Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[kthomp19]

A thief steals your Lamborghini and enters it in a demolition derby. He then argues that all he owes you is the market value of the junk.

If the issuance of the warrants represents a "theft" then it occurred 13 years ago and the statute of limitations has passed (six years in the USCFC).

If the exercise of the warrants is what represents the "theft" then the vehicle was already junk when it was stolen.

If the damage occurred in 2008 it's too late for anyone (other than Washington Federal) to sue over it. If it hasn't happened yet then the loss in share value between 2008 and now doesn't matter, regardless of its cause. You can't have it both ways.

Who could possibly come up with such a ridiculous argument?

You, evidently, because you're the one that posted it. It's a complete strawman anyway.