Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Wise Man]

Beware of Guido always posting false information.
Now repeating once again the repurchase of the Warrant, when he saw that one of his bosses was being attacked in this board (Timothy Howard, Pagliara and Bryndon Fisher).
He mistakes the exercise price for the value of the Warrant (I mention the Warrant value at the end of the comment).
He can't understand the text that he is reading, because the Treasury press release talks about

The exercise price was set at the average of the stock price during the 20 day period preceding the day...

Whereas in FnF, the exercise price of the Warrant to purchase 79.9% common stock (limit to not consolidate the accounts into the Federal Budget) was set at a shocking, out of the blue, $0.00001 per share.

Guido read "average price of the prior 20 days" to calculate the exercise price, and he switched it for the "repurchase of the Warrant", making up that:

FnF can buy back the warrants based on previous 20 days average closing price

Guido even didn't address it when he was called out by other Ihub user about this issue of the 20-day average price, evidence that he is in full con mode, the art of deception, as disciple of the 3 amigos.
His take about "repurchase", primarily, isn't written in the Warrant prospectus of FnF and, secondly, the Pagliara's clerk doesn't understand that, with the 20-day average price, he now would be talking about the settlement of the Warrant with differences (that is, to lock in the profit in dollars, not receiving the shares), not about the value of the Warrant that he claims will be repurchased and it's what he is peddling.


The exercise price of $0.00001 per share corroborates the idea that the Warrant was issued for free as a collateral of its investment in SPS, because the authority of Treasury to purchase this security can only be feasible with (iii) to protect the taxpayer (a security that acts as protection is called collateral).


But the true intention of the warrant wasn't "collateral", but the assault on the ownership by Wall Street and the Community Banks paying nothing, as the clause 2.1 of the Warrant prospectus states that the exercisable shares can be assigned to any Person: BKT, MS, etc that become owners of FnF by Immaculate conception.


This clause 2.1 makes the Warrant de facto transferable, because you can assign "the right to receive shares", which is the definition of Warrant, a financial concept the Fanniegate attorneys that wrote it weren't aware of.
It turns out that the clause 7 states that the Warrant is non-transferable, which makes the whole thing VOID.

Besides, I remind the board that the Charter's provision FEE LIMITATION of the United States wasn't struck down with HERA, and we always have in mind.


The Charter wasn't construed to make an opportunistic Goldman Sachs alumni acquire FnF for $0.00001ps, this is why he forced FnF to issue it for free (and thus, its value of around $3B each, was debited from the Additional Paid-In Capital account, like any other security issued/increased for free -today's SPS LP-) knowing that it was inserted a provision with infinite yield SPS, in order to evade the authority of UST posted before that relates to the PURCHASE of securities. Therefore we should consider it PURCHASED at no cost and thus, collateral it is.
In the end, the UST hasn't purchased even one security. The SPS LP is "increased" instead of SPS issued and purchased (same 1 million SPS that were issued for free on day one), in order to evade this deadline on the authority of UST to purchase securities of FnF. It would have compelled the UST to make a one-time investment in FnF on day one.
A securities law violation because the securities are issued/purchased, so they are dated.