Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[ano]

warrant is an illegal exaction”

Hi Obi, would like your opinion on:

In the AIG Starr v. United States, Case 1:11-cv-00779-TCW Document 443 https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/StarrvUS06152015.pdf

Judge Wheeler ruled the warrant is an illegal exaction,(details below) later this case was overruled because of lack of standing and AIG did not participate in the suit, and then the supreme court refused to hear the case, but the initial order of Judge Wheeler was not overruled and keeps applying to FnF, so it is impossible for the government to even own, let alone execute the warrant, these legal texts cannot be misunderstood right?

Ano, let's narrow it down to specifics.

is it Judge Wheeler's opinion about an illegal exaction by a warrant being converted into Senior C preferred shares with voting rights in a deal made by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York under the Federal Reserve Act 13(3) with AIG that was not disagreed with by the Court of Appeals for the Federal District?

yes, this opinion clearly states “the government” (doesn’t matter who specifically as all run under the same umbrella with more or less the same powers) in several paragraphs with a dozen of lawsuits as backup, it is not allowed by statue to take ownership and or voting right of a company, and indeed although broad powers are allowed a takeover is not allowed in HERA nor any other statue that I’m aware of, so it looks like the basics although overruled in this case, still apply to our case , FHFA did not receive congressional power to takeover FnF with voting power, it clearly is a steps outside conservatorship too as the only mandate would be to conserve and preserve

For example, the Court of Appeals for the Federal District in Note 25 Appendix A, p. 41a states:

Quote:
________________________________________
In view of our decision that Starr lacks direct standing to pursue the Equity Claims, there is no need for further proceedings on remand regarding the merits of those claims. https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/17-540-petition.pdf
________________________________________

Of course the government is in a difficult position but lack of standing doesn’t resolve the issue on hand, in our case we do have standing so the same basics apply to us here, the government cannot force a company to voluntary agree to a 79.9% giveaway of the company, as that is not the job of a conservator statue and as judge wheeler said “There is no law permitting the Federal Reserve to take over a company and run its business in the commercial world as consideration for a loan.”

so it is impossible for the government to even own, let alone execute the warrant, these legal texts cannot be misunderstood right?

Is it impossible for the US Government to own and execute a specific warrant or own and execute warrants in general?

What law makes either case an impossible one?

The statue of a conservatorship does not allow (gave permission to) the treasury to own warrants that entitle them to more than the initial loan

The Government in the AIG case is the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, not the entire US Government with all its various agencies.

All various agencies are bound by the powers congress gave them, and nowhere it is allowed to takeover ownership of a company in conservatorship, conservatorship is about giving loans and payback, not ownership

The AIG case is related specifically to the assertion that "there is nothing in the Federal Reserve Act that authorized the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (FRBNY) to demand equity or voting control as consideration for a Section 13(3) loan."

The same rule applies in our case, HERA did not authorize the FHFA to demand equity or voting control as consideration in the SPSPA

So the question to ask and answer is: Does the Federal Reserve Act apply to the actions of FHFA that are statutorily governed by HERA?

Maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t , but for sure the government did not authorize FHFA to takeover FnF

So all in all, if you take the rule of law, it looks like FHFA cannot execute or even own in that matter, the warrant, it is illegal as conservator to own(force a company) and take the voluntary 79.9% warrant in consideration of a loan, Right?