InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

daulton

03/01/10 4:00 PM

#156277 RE: fsshon #156273

Nice find Fish.

"The FDIC as receiver is not subject to the direction or supervision of any other agency or department
of the United States or of any state, in the operation of the receivership. These provisions allow the
receiver to operate without interference from other executive agencies and to exercise its discretion
in determining the most effective resolution of the institution’s assets and liabilities."
icon url

rainbow1111

03/01/10 4:08 PM

#156283 RE: fsshon #156273

Is this from a textbook? Or what?
icon url

thepennyguy

03/01/10 4:14 PM

#156290 RE: fsshon #156273

I think you mean page 71, but the whole document is interesting. Incredible the FDIC power or I should say presumed power. Ridiculous! Basically stating they're above the law. WOW I think this is deeper than any of us expected. I don't think the FDIC will settle, JPIG (maybe) but the FDIC will fight this ofr years to come. I hope I'm wrong!
Nice find fish!
icon url

Legend5431

03/01/10 4:17 PM

#156293 RE: fsshon #156273

I thought nothing is above the LAW... guess not as stated here.
icon url

luv2shop

03/01/10 4:37 PM

#156305 RE: fsshon #156273

If I am understanding the doc correctly then...it means that the FDIC has acted in a contrary manner in all of its responsibilities concerning WAMU, but there isn't any entity or power to whom they have to answer if they are the receiver??

tia
icon url

QBert

03/01/10 4:45 PM

#156311 RE: fsshon #156273

Hopefully the key word for us is "failed". If we can prove that WAMU was solvent, then FDIC should have no grounds for what they did, even with this document.