Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Wise Man]

Quit lying, pro se plaintiff. Ain't no refinancing option.
You keep on repeating the same lies. But a mistake in court with your two lawsuits, is very costly.
Lately: "the SPS are products". It only shows that you don't know what you are talking about. A security needs an activity to be considered a product, and thus, an special authorization by the FHFA director, publication in the Federal Register, comment period, etc. This is why with the lack thereof, you end up saying that the SPS are illegal.
Also, there are activities that aren't products. Everything is stated in the law that you are reading. So, you are just messing around to later claim: "it's complicated".

Therefore, a SPS isn't a product but a simple security and it's been considered one of the "any redeemable obligation" (in respect of capital stock (Source SPSPA. Equity) for the original UST backup at special rates (Subsection (c)(b) in the Charter Act) as a last resort (Section Purposes: "Operations financed by private capital to the maximum extent feasible") and the ones with high yield, duly authorized to purchase/no-purchase (SPS LP increased➡️fraud) by the Treasury under the prerequisites (i) and (ii).Source, suitable for the assessments in a Separate Account plan, FHLBanks-style.
I already explained it once to your other alias, Barron. But you rather go rogue, repeating it at least 10 more times and you want me to reply to your posts rebutting it each time, right? Which I refused, until today. The latest with Rodney citing "our friend Barron".

With regard to your comment that I'm replying to, the same repetitive lie you post about the reduction of SPS set forth in the law. And, by the way, for which Howard faces charges stating a dozen times in his SCOTUS amicus brief that the SPS are non-repayable securites.
It's NOT a refinancing option, because the objective of the lawmakers is to maintain the same capital as before, or increase it. That's what a Restriction on Capital Distributions is for. It's not a fancy name. Also, pursuant to the conservator's power: Put FnF in a sound and solvent condition (Build capital and reduce the debentures SPS, respectively. So, this Restriction on Capital Distribution and its exception, was spot on during a Conservatorship) and preserve and conserve assets. So, increase and/or preserve capital and reduce debentures (even more if it's an obligation with the taxpayer: SPS), is the way to go. That's called financial rehabilitation.

The exception A that you point out, is achieved when FnF repaid the SPS with cash, at the same time as the Common Equity increased (Retained Earings account. Core Capital). Double-entry accounting. There you are, the required increase in capital in the same amount as the reduction in the SPS for the exception B. So, the intent of the lawmakers was satisfied and there is no need to issue new shares or obligations.

Finally, your other slogan. Can't you read that it's always the FHEFSSA as amended by HERA? Not HERA alone as you claim, that just inserted the amendment in the FHEFSSA.
Where is the ball? Are you going to say again the catchy phrase: "it's complicated"?
How many times did I post these screenshots taken from the statute just for you?





I already denounced you misbehavior, rogue pro se plaintiff. Here, posted just two weeks ago:

Wait a few days for the plaintiff Joshua Angel to post the same lies with one of his 30 different aliases (HappyAlways, EternalPatience, Fannie heyyyy, nagoya, Rodney, Barron, stvupdate, 5 bagger, etc), refuted over and over again (interest rate; HERA; 4 exceptions in the CFR 1237.12 to conceal the ones by statute U.S.Code §4614(e); refinancing option; PA, a contract; etc.)
This is the bread and butter during conservatorship with all the commissioned social media celebrities and attorneys that post here regularly.

GOTCHA!