Bush and Silverado?

Question

Neil Bush bailed on Silverado shortly before it went belly up..many small investors lost their life savings. Does any one know anything about it and why the matter was hushed up so quickly?
Am thinking of Martha Stewart and her prosecution and wondering???????????????? And why no one waylaid that hidden Bush brother. He's still keeping a low profile.

Just answer the question, buggy..it's simply written!

Answer 1

Silverado was a part of the "Savings and Loan Debacle".

There have been numerous scholarly articles and books written in recent years about the savings and loan debacle of the 1980s. This is certainly understandable insofar as 1,309 institutions with $642 billion in assets failed and cost $154 billion to resolve; of which, Neil was a small part of ~ >1%. Despite all the attention, however, there still remains substantial disagreement regarding the fundamental cause of the debacle. Some argue that fraud and high-yield securities were the major contributing factors in the collapse of the savings and loan industry; certainly participants like Neil Bush did not use the best business ethics, however, trials and accusations are still loose. Others argue that inappropriate laws and regulations prior to the 1980s prohibited savings and loans from adapting to a changing financial environment, thereby needlessly exposing institutions to the adverse movements in interest rates that occurred in the early 1980s. It is further argued that once the industry did indeed collapse in the early 1980s inappropriate regulatory oversight exacerbated the credit-quality problems that materialized in the second half of the 1980s. With the economy running in cycles, I believe that we're near the middle of another S&L Debacle.

Martha Stewart is a financial genious who was accused of "Short Sales" (selling her own public stock with knowledge that the rest of the public did not have). Ms. Stewart is contesting this charge still, however, her genious trumphed the courts when she took the jail time to get a bad situation behind her. This bold move said "Up-Yours" to the courts saved her hundreeds of thousands of dollars in lawer fees and bought her millions of dollars in advertisements and publicity.

Answer 2

Isnt it obvious--Martha Stewart represents the american dream--She built her business from the ground up, worked non-stop, etc..She could indirectly be the gov't way of saying to the american people "See will protect you against bi buisness". All without harming her to much. Duh--she was a scapegoat.
Neil Bush on the other hand represents what american iis sick of : Born rich bastards who have control of this country who really doant have to work for anything, he is Also, the President's brother, the ex-presidents son. America would have gone into a revolution against big buisness

Answer 3

In my humble opinion, Neil Bush was simply an important name behind Silverado Bank. His direct cash financial committment was modest. It should come as no great surprise that he was not the brains behind any of the banks transactions. His presence was to act as a lightening rod to prospective investors and investment opportunities using the apparent single genetic inherited family trait which was to flaunt his family name and connections. It may have got his brother a special entry to the Texas Air National Guard and special training in an aircraft that was militarily obsolete prior to beginning training which meant his assignment chances to go to Viet Nam was`only slightly ahead of swordsmen and less than archers or petarders.

I have no knowledge and do not suspect or suggest that Neil violated any state of federal banking law. One would have to have direct knowledge of the laws and have served in a level of formal responsibility. I do not think cheerleading is such a position.

I do wonder if he might have had some non-criminal civil director liability. If so the records would likely never have been made public and with sufficient assets, one can settle most claims. If any claims were ever filed or paid by him it would have been on the basis of simple negligence based upon his limited banking experience`and knowledge.

Martha, in her ignorance of her right to remain silent, kept talking to show her innocence. WHEN you talk to law enforcement, as opposed to your attorney, they can ALWAYS FIND IN YOUR STATEMENTS POSSIBLE CONTRADICTIONS, which can mean in the prosecutorial sense either CHARGES OF A) OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE or B) PERJURY.

Had MARTHA kept silent she would never have been convicted or likely charged. [Important Life Lesson] Law enforcement is less interested in cooperation than prosecution... Always hire a member of the bar to speak to authorities in all dealings.

During the Silverado liquidation, I was part of a group that PURCHSED FROM THE BANK, over $33 Million in assets. Not one dime in profits were made. And from the free soup lines in downtown Denver, I can point to at least (3) buildings in which I once enjoyed a nominal financial interest. I never met Neil, but individuals with whom I have dealt reported him to be a thoroughly pleasant, engaging and charming gentleman.

Answer 4

Just here for my two points.

This is what stupid answer you gave on my post.
Talk about being sarcastic! Just be real!

annie Bee
2 minutes ago


Report Abuse
Are we living in the same country?

Answer 5

damn! rock on again tamika! another great answer!


i agree!