Peter1469
09-10-2014, 06:32 PM
Banking Fraud and the lack of prosecutions since 2008. (http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-09-09/the-reasons-bankers-weren-t-busted)
Many intellectuals, banking insiders, and government officials have said the lack of prosecutions is because no crimes were committed..... Absolutely incorrect. Notice the revolving door between Wall Street and the highest levels of our government.....
“There Were No Convictions of Bankers for Good Reason” is the headline of a post (http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/08/27/holding-bankers-accountable/there-were-no-convictions-of-bankers-for-good-reason)by Mark F. Pomerantz, a lawyer and retired partner at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison in the New York Times's Room for Debate discussion:
The reason that senior bankers did not face charges, even though investigators interviewed countless witnesses and pored over truckloads of emails and other documents for many years, is that the executives running companies like Bank of America, Citigroup and JP Morgan were not engaged in criminal acts.
***
This is a short list. They should include the entire mortgage derivative scheme (that is much much bigger than anything listed in the article).
So what crimes could we imagine? How about fraudulent mortgage underwriting; robo-signing and foreclosure perjury; falsifying Libor rates; manipulating gold and other metal prices; money laundering for drug kingpins and terrorists; and participating in Ponzi schemes. This is hardly an all-inclusive list and I could certainly make it longer.
If only the list of attempted prosecutions was as long.
Many intellectuals, banking insiders, and government officials have said the lack of prosecutions is because no crimes were committed..... Absolutely incorrect. Notice the revolving door between Wall Street and the highest levels of our government.....
“There Were No Convictions of Bankers for Good Reason” is the headline of a post (http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/08/27/holding-bankers-accountable/there-were-no-convictions-of-bankers-for-good-reason)by Mark F. Pomerantz, a lawyer and retired partner at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison in the New York Times's Room for Debate discussion:
The reason that senior bankers did not face charges, even though investigators interviewed countless witnesses and pored over truckloads of emails and other documents for many years, is that the executives running companies like Bank of America, Citigroup and JP Morgan were not engaged in criminal acts.
***
This is a short list. They should include the entire mortgage derivative scheme (that is much much bigger than anything listed in the article).
So what crimes could we imagine? How about fraudulent mortgage underwriting; robo-signing and foreclosure perjury; falsifying Libor rates; manipulating gold and other metal prices; money laundering for drug kingpins and terrorists; and participating in Ponzi schemes. This is hardly an all-inclusive list and I could certainly make it longer.
If only the list of attempted prosecutions was as long.