whether or not the above collusive scenario factually unfolded in 2008 to make WMI fail to facilitate usurpation of its valuable assets by JPMC can be ascertained only by an independent examiner with full authority to issue subpoena and take depostions under oath.
Collusion or lack thereof has not been ascertained so far in any investigation by the Congress or Court.
The Equity Committee's request for an examiner with complete authority is thus legitimate.
An examination with complete authority is paramount for the court too in order to determine wether the assets of WMI, which rightfully belonged to the WMI security holders, have been seized and transferred to JPMC via collusion among MMs, gouvernment regulatory agencies and public rating agencies. Establishing whether or not collusion has occured should be paramount to the Court for two reasons:
(i) It will prove or disprove if a fraudulent conveyance of WMI assets to JPMC has occurred. If a fraudulent conveyance has occurred, the court's ruling will be dramatically different from the standard allocation of assets, based on fair valuation, to various claimholders of WMI.
(ii) Which constitutional rights of 'We the people' have been transgressed due to JPMC's acquisition of WMI for pittance will depend on wether collusion occured. For example if the WMI assets were really transferred to JPMC through collusion, it would be a case of violation of the constitutional right to property of WMI security holders whose assets were usurped collusively. Otherwise, it would be a simpler case of constitutional right to fair compensation for WMI security holders whose assets were seized by the FDIC Receiver and transferred to JPMC.