Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Wise Man]

Is now renaming the Conservatorships "Taking of private property" the slogan of the plotters?

NWS is a clear case of illegal taking of private property.

And shamelessly concealing that the NWS was a NWS dividend.
A Nationalization through dividend payments isn't authorized during a Conservatorship, pro se plaintiff. Dividend payments are restricted.
Then, their special rates on SPS, prevail (Subsection (c)), in exchange for their Public Mission and as a last resort. Better known as UST backup.
It's not just Conservatorship. Where do you read Nationalization in the Fee Limitation clause?

The stocks could have been taken over at their fair value at the time, but it didn't happen. Now you can't go to the past.

The transfer of powers and rights is part of a Conservatorship, like occurs with the trustees, in order to allow them to carry out their functions, without the shareholders and the management and BOD messing around.
Unlike in a Receivership, the powers and rights are returned.
Rogue investors like Pagliara and Bryndon Fisher, have repeatedly said that we don't have rights, in order to turn themselves into Shareholders' Rights advocates and lure more investors into the hedge funds' cause, aiming to increase the Capital needs in FnF and the assault on the ownership.
Those rights are the same as before and remain intact in the figure of conservator, that is using them temporarily. The plotters want to transmit the idea that this Succession didn't happen, and FnF are operating business as usual, naming new individuals to serve at the BOD of FnF, which is fine if they have clear that they don't have powers, etc.. Even the managements are named Defendants in the Lamberth court, which is impossible because they can't be sued for actions carried out without powers and this is what a conservator is for.

This is the reason why Fiduciary Duties emerged, like occurs always when someone is acting on behalf of others (Trustees). Althought it's not related to actions in our best interests (dividends, maximize profits, etc), there are other Fiduciary Duties, like Loyalty that prevents the conservator from carrying out a Separate Account plan. Let alone Confidentiality Duty broken in the Lamberth trial. Duty of care (uphold the laws) broken with the breach of the Charter's Credit Enhancement clause, with the CRT operations.

I sent a letter to judge Sweeney through certified mail, explaining that the Incidental Power of the conservator might well be where is set forth its Fiduciary Duties owed to us, upon the Succession Provision clause, where our bests interests are excluded as expected, but it states that any action must be "authorized by this section", which sounds a lot like the Fiduciary Duty of Duty of Care, with a mandate that it must uphold its main power in any event (judge Willett: "any action within the enumerated powers"), about the financial rehabilitation of FnF: recapitalization and reduce the obligations SPS with the taxpayer.
So, it's some leeway given to the FHFA that has authorized it to ready a Housing Finance System revamp, the creation of the UMBS, etc., but it always has to respect the main power, as stated by the etymological definition of Incidental Power: actions where it doesn't have an express grant of authority, but they are supplementary and secondary to the main power.