You asked, “ Has your top line argument been argued in any court.”
No, the expert lawyers never mention the Charter Act. I’m hoping Barron’s efforts will reach a Judge that will rule the SPSPA void. Barron has brought to our attention the statutes of limitations has not run out by reason of the letter agreement that modified the SPSPA.
Barron Quote:
“I posit that the variable liquidation preference outlined in the SPSPA and all amendments are an illegal commitment fee/charge attached to the purchase of the senior preferred shares. Prohibited by the Charter Act. The warrants are also a fee in consideration for access to the commitment. Prohibited by the Charter Act.
I posit that the senior preferred shares with their variable liquidation preference as outlined in the SPSPA constitute a new product for the purpose of the secondary mortgage market outlined in the charter act at sec 1719.
I posit that under the safety and soundness act as modified by HERA, the sale of SPS with a variable liquidation preference to Treasury under authority of sec 1719(g) of the Charter Act required notice in the federal register, opportunity for public comment, and official rule making by the plain language of the safety and soundness act.
I posit that the above statutory violations necessarily violate the warranties on behalf of the FHFA-C contained in the SPSPA.
301 Billion to be returned to the corporation. LP and warrants canceled. Future of 191 billion of taxpayer debt illegally given to corps to be determined.” End of Quote
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
