I read that, But it did not say anything about interference or direction from the Judicial Branch, because Congress knew that giving a government entity or agency express power is not in the best interest of the country and there needs to be "checks and balances."
The Judicial Branch has to follow the "law of the land" i.e constitution or as they do now "case law." I feel strongly that THJMW is getting ready to set a "new precedent" and establish "new case law" just like Judge Peck in NY has been doing and Judge Collyer in DC will do soon. Something has to be done to slow the FDIC down and make them take into accout the vlaue of institutions and the sahreholders who invest in those institutions value. The Market will not right itself until these unknown variables are settled.
My first question to Bair would be "what was the premise of the decision to run Indymac for 6 months and not do the same for WAMU, therefore maximizing the return for the creditors and sharehodlers of the institution?"
I'll bet her answer is generic one.
In the WAMU case, At the time we felt the deposit fund was in jeopardy and felt JPM was the appropriate candidate to assume the deposits. We also felt the transfer of the assets of WMB and it subs was necessary to insure there was not any disruption to daily operations of WAMU. In the case of Indymac, the Country was not in Jeopardy of losing the banking system, so we felt that we needed to follow our corporate charter. In the case of WAMU, we did not have time nor resources to manage a bank of WAMU size and scope.
Spin It Sheila, the PSI, Congress and DOJ are gunning for "fall guys!"
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
