This indicates to me that they were talking about seizure with the "government" as
far back as march 2008.
Am I reading this Correctly?
This looks to be collusion to commit fraud. How much more obvious does it get?
I mean all you have to do is show who was shorting the stock after that and who
caused the electronic bank run.
This should be a no brainer.
I found this, I think its what you are talking about right?
From: Tim Main/JPMCHASE firstname.lastname@example.org
Sent: Sunday March 30, 2008 7:31 AM
To: Charlie Scharf/IL/ONE Charlie.email@example.com
Subject: Re: West
I of course love the idea of a slightly higher price than they deserve in the
form of a contingent where their shareholders pick up the first loss versus say
Their high credit case until they literally get zero, then the government kicks
In with some form of second loss either 75% for them and 25% for us, or they
Take 100% for a slice and then its all for us.
Either way, something that really really reduces our risk and gets the
Government comfortable than they only get involved if shareholders get zero.
It sounds to me like the government is really concerned as they should be about
Taking losses, so they should like this versus alternative.
Look forward to talking today and travel safely.
From: Charlie Scharf
Sent: 03/29/2008 09: 10 PM CDT
To: Tim Main
Subject: Re: West
Will do. Didn’t miss much. A few questions. The 2 got screwed up because the
Phone on your plane that I was borrowing wasn’t working so we did some add hoe
Follow ups Fernando working on warrants, contingent security tied to loans,
And contingent tied to hpa index.
From: Tim Main
Sent: 03/29/2008 06:14 PM CDT
To: Charlie Scharf
Do me a favor and let me know when you are going to be on calls so I can make
Sure that I am as well.
Sorry to ask you to do that but schedule from my team was murky again today