Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Achilles deFlandres]

>>Had they gone straight to Receivership originally they could legally be doing everything they have done.>>

No, As Hamish Hume pointed out at the Perry appeal is that in receivership the shareholders have definite rights. IN conservatorship, none. In receivership, it is liquidate and wind-up. Additionally, the books would be open and under scrutiny of the courts. In conservatorship, as we have experienced every single day, there are no shareholder rights. Everything takes precedence over the shareholders. The "certain Constitutional rights" SCOTUS claimed the shareholders have are still undefined or non-existent. In either case those "rights" =ZERO DOLLARS for the shareholder.