpetual Equity Investment in the enterprises, the Treasury stated a temporary investment period!

The calculation of the pay down of the liquidation preference of the Senior Preferred Stock, I am asking this committee to apply the law written in the HERA legislation passed by Congress.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/15978NWfDcTtuClMBnwgWFmoPnwK94vWn/view

The liquidation preference has be paid and the Senior Preferred Stock should be canceled.

The law actually exists! FHFA and its Director are executive branch entities. They can not make changes to federal laws. Only Congress can change the law.

Therefore, the U.S. Congress did not give DeMarco the power to take all the future profits of their wards in conservatorship into perpetuity, thus Nationalizing the GSES, based on an Incidental Power in HERA: The Net Worth Sweep.

The U.S. Congress would have given the FHFA more explicit instructions to do so than merely drafting in the HERA to do whatever it feels is in its best interests. DeMarco, this non-elected bureaucrat, has been allowed to steal the companies for the Treasury.

The SCOTUS upholding the NWS does not change the fact the liquidation preference can be paid down and the Senior Preferred Stock redeemed under the terms of the law of HERA. The money kept by the Treasury by the NWS should be applied to principle and 10% interest and over payment should be returned to the companies. $301 billion is more than enough to pay the liquidation preference and redeem the Senior Preferred Stock.