If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   Justice Department is shocked, SHOCKED to find out JPMorgan Chase and Bank Of America are laundering money for terrorists and drug cartels   (nytimes.com) divider line 45
    More: Obvious, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Bank of America, U.S. Bancorp, Justice Department, inquiries, United States, Standard Chartered, Comptroller of the Currency  
•       •       •

2452 clicks; posted to Business » on 15 Sep 2012 at 3:12 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



45 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-09-15 11:10:52 AM  
Remember kids, downloading music or movies, using drugs or doing business with these financial institutions gives money to TERRURISTS!
 
2012-09-15 11:32:03 AM  
This reminds me, I really need to stop being lazy and move into a credit union. I hate Chase.
 
2012-09-15 11:36:46 AM  
If you still believe that for-profit banks are really misunderstood and are not actual criminal organizations, then perhaps you should be tested for mental impairment.
 
2012-09-15 11:47:37 AM  
Looks like the banks are being investigated for not following proper security protocols, which led to some past events that went on under their noses (Mexican drug cartels and Iranian transactions are named in TFA). This is really an IT shortcoming, but I'm glad they're being investigated. No one is going to spend millions on upholding regulations and implementing IT systems if the enforcement isn't there.
 
2012-09-15 11:59:39 AM  
This is just an excuse to get into everyone's banking info. The big organizations that foreclose on homes that don't owe money and rip off customers on a daily basis will never feel any repurcussions.
 
2012-09-15 12:10:14 PM  
Not a surprise, yet nothing will happen.
 
2012-09-15 12:21:33 PM  

ManateeGag: Not a surprise, yet nothing will happen.


AbbeySomeone: The big organizations that foreclose on homes that don't owe money and rip off customers on a daily basis will never feel any repurcussions.

 
2012-09-15 12:34:56 PM  
This is going to be a terrible inconvenience for the executives. They might have to spend an entire morning testifying instead of eating brunch with their friends. That's just terrible.
 
2012-09-15 12:39:16 PM  
Shocked, but not Gitmo shocked.

When you start executing the terror funders, then you have begun fighting the war.
Until then, you are just poking at the rising bubbles in your bathwater.
 
2012-09-15 02:44:48 PM  

Chevello: Remember kids, downloading music or movies, using drugs or doing business with these financial institutions gives money to TERRURISTS!


I hate to point it out, but as long as drugs* remain illegal, using drugs *does* help enrich some really shiatty people/organizations, some of which goes to terrorist groups (especially opiate-based illegal drugs).

Not that it *should* be that way -- drugs should be legalized, in part to help minimize said enrichment... THAT SAID, SMOEK WHUT U GOT

*recreational
 
2012-09-15 02:44:58 PM  
1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-09-15 02:53:46 PM  
Lock up those involved in Gitmo. Lets out that place to a use we all can agree on.
 
2012-09-15 03:32:49 PM  
FTFA: Federal and state authorities are investigating a handful of major American banks for failing to monitor cash transactions in and out of their branches, a lapse that may have enabled drug dealers and terrorists to launder tainted money...

Oh, they monitor their transactions alright. The bank computers probably keep banks more on top of things than the individuals or companies using them.

AbbeySomeone: This is just an excuse to get into everyone's banking info.


Yep, I can see that. This sounds like a bank shakedown but not one intended to benefit all of us.
 
2012-09-15 03:37:17 PM  
Call me when they freeze the bank's assets.
 
2012-09-15 03:54:04 PM  
ManateeGag: Not a surprise, yet nothing will happen.

AbbeySomeone: The big organizations that foreclose on homes that don't owe money and rip off customers on a daily basis will never feel any repurcussions.


THIS
Can't be repeated enough.

OH NO! They might have to pay a FINE! It might be THOUSANDS of dollars!
 
2012-09-15 04:02:20 PM  

gameshowhost: Chevello: Remember kids, downloading music or movies, using drugs or doing business with these financial institutions gives money to TERRURISTS!

I hate to point it out, but as long as drugs* remain illegal, using drugs *does* help enrich some really shiatty people/organizations, some of which goes to terrorist groups (especially opiate-based illegal drugs).

Not that it *should* be that way -- drugs should be legalized, in part to help minimize said enrichment... THAT SAID, SMOEK WHUT U GOT

*recreational


True, true and yet..so true.
 
