Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Robert from yahoo bd]

What the government gains means nothing in a takings lawsuit. Only what the property owner lost matters, and in the case of publicly traded shares, the market price provides the best (and only, in fact) measure of loss in market value.

I think this quote from you was answering the proposition that a shareholder sues if the UST exercises the warrants.

But, can you cite any specific case law on when a conservator that has controlled all an entities business decisions, is privy to insider information, and the court ruled that ONLY share price on the pink sheets is the relevant measure of a loss in market value?

But what of the proposition that the government nationalized the gses? I totally agree with the 'what the government gained' is probably irrelevant in a Takings Case, although here the government would be receiving something they definitely don't want if a court rules that a nationalization has occurred, $7+T in new liabilities on the federal government balance sheet, which is why they privatized them in 1968 and 1970 in the beginning.

When exactly did the Takings take place, was it market value on the day before the placement in conservatorship which was part of the implementation of the government's plan for nationalization? Was it when they decided to sweep the entities profits into perpetuity? Was it at some other point in time?

Which if any of the current class certified litigation involves Takings Claims?

I know it's a lot of questions but I'm interested in your thoughts on these issues.