Katie advertised that she had developed a miracle pill for women that would result in weight loss, wrinkle loss, and improved vitality; and for men would result in all those things, plus hair growth. Her television advertisement showed the miracle results allegedly obtained by consumers. Katie cautioned, however, that ingestion of the pill for six months was required before results would be evident. Although it was very expensive, the product was wildly popular. Some months after Katie began selling this product, consumers began filing complaints about it with the U. S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Consumers alleged that they did not experience the changes that had been promised in the advertisements for the product. The FTC investigated, and determined that Katie had failed to have a reasonable basis for the claims she made in the product advertisements. Katie responded and said that the ads merely involved in the use of generalities and clear exaggerations, and were not promises of product performance. The Commission disagreed and issued a formal administrative complaint against her. After a hearing, the FTC issued a formal order requiring that Katie stop advertising and selling the pills. Even after losing all appeals, Katie continued selling the pills until she was fined by the Federal Trade Commission. She has since left the country and cannot be located. What is the FTC? What is the basis of its authority and jurisdiction? Who would have presided over the hearing involving the administrative complaint filed against Katie by the FTC? Why do you think that tribunal reached the decision that it did in this case? What law is relevant, and why? What remedies is the FTC authorized to seek against Katie, and which of those remedies would be most effective? Why? Would consumers who purchased the product have any remedies against Katie? If so, what would those remedies be? Discuss in detail and explain your answer in depth. (50 points)