There is actually very little in your post that I disagree with. But some of it I see from an alternative vantage point. I'll try to break it down succinctly.
1. There are valid concerns raised in many camps about the manipulation of numbers and concealment of risks that led to conservatorship. Some blame the government, now some blame the auditors. But the truth is that the blame lies within the GSEs, themselves. Period. The issuance of $ billions in preferred shares in the prior 2 year period is an absolute disgrace.
2. There is ZERO secrecy about many in government wanting to reform housing finance, even including winding down the GSEs.
3. HERA establishes no imperative to wipe out shareholders. In fact, its blatant intent is exactly the opposite. HERA specifies clear conditions for receivership.
4. I have said FOREVER that Amendment 3 was an illegal overreach and should be modified or voided. Do I think budgetary pressure played a role in seizing money to keep the government afloat? Well, I was the only poster on this board that kept bringing up Paul Ryan's published statements indicating this was exactly what was up in 2012. Of course I got reviled and shouted down because my view cast aspersions on the ever-popular Trump campaign element that has dominated board discussions for the last year.
5. Amendment 3 is a TAKINGS claim. It is the key element in the Fairholme suit and a simple black and white question of law that requires no document discovery to be heard by the Court of Claims. Three years of delays have resulted because their attorneys have initiated a wild goose chase for documents that bear little-to-no relevance to their case.
Contrary to often-expressed sentiment to the opposite, I am no blind devotee of everything the government has done in Fanniegate. But I do feel compelled to speak up when the profiteering motive of some leads to a hysteria of condemnation for everything and anything our government does or stands for because, warts and all, this is still the best country in the world to live in. I, for one, stand up during the National Anthem.
I bought FNMAS shares to make a modest profit. My investment thesis had a lot to do with the proliferation of lawsuits beginning with Jacobs, Hindes and the conclusion that the injection of additional layer upon layer of claims, counterclaims and crushing amounts of documents demanded as "discovery" would push FNMA beyond the brink of receivership in late 2017. My bet is that the legal empire has doomed the GSE empire.
I am no hypocrite. I am not cheering for Fannie to fail. If the suits actually prevail, I will see much larger returns than I initially expected. And if all the pfd shares get cancelled and given to support some minority housing initiative, then I'll move on and await the arrival of the next Cabrini Green project. Cheers.
JMHO.
