10-31-2010, 03:07 AM
I will say that examining Fred's past is not wrong. But assuming that every plaintiff claim in a lawsuit is fact is cherry picking the data to serve a predetermined position. There was apparently no examination of the S&L that I could see. Without much effort I was able to find a 1993 news article for example showing that the Topa S&L has been slammed by the Feds for "bad business practices". I can't say that the two things, lawsuit and Feds, are related but in a lawsuit there are always two sides or it would not be before a court. jtkong was taking the plaintiff's case as gospel. So it is difficult to impossible for me, from the documents presented, to draw a conclusion.
As I said in my first comment on this: "There is just enough there to be interesting but not enough to be satisfying."
I stand by that.
As I said in my first comment on this: "There is just enough there to be interesting but not enough to be satisfying."
I stand by that.
Assume the best and ask questions.
Punaweb moderator
Punaweb moderator