At first, and then it explains why that's not an accurate statement. In fact, it literally says those exact words later on. Perhaps don't stop reading after the first sentence?
Nope. That's a completely disingenuous description of the article, so misleading as to justifiably called a lie. The article does go on to say that "The Fed is a little defensive about the question of ownership." - true, and a bit of an understatement. What you claim is the article explaining why the it's "not an accurate statement" is simply a quote in the article from the Fed itself, being, yes, "defensive" about its ownership, and going so far as to re-define the term "ownership" to suit its own view.
I don't call that either accurate or credible. So I guess, really, all of your arguments come down to the Fed defending their own destructive and harmful structure and practices.
Your sig is surprisingly accurate.
I love it when people point that out in an argument. It completely outs them as a person that takes the statements at face value, and have never learned to think critically on their own.