Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Rodney5]

Let's simplify this...

JUSTICE BREYER: “Well, why didn't you bring a takings claim?”

The Plaintiffs brought the wrong lawsuit to the SCOTUS.

TAKINGS CLAIM: Your Honor, The Senior Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement is not a law: The SPSPA is an illegal contract: The Charter Act is the Law.

SUBSECTION (g) TEMPORARY AUTHORITY OF TREASURY TO PURCHASE OBLIGATIONS AND SECURITIES; CONDITIONS.— EMERGENCY DETERMINATION REQUIRED. Page 16

Under this subsection the FHFA / Treasury would have to prove, 'What was the Emergency'...

(And this will open the door for the plaintiffs to bring out the forced write down of the deferred tax assets, treasury's charge of an illegal commitment fee, violated the law by not adding the liabilities onto the national debt, neither entity met any of the twelve conditions for conservatorship spelled out in the newly passed HERA legislation, 5th amendment, 14th amendment, etc...)


There was no 'Emergency.'

FHFA freely admitted the companies were adequately capitalized, evidence the companies exceeded capital requirements absolutely no need for emergency funding.

SECOND QUARTER CAPITAL RESULTS

Minimum Capital
Fannie Mae’s FHFA-directed capital requirement on June 30, 2008 was $37.5 billion and its statutory minimum capital requirement was $32.6 billion. Fannie Mae’s core capital of $47.0 billion exceeded the FHFA-directed capital requirement by $9.4 billion.

Freddie Mac’s FHFA-directed capital requirement on June 30, 2008 was $34.5 billion and its statutory minimum capital requirement was $28.7 billion. Freddie Mac’s core capital of $37.1 billion exceeded the FHFA-directed minimum capital requirement by $2.7 billion.

Link:https://www.fhfa.gov/mobile/Pages/public-affairs-detail.aspx?PageName=FHFA-Announces-Suspension-of-Capital-Classifications-During-Conservatorship-and-Discloses-Minimum-and-RiskBased-Cap.aspx

https://www.fanniemae.com/sites/g/files/koqyhd191/files/migrated-files/resources/file/aboutus/pdf/fm-amended-charter.pdf