Thanks, Smuck. IndyMac was a 32B bank. Looks like Joe Lunchbucket is going to have to bail them out too. This and Sens. Dodd and Conrad's Countrywide shananigans. Time to make Congress a part time, and unpaid job.

quote:

"...IndyMac came under fire last month from U.S. Senator Charles Schumer, who said lax lending standards and deposits purchased from third parties left it on the brink of failure. In the 11 business days after Schumer explained his concerns in a June 26 letter, depositors withdrew more than $1.3 billion, the OTS said."

Source

So you're saying he was wrong for actually warning customers of IndyMac of a possible failure? The same customers who have now, thanks to INDYMACS practices, lost considerable ammounts of money because they were not insured??

Some of the partisanship is simply ridiculous....

Eventhough IndyMac was a dead man walking, Senator, and trusted statesman Smuckie should've maintained that confidentiality. Can't wait to find out if it's discovered that short sellers of IndyMac stock contributed to Schumer...

quote:

Sen. Charles E. Schumer publicly taunted bank regulators last week about IndyMac Bancorp's financial condition, which helped trigger a sudden outflow of deposits from the Pasadena thrift. Now the New York Democrat is getting some harsh blowback from one current and one former regulator. Their message, distilled: Zip it, Chuck.

LA Times

quote:

Originally posted by Kegler300:
Eventhough IndyMac was a dead man walking, Senator, and trusted statesman Smuckie should've maintained that confidentiality. Can't wait to find out if it's discovered that short sellers of IndyMac stock contributed to Schumer...

quote:

Sen. Charles E. Schumer publicly taunted bank regulators last week about IndyMac Bancorp's financial condition, which helped trigger a sudden outflow of deposits from the Pasadena thrift. Now the New York Democrat is getting some harsh blowback from one current and one former regulator. Their message, distilled: Zip it, Chuck.

LA Times

Right.....He should have shut up, and let the "dead man walking" carrying my money collapse into his grave while I go get a shovel and hope I find it??

It is illegal, unless you are a sen or congressman, to make negative statments about the financial stability of such an institution. As a direct vresult of his remarks, nearly a BILLION AND A HALF dollars were withdrawn from Indy. The very definition of a run on the bank.

As a result, the banks lending limit was reduced by about $12 BILLION! Chances are that if the bank was not out of paramaters before the run on the bank, it clearly was after. It will take YEARS before we know, most likely. So it could be that the Schmuckster was accurate OR in may show that the Schmuckster destabelized a marguinal bank causing BILLIONS to be unnecessarily spent by the taxpayer.

Let's watch, shall we?

quote:

Originally posted by Kegler300:
Thanks, Smuck. IndyMac was a 32B bank. Looks like Joe Lunchbucket is going to have to bail them out too. This and Sens. Dodd and Conrad's Countrywide shananigans. Time to make Congress a part time, and unpaid job.

quote:

"...IndyMac came under fire last month from U.S. Senator Charles Schumer, who said lax lending standards and deposits purchased from third parties left it on the brink of failure. In the 11 business days after Schumer explained his concerns in a June 26 letter, depositors withdrew more than $1.3 billion, the OTS said."

Source

Another black eye for the Bush administration...

Okay so lets make clear what the point is:

A)Chuck Schumer is responsible for IndyMacs collapse?

B)We can also connect Mr.Schumer to say Bearstearns, Citibank, Countrywide, Lehman Bros....etc..etc??

C)Why is Freddie Mac and Fannie May on the edge of the toilet seat? Mr Schumer to blame as well?

What is the point here??

quote:

It is illegal, unless you are a sen or congressman, to make negative statments about the financial stability of such an institution.

Under what law?

quote:

Originally posted by 18476586:
So you're saying he was wrong for actually warning customers of IndyMac of a possible failure? The same customers who have now, thanks to INDYMACS practices, lost considerable ammounts of money because they were not insured??

Some of the partisanship is simply ridiculous....

So I guess if Shooomer is given a pass to talk about banks in trouble,can he talk about any other sensitive information,also,& be applauded for it?Not conducive to a healthy enonomy.But maybe he had some insde knowledge???