“The laws matter. The Supreme Court said the NWS was legal, which means FHFA and Treasury have been following the law all along. Maybe not your interpretation of it, but too bad.”
The problem with the above statement, and the ruling you base it off of is that no plaintiff’s have bothered to read the Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 and realize that the (NWS) should have been repealed as it represented a modification to a “new product” authorized under Sec 1790 of the Charter Act that hadn’t had a public notice in the Federal Register, opportunity for public comment, or required rule making. Supremes ruled in a vacuum of what a FHFA-C could do. The APA requirements on the director of the FHFA have nothing to do with the actions of conservator. Unfortunately, judges will not lift a mental finger of curiosity to read outside the briefs. If the Plaintiff doesnt raise the issue, they wont look. Just the way it is I guess. Problem is that anyone who takes the time to actually read the laws that matter can clearly surmise that the SPS are an illegal product in the absence of required rule making of the Director. This is all whats called a categorical error of the Plaintiffs. And it is why nothing will ever be done to correct the wrongs perpetrated against the companies and its shareholders. Too much time has likely expired.
Isnt it amazing how some APA requirements of the Safety and Soundness act must be followed, no matter what, such as the capital requirement rule or the transparency rule, or the new MBS products and activities rule? But lets skip the rule making for a new product called the Senior Preferred Shares with a variable liquidation preference tied to 200 billion in tax payer debt. Just think if an Attorney back in 2013 said to Sweeny, or any other judge. “Excuse me, but where is the required rule making for the SPS”? Boom, APA requirement is black and white, the worst that would have happened is that FHFA would have been forced to do the rule making. No automatic NWS by signing a letter. At least it would be legal afterwords. There would have been no more simple letter agreements or amendments.
The institutions are all systematically corrupt in my opinion.
AI
