Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Wise Man]

You aren't doing any favor to Trump posting his letter.
The Supreme Court didn't opine that a new statement from Trump, is what it's needed to prove constitutional damages.
It's obvious that it was related to a statement when he was in office.

This is fabricated evidence since it was used by Berkowitz's attorney in Court, both in the Collins case and, recently, in the Bhatti case.
Besides stock price manipulation, since he proposes actions not authorized in the law and CFR, for the assault on the ownership of FnF, as it would dilute the common shareholders 99.99% in their companies, and, secondly, against the Supreme Court's prerequisite of the rehabilitation of FnF since day one, synchronized with the prior ruling by judge Willett (take any action "within the enumerated powers": put FnF in a sound and solvent condition, which is what is called financial rehabilitation).
Let alone judge Sweeney omitting the "authorized by this section" in question, in her interpretation of the same sentence of the Incidental Power. So, she just read "take any action ...................... (this part intentionally left blank), in the best interests of FHFA". How is this even possible?
Let's not forget that it's an Incidental Power. It couldn't have been created to override the main power, but the opposite. Its purpose is to help fulfill the main power by definition.

Take their capital away is NOT authorized. Necessary for their financial rehabilitation (Retained Earnings account. Core Capital). Today, adjusted $-216B Accumulated Deficit Retained Earnings accounts together, the only account that absorbs future (unexpected) losses (not the Capital Stocks that just offset a negative RE account, so that the Net Worth remains positive) and where the dividends are distributed from (at least you need to have a positive balance on the Balance Sheet, as a picture of a company on a determined date, to distribute it out. It's not a simple charge like happens with a loss in the period).
The only gauge of the financial condition in a financial company: Does Capital ratio ring a bell?

Notice that the tweet posted below comes from the guy that said: "The Supreme Court said FHFA can do whatever the hell it wants" (Source)
So, all made up.
The same stance by his mentor, Bill Ackman, implying that the Supreme Court said FHFA has absolute discretion (Source)
This is the bread and butter during Conservatorship: coverups, twists and outright lies.

$FNMA #FANNIEGATE --- the supreme court opined that if trump wrote a letter like this that it would be sufficient to show that the statutory provision caused harm. God Bless Trump pic.twitter.com/RQqty13WFv

— Fanniegate Hero (@DoNotLose) November 30, 2021