Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[FOFreddie]

Thanks Familymang.

In which way can it be irrelevant about something being illegal if there is not a relevant law?

You might be right that UST will do what it wants regardless of the legality of a law but it seems like you are saying UST will more likely be doing something that is unconstitutional ( as in Collins) or illegal ( as in omitting to disclose the material fact that they proposed the Nationalization of the GSEs prior to the sale of billions of JPS to the public in the Spring of 2008) , unethical ( as in violating UST Ethics guidelines in leaking the Nationalization memo to Barrons) or unjust as in the unjust enrichment claim in the Wazee lawsuit?

There is nothing illegal about compromising a debt owed to the UST there just has to be grounds for it and there are plenty in CFR 902.2 -

"Agencies may compromise a debt if the Government cannot collect the full amount because: ....

(d) If there is significant doubt concerning the Government's ability to prove its case in court for the full amount claimed, either because of the legal issues involved or because of a bona fide dispute as to the facts, then the amount accepted in compromise of such cases should fairly reflect the probabilities of successful prosecution to judgment, with due regard given to the availability of witnesses and other evidentiary support for the Government's claim..."