I should not have to remind you that FDIC has no role.
It is obvious that we had a situation where a bank was riddled with unsafe and unsound lending practices.
This is not effective regulation. It is feeble regulation, year after year after year.
You did not want FDIC to be meddling around in your backyard.
I would not cite that in defense of your feeble enforcement, that there is a money-laundering order.
Can you use the words, 'Folks, your progress is inadequate?' Are you able to tell them that?
Why should it take the FDIC 4 months to get a desk or access to the examiner's library with WaMu documents?
Now, as WaMu's condition continued to worsen in the summer of 2008, the FDIC conducted a capital analysis, recommended to OTS that a 4 ratin...
We cannot rely on the regulators. That is obvious from today's hearing, it seems to me.
Do you have a conclusion as to why Washington Mutual failed?
So why wasn't it changed? What were the reasons it was not changed from what you have heard?