The Wacky World of Bank Law Blogging
Bank Lawyer’s Blog:
Every once in awhile, I have to step back and wonder whether the creative (and often, emotional) release of spending an hour a day pounding out semi-snarky blog posts instead of ogling scantily-clad female hoofers on “Dancing With The Stars” or proving to myself that, once again, I’m not smarter than a fifth grader, is worth the aggravation of putting up with Millennial lawyer newbies who criticize me for a position on a point of law about which they know absolutely nothing (which hubris is, I’m told by parents of Millennial children, a characteristic of the entire generation, not merely those members who’ve made the bad career choice of lapping up the leavings of soon-to-be-exiting Baby Boom Shysters), or with the tin foil hat wearing nutroots who want me to render advice (pro bono, naturally) about their scheme to solve the subprime mortgage crisis “if only Secretary Paulson would listen to my great idea.” At those points, a reader will often e-mail me a link to something that convinces me that the brain damage is worth it, after all.
The takeovers of federal savings banks IndyMac and Washington Mutual generated an unusual amount of vitriolic, borderline unhinged e-mail that vilifies the FDIC, particularly FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair, and proposes conspiracy theories at which even Oliver Stone and Michael Moore would laugh out loud. Because Ms. Bair’s pro-consumer agenda is often a target of this blog, some of the conspiracy theorists have approached me to determine whether I’d be interested in rendering advice to groups of potential plaintiffs who propose to sue the FDIC, the insolvent institutions, the U.S. Government, individual agency officers, and, if I recall correctly, Al Gore, Pope Benedict XVI, the Dali Lama, and The-Artist-Formerly-Known-As-And-Now-Once-Again-Known-As-Prince for violations of both the United States Constitution (with particular emphasis on…