Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[miglargu]

from Yahoo Board



PLEASE DO NOT CURSE ON ME IF .....
.

1/ Government explain that the sweep is to save the bailout funds for taxpayers in case FNMA continued to lose and did not have ability to re-pay. It was no intention of " taking " at all --- Sweeney will rule
" Taking Clause does NOT apply ".

2/ Government explain that because FNMA today prove they are solvent, Government therefore retain the bailout funds of 116B, the rest will be returned to FNMA. It was no seizing private property for public use at all --- Sweeney will rule " HERA does NOT apply ".

3/ Government explain that because The Board of FNMA and the right of Shareholders were dismissed since FNMA was placed into C-Ship, FHFA was therefore guardian of the Company to oversee and decide on all operations on behalf of FNMA, including signing the sweep with Treasury ( refer to # 1 above for reasons of sweeping ) --- Sweeney will rule " The fiduciary duty is NOT breach ".

4/ Between 2 options, EITHER 1M Senior Preferreds + 10% interest OR 79.9% Common shares, Government now choose to exercise 79.9% Commons, then release FNMA --- Sweeney will rule " The bailout agreement is NOT breach ".

The case is therefore dismissed. FNMA is released and comes back to NYSE. No further action needed. No financial reform needed. Please share your opinions if

1/ Is it possible the case to go that way ?

2/ Do you want that way or not ? If not, what do you want ?

I am OK if the case goes that way. Everyone is happy. Back to normal life