InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

chaarles

07/12/10 3:09 PM

#220357 RE: rramirez82 #220347

It could be anything, a complete balance sheet for example where finally appear the 33 bill. assets stated in the voluntary petition?, emails between weil and WMI BOD?, whatever it is it must be big. Susman did not need nothing extra in support of the examiner, I think it was a done deal, I think he took the chance to present some clear evidence to the judge with the excuse of supporting the examiner motion.
I believe that if we knew what docs were submitted we would say only..........WOW............
icon url

errett

07/12/10 3:19 PM

#220361 RE: rramirez82 #220347

rramirez82 I thought about that also, and I recall reading somewhere that almost all of the attorneys with Susman have prior Justice Dept. experience---connections---wonder if someone found something and passed it on.


I'm wondering whether it could be the "missing" 3.1(a) statement.