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)   "Why only one banker went to jail over the financial crisis" Because we're run by the banking industry?   (nytimes.com) divider line 34
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

4852 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 May 2014 at 9:48 AM (34 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2014-05-01 10:01:20 AM  
3 votes:
Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.
2014-05-02 05:04:33 AM  
2 votes:

Debeo Summa Credo: BullBearMS: Fraud

Wells Fargo & Co. has agreed to pay the Federal Housing Finance Agency less than $1 billion to settle claims that it sold toxic mortgage-backed securities to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae prior to the financial crisis, according to a Thursday news report.

Gee, you'd think more people would be going to jail if there was so much "fraud".

No, it's all a conspiracy. All those attorneys general and prosecutors are just in cahoots with the big bad bankers, I'm sure.


you're a terrible troll 1/10.

Go back to the 1990's and read the Holder memorandum...wait wait let me help you'r dumb ass out and link it for you.   HERE.

This follows the successful busting of Arthur Anderson (ENRON accounting and audit firm).  What happened to Arthur Anderson should happen to many many more businesses in the USA and frankly around the world.  However our esteemed Attorney General thinks that we ought to just fine them or enter into deferred prosecution agreements instead.

How nice of him.  How 'fortunate' for those who put money into politicians coffers.  HSBC even admitted to knowingly laundering 850 million (yes million) dollars in drug money from the cartels to hezbollah and many other recipients.  Eric Holder said...nah just fine em for like 1.9 billion and they can walk.

So The US government decided that it was ok to take $1.9B in lieu of shutting down a corrupt organization.  That is just what HSBC admitted to.  There was no trial...no discovery and no investigation.  That 850M was likely the tip of a very large iceberg and HSBC were happy to pay.

That is just one scandal.

LIBOR rate fix
Countrywide mortgage fraud (JP Morgan Chase paid $13B in a settlement)
Municipal Bond Rigging and Price Fixing

*currently under investigation*
- Gold market rigging (and other precious metal markets)
- Foreign Currency Exchange rigging (FOREX)

No totally not signs of cartel activity and a participatory government!
One hand is washing the other.
2014-05-01 10:52:02 AM  
2 votes:
The bankers' behavior is kinda to be expected. You tell them go ahead have fun take as big risks as you want we'll foot the losses they're gonna do just that very thing. And when it all blows up in their face they can cry too big to fail, financial instability, great depression oogy boogy and get their bailouts. Then pay them back by being first in line for T-Bill auctions then reselling them and using those profits for repayment


Banks have a tendency to become very corrupt but people seem to forget that they don't want to store quantities of currency in their home and kind of like being able to purchase things without being required to have the entire bill up front in cash. Much less our financial system is really the only thing keeping us a superpower. There are tremendous perks to having the world's reserve currency and biggest banking system. You don't want to be around when that is no longer the case
2014-05-01 10:46:31 AM  
2 votes:

Deathfrogg: Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.


The problem is, if you shut down all or most of the largest banks in the country, unemployment would go to 25% or so overnight.  The point of a bank is that it loans money to other companies and individuals; if all of those people and companies started having serious trouble getting loans, the economy would crash and another recession would start.

One problem with articles like this is they never list any specific people who "should" have been prosecuted but weren't.  The number could be zero, for all I know.  Give some specifics, man, not "bankers suck and the government sucks" generic crap.
2014-05-01 10:18:50 AM  
2 votes:

In the case of HSBC, caught red-handed laundering money for terrorists and drug cartels the "Justice" Department actually said they were too big to jail:

"Had the U.S. authorities decided to press criminal charges," said Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer at a press conference to announce the settlement, "HSBC would almost certainly have lost its banking license in the U.S., the future of the institution would have been under threat and the entire banking system would have been destabilized."
2014-05-01 10:08:14 AM  
2 votes:

imfallen_angel: 'cause 'murica and capitalism?


cdn.motinetwork.net
2014-05-01 10:06:13 AM  
2 votes:
Because the DoJ's run by pussies who couldn't give two farks about justice.
2014-05-02 07:09:47 PM  
1 votes:
kinda' hard to put wealthy bankers in prison when these same bankers own Judges and Legislators and can afford the best Lawyers in the business.

when is the last time a wealthy murderer was put to death???    not gonna' happen.

feel free to try, though.    no pun intended.

ain't Freedom great!
2014-05-02 06:48:15 PM  
1 votes:
2014-05-02 08:15:16 AM  
1 votes:
2014-05-01 08:43:37 PM  
1 votes:
Because they could only find one case where the evidence didn't lead right back to the politicians or the bureaucrats at the FED and/or Treasury Department.
2014-05-01 07:13:03 PM  
1 votes:

Deathfrogg: Give it up BB, folks like that don't give a shiat about factual information.


Of course not, but it's fun to prove just how full of shiat he is when he pulls this exact same BS in every thread on the financial crisis.
2014-05-01 07:08:51 PM  
1 votes:
Fraud

Wells Fargo & Co. has agreed to pay the Federal Housing Finance Agency less than $1 billion to settle claims that it sold toxic mortgage-backed securities to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae prior to the financial crisis, according to a Thursday news report.
2014-05-01 06:57:25 PM  
1 votes:
2014-05-01 06:53:36 PM  
1 votes:
2014-05-01 06:50:45 PM  
1 votes:
2014-05-01 06:47:42 PM  
1 votes:
2014-05-01 04:06:07 PM  
1 votes:
There's not much point in controlling a vast empire if the people at the top are subject to laws.
2014-05-01 01:30:14 PM  
1 votes:

The Irresponsible Captain: Because America is now full of pussies. We need to get all Teddy Roosevelt on these guys.

