Replies to post #747807 on Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Robert from yahoo bd]

No I hear you, I'm just saying that there's plenty of constitutional reasons to overturn the NWS and I think you should rest your final judgement after ALL of them have been adjudicated. That's all.

Perhaps the "fix is in" or it's "a conspiracy by the Federalist Society", we will find out in the end (if father time doesn't win 1st!).

I realize what a pain in the arse this Gubmint/Private Capital partnership is with the rampant theft and pillaging by our 'dear leaders' in Gubmint, but the intellectual dividends offered by this stock holding is enjoyable for me personally, as it touches all my favorites, Law, Finance, Real estate, the inherent weaknesses in the human condition, Economics, Politics.

[FFFacts]

Didn't you see some of the scotus justices at the state of the union laughing and shaking hands with potus and the 'leaders'

Scotus job first and foremost is governance, order and stability not the rule of law.

[Barron4664]

I hear and mostly agree with you in your assessment. The reason I believe that all the lawsuits have failed is relatively simple. An analogy to the GSE lawsuits that illustrate this is as follows. In many states, the courts have ruled and applied “the presumption of correctness” to the tax assessor. If the town you live in, reassesses all the property in the town. You may find yourself with an assessment you don’t think is correct. So what can you do? You can try to appeal your assessment before the county gov. After you fail you can then appeal to the tax court. In almost all cases your appeal will be dismissed. Why, because the Courts have already ruled that the tax assessor is an expert and presumed to be correct. This is established law in most places for a century. For FNMA shareholders, the director of FHFA is the tax assessor, HERA is a codified presumption of correctness. He can do mostly anything he wants and no court can question it. The failure here is not the judges or that the fix is in. If anything the fix was commited by the plaintiffs attorneys. Why do I say this? Because from the very beginning, 2008 till now, the actions of the Sec of Treasury could have been challenged at every step of the way without ever naming FHFA as defendant with its presumption of correctness that cant be questioned. Why did every lawsuit challenge the party that had no ability to provide the funding. Classic mis-direction play. Its been a clusterf..k since day one with the plaintiffs.