Barron Quote: "Statute of limitations would rely on DOJ guidance for recurring claims due to material changes introduced in the letter agreements. For example the new increase of liquidation preference for free introduced within the last 6-years." End of Quote
Quote: "It is not a law, but at this point any legal challenge made to it would be time-barred by the statute of limitations." End of Quote This statement appears to be not correct. The FHFA / Treasury continue to change the contract, letter agreements. So, the Statute of Limitations are not up.
Howard took down my post. I mentioned that no government agency has the right to suspend any part of any law. I said that if they can there's no point in having a legislative branch of the government.
I also said that statutes of limitations begin tolling after SCOTUS ruled in Collins and the Justices said that every citizen has the right to sue. Before that the government was arguing and the lower courts agreed that during conservatorship only FHFA can file suits.
I'm not sure Howard thinks we can challenge it since it wasn't argued earlier.
If Kelly's case is accepted, I'll make sure his attorneys are aware of it.
The FHFA / Treasury continue to change the contract, letter agreement dated January 14, 2021, So, the Statute of Limitations are not up. PAGE 6 Liquidation Preference increases dollar for dollar for all the retained earnings of the enterprises.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