2012-09-15 04:31:12 PM  

Nofun: Looks like the banks are being investigated for not following proper security protocols, which led to some past events that went on under their noses (Mexican drug cartels and Iranian transactions are named in TFA). This is really an IT shortcoming, but I'm glad they're being investigated. No one is going to spend millions on upholding regulations and implementing IT systems if the enforcement isn't there.


This. The Govt prefers to make examples of the big banks to senda message.
 
2012-09-15 04:32:32 PM  

Nofun: Looks like the banks are being investigated for not following proper security protocols, which led to some past events that went on under their noses (Mexican drug cartels and Iranian transactions are named in TFA). This is really an IT shortcoming, but I'm glad they're being investigated. No one is going to spend millions on upholding regulations and implementing IT systems if the enforcement isn't there.


Sure, blame it on IT. Except IT doesn't make the rules on how those types of transactions are monitored and tracked. That's the responsibility of IA, Risk and Compliance. Other departments make the rules, IT implements them. Now if IT was told to create the programs to that would be used to make sure that the regulations weren't followed and didn't, or made faulty programs, that's something else. But it's not the geeks fault yet.
 
2012-09-15 04:56:55 PM  
Laundering? fark, they probably ARE the cartels.
 
2012-09-15 04:57:35 PM  
This is what GOPers like to pretend is not happening, in that the wealthy only worship wealth and have allegiance to nothing else.
 
2012-09-15 05:09:33 PM  
money is money. these businesses are not opening buildings for your benefit. they open buildings to make money.
On lighter note, I think via RICO, the association with terrorists allows us to put every single employee of boa and jpmc in jail.
 
2012-09-15 05:12:30 PM  

GreenAdder: This is going to be a terrible inconvenience for the executives. They might have to spend an entire morning testifying instead of eating brunch with their friends. That's just terrible.


Saying "I don't recall" a couple of dozen times does tend to wear you out.
 
2012-09-15 05:38:02 PM  
FTA: Under the Bank Secrecy Act, financial institutions like banks and check-cashers must report any cash transaction of more than $10,000 and bring any dubious activity to the attention of regulators.

This is not true. It was changed to $5-6000 grand (not sure which) in about 2008 thanks to the glorious evolutionary growth of the Patriot Act.
 
2012-09-15 05:40:44 PM  
So when does financial terrorist Jamie Dimon get sent to a Federal Penitentiary?
 
2012-09-15 06:19:17 PM  
I still remember an old (mid 90s?) Frontline about the Colombian drug cartels. There was an interview with an agent who was tracing the money. He had followed it out of the US, down to Colombia and was about to link it back to banks in Miami when he was told to stop.
 
2012-09-15 06:47:51 PM  

Goodfella: So when does financial terrorist Jamie Dimon get sent to a Federal Penitentiary?


Right after I get my 3-way with Zooey Deschanel and Mila Jovovich. So, you know, any day now.
 
2012-09-15 06:50:42 PM  
Comon, you can't hold them responsible for the financial transactions they make. They are just profit-hungry machines, they can't help their nature
 
2012-09-15 06:58:36 PM  
img233.imageshack.us 

/oh, thank you
 
2012-09-15 06:59:37 PM  
Thank Jeebus I have a USAA account.
 
2012-09-15 07:00:56 PM  
It's estimated that close to a trillion dollars in illegal drug money is laundered thru US banks each year. A lot of that money is laundered by the CIA. Much of it ends up in the stock market. Win the drug war and our economy will collapse. Well, it's going to collapse anyways, but that would make it even worse.
 
2012-09-15 07:19:50 PM  
Rest of planet responds with a multilingual "Well, duh."
 
2012-09-15 07:38:18 PM  

raerae1980: This reminds me, I really need to stop being lazy and move into a credit union. I hate Chase.


I finally did that about a year ago. I'm still wondering what took me so long.
 
2012-09-15 08:43:23 PM  
But no CEOs will go to jail, just fines that no where equal the crimes.
 
2012-09-15 08:50:05 PM  
well color me shocked as well.

also,

The Green Intern: Thank Jeebus I have a USAA account.


this.

:)
 
2012-09-15 10:09:18 PM  
it's just the nature of the way things woiks. have a fig.
 
2012-09-15 10:42:31 PM  
No bank officer will be inconvenienced in any lasting way by this investigation.
 
