The law isn't HERA but the FHEFSSA-Charter Act, as amended by HERA, pro se plaintiff with one of your 30 different ID's: HappyAlways, Barron, Vancmike, Fannie Heeeey, EternalPatience, stvupdate, etc.
The resolution of Fanniegate isn't about... "What if the NWS dividend hadn't existed". "What if...". Commonly known as do-overs.
The 10% and NWS dividends existed and they are forbidden when FnF are undercapitalized, besides there weren't funds available for distribution as dividend out of a Retained Earnings account with deficit all along.
We use the FHFA-C's Incidental Power (take any action...) to apply these capital distributions (no actual dividend payment) towards the exception in the law (reduce the debenture SPS) and, once fully repaid, for their Recapitalization in the CFR 1237.12, complying with the FHFA-C's Rehab power as well (solvent condition and sound condition, respectively)
That is, the legalization of all the FHFA-UST's actions with an Incidental Power that allows the FHFA to lie about it with a Separate Account. No do-overs.
You want to conceal the rest of the FHEFSSA and the Charter Act that wasn't amended by HERA:
- The original low cost UST backup of FnF, about purchases of any (subsection (c)) redeemable obligation (subsection (b)), such as SPS.
- Besides, the definitions of each capital requirement, to learn that they are met with Core Capital/Total Capital, not with the Net Worth as the plotters peddle all the time.
Meeting the Capital levels is what soundness is about, in the FHFA-C's Rehab power.
- Or even the Fee Limitation of the United States as part of the Charter dynamics.
How is judge Sweeney doing, pro se plaintiff?
