Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[kthomp19]

The warrant cannot be executed as Fannie and Freddie were solvent at the time of takeover

False. The warrants, conservatorships, and original SPSPAs have nothing to do with whether FnF were solvent at the time. The boards consented to conservatorship, and the only case to challenge that has been dismissed.

the AIG case which is president here and enables the government to take over 79.9% of the company is based on a bankrupt company, not on a voluntary agreement of a solvent company,

False. The 79.9% has nothing to do with whether or not FnF were bankrupt. The warrants were a condition Treasury required to agree to the original SPSPAs, which kept FnF out of mandatory receivership.

the fiduciary duty and duty of candor forbid this

False. FHFA has no fiduciary duty to shareholders. And what case has made a challenge based on the duty of candor, let alone prevailed on it?

One down on three swinging strikes.

But the discussion in AIG is not the same as in Fannie or Freddie, AIG was bankrupt and had no other options left and would have been bankrupt anyway without further assistants

We will never know whether or not FnF would have gone bankrupt without Treasury's assistance, no matter what any of us says. Even Tim Howard said

Finally, we can’t definitively say that without the non-cash accounting entries made by FHFA Fannie would have survived the crisis.

Without concrete proof the contrary, courts will not allow counterfactuals like "FnF would have been fine!" If Tim Howard couldn't find that proof, good luck finding it yourself.