2012-09-15 11:17:38 PM  

BizarreMan: Nofun: Looks like the banks are being investigated for not following proper security protocols, which led to some past events that went on under their noses (Mexican drug cartels and Iranian transactions are named in TFA). This is really an IT shortcoming, but I'm glad they're being investigated. No one is going to spend millions on upholding regulations and implementing IT systems if the enforcement isn't there.

Sure, blame it on IT. Except IT doesn't make the rules on how those types of transactions are monitored and tracked. That's the responsibility of IA, Risk and Compliance. Other departments make the rules, IT implements them. Now if IT was told to create the programs to that would be used to make sure that the regulations weren't followed and didn't, or made faulty programs, that's something else. But it's not the geeks fault yet.


IT is not sales, thus it is overhead and should be cut anyway. IT becomes even bigger overhead if the compliance systems implemented by IT prevent the sales superstars from laundering nine and ten figures a year.

Pretty much everyone who isn't on a commission pay schedule is more likely to face fallout than those who are. Whether it is compliance, risk management or IT so long as they can blame someone whose conviction wouldn't impact their official standing with the SEC they will do so.

I had to take anti-money-laundering through FINRA to sell fixed rate life policies. It ain't that hard to be compliant on the sales side, but it is so much easier to replace a few technology officer types than to make good with the feds for licensed brokers screwing up or actively working with dirty money.
 
2012-09-16 01:23:24 AM  
Even worse, they're banks.
 
2012-09-16 08:41:10 AM  

ManateeGag: Not a surprise, yet nothing will happen.


The Obama Justice Department's attitude is we shouldn't worry about the past.
 
2012-09-16 07:16:47 PM  

raerae1980: This reminds me, I really need to stop being lazy and move into a credit union. I hate Chase.


Get out of my head.

/It's disgusting in here.
 
2012-09-16 08:28:13 PM  

Spare Me: FTA: Under the Bank Secrecy Act, financial institutions like banks and check-cashers must report any cash transaction of more than $10,000 and bring any dubious activity to the attention of regulators.

This is not true. It was changed to $5-6000 grand (not sure which) in about 2008 thanks to the glorious evolutionary growth of the Patriot Act.


Clarification: A cash transaction over $10,000 must generate a CTR (Cash Transaction Report). If you make a deposit of over 10 grand in check form; no CTR. If the MSB (Money Service Business) and/or its employee or agent suspect that you are "structuring" a transaction in order to evade the 10 grand trigger, the MSB is to refuse the transaction(s) and file a SAR (Suspicious Activity Report) with the Feds.
A whole bunch of transactions involving money transfer (Western Union, Moneygram, et al) can trigger a SAR even if the action itself is completely innocent.
Financial professionals are walking the streets these days, but if you're well versed in auditing AND the Bank Secrecy Act provisions & implications, you can get yourself a pretty good gig.
 
2012-09-16 08:44:55 PM  
Shine on you Jamie Dimon!
 
2012-09-17 10:14:16 AM  
Just let them continue - no one will be jailed over this anyway - they'll just find another way to do the same thing.

At least this way you can keep an eye on everything
 
2012-09-17 03:33:34 PM  

AbbeySomeone: This is just an excuse to get into everyone's banking info. The big organizations that foreclose on homes that don't owe money and rip off customers on a daily basis will never feel any repurcussions.


The government can already get any info they want from the banks. The banks don't have any 4th amendment claim over YOUR account info. And you're not in possession so you don't either. Don't even need a warrant. This has been settled law for the better part of 75 years.
 
2012-09-17 03:37:54 PM  

NotARocketScientist: ManateeGag: Not a surprise, yet nothing will happen.

AbbeySomeone: The big organizations that foreclose on homes that don't owe money and rip off customers on a daily basis will never feel any repurcussions.

THIS
Can't be repeated enough.

OH NO! They might have to pay a FINE! It might be THOUSANDS of dollars!


And I'll repeat. The Feds can already get your bank records sans warrant. That was settled in the mob hunting days. Pre-war on drugs, pre-USA PATRIOT act.

You don't have a 4th amendment claim to anything you don't have 1) on your person or 2) on your private property. This isn't limited to bank files - its the way the 4th has been read for over a century.

While I agree that the banks likely won't see anything in the way of real serious fines, claiming this as a power grab is ignorant of the actual law.
 
Displayed 45 of 45 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report