[www.authentichistory.com image 330x438]


Teddy was actually much more like the present administration.  Sure, he was known as a trust buster, but that was only in contrast to the absolute laissez faire way of doing business in previous administrations.  Teddy's MO was to only go after trusts when the economics of doing so made sense, and where the imposition of government regulation didn't risk any radical destabilization of the market.  He would have applauded the HSBC settlement.

Taft was the true progressive.  He broke up something like 4x the monopolies that Teddy did, and in only a fraction of the time.  That's why Teddy came to hate Taft, and why Teddy started the Bull Moose party to unseat him.
2014-05-01 12:33:09 PM  
1 votes:

Detinwolf: Geotpf: The problem is, if you shut down all or most of the largest banks in the country, unemployment would go to 25% or so overnight.

Just kill the investment side and let the basic lenders exist.  Investment banks are the ultimate "screw you, I got mine" industry.


Ending investment banking would have no impact on the economy - this is what farklibs actually believe
2014-05-01 12:21:20 PM  
1 votes:

Deathfrogg: electricjebus: Deathfrogg: Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.

I believe that's called cutting off your nose to spite your face.

When cancer invades your nose, and the only solution to surviving that cancer is to remove ones nose or die, perhaps it isn't such a bad thing. The megabanks are most certainly a cancer. They're the pancreatic cancer of our Republic, and the Christian Scientists are in control of the legislatures.


This is what farklibs actually believe
2014-05-01 11:30:57 AM  
1 votes:

Dr Dreidel: That's supposed to be where the courts come in, but it appears they don't care much, either.


SCOTUS does care, but for the bad guys. Since nearly half (44%) of all American families are objectively one glitch away from financial disaster I don't see much reason to have such faith. Furthermore, once caught up in the same legal system a family in bankruptcy is screwed whereas a financial corporation can pay for a legal team to delay indefinitely any legal action aimed at its staff and officers. As Eric Holder was paid to say, "some banks are too large to prosecute."
2014-05-01 11:25:00 AM  
1 votes:

Deathfrogg: Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.


I believe that's called cutting off your nose to spite your face.
2014-05-01 11:07:21 AM  
1 votes:

Geotpf: The problem is, if you shut down all or most of the largest banks in the country, unemployment would go to 25% or so overnight. The point of a bank is that it loans money to other companies and individuals; if all of those people and companies started having serious trouble getting loans, the economy would crash and another recession would start.


Their investments wouldn't disappear overnight. They might get tied up for a while, and there would be significant impact, but I doubt 25% unemployment (didn't get that high when trillions vanished overnight, did it?) and a total freeze of the monetary system.

I think the bigger problem comes when people have no faith in the high-finance system (well, I'd assume most of us don't already) - but then again, once you've got the table minimum, it appears you lose some part of your humanity. The only ones who care don't matter; and the only ones who matter don't care.

That's supposed to be where the courts come in, but it appears they don't care much, either.
2014-05-01 10:40:16 AM  
1 votes:
Gulper Eel:
And where's the congressmember to introduce such a measure? Anybody? Surely there is one with the courage to bring this up.

Well, there's no way to prove if he would or wouldn't (one of the few perks of being dead) but I'd like to think Paul Wellstone would.

/not a conspiracy guy, but I still think that crash was fishy
2014-05-01 10:39:19 AM  
1 votes:

Debeo Summa Credo: Because crimes weren't committed, I suppose.

Don't worry, little tinfoil hatters, the govt managed to extort billions from banks in the wake of the crisis.


How is the air on your planet? You certainly aren't alive and well on this one.
2014-05-01 10:25:17 AM  
1 votes:

Deathfrogg: Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.


Real answer? Because all that poses no credible threat to the life, liberty and wealth of individual bankers. It is only the credible threat to spending the next several decades getting cornholed by Bubba in cell block D, along with impoverishing your children, seeing you hottie wife divorce you for some other banker, and people making Bernie Maddoff jokes about you that will change behaviors.

And of course, this guy made the unfortunate choice of being born brown...throw him under the bus!
2014-05-01 10:04:40 AM  
1 votes:

Deathfrogg: Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.


And where's the congressmember to introduce such a measure? Anybody? Surely there is one with the courage to bring this up.
2014-05-01 10:00:12 AM  
1 votes:
Because holding them responsible for their crimes would be socialism. You don't hate America, do you?
2014-05-01 09:58:36 AM  
1 votes:
Screw ALL of those greedy b*stards.  They should all be in jail.  But money talks, BS walks.  It's the American way.
2014-05-01 09:57:29 AM  
1 votes:
Because of the golden rule. He who has the gold, makes the rules.
2014-05-01 09:52:51 AM  
1 votes:
Because the private sector pays its lawyers better.
2014-05-01 09:52:28 AM  
1 votes:
And people hate the cops.....
2014-05-01 09:50:47 AM  
1 votes:
Thread's pretty much over already. Subby, get the lights.
 
Displayed 34 of 34 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report