SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: ChinuSFO who wrote (145618)9/7/2014 2:43:21 PM
From: pcstel  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 149317
 
<The economic policy that I do not support is his refusing to provide tax incentives to American companies repatriate overseas profits to create jobs here.<

Yeap! Let's keep all the Corporations money HERE. 15% of a big pile of money is better than 35% of nothing.

PCSTEL



To: ChinuSFO who wrote (145618)9/9/2014 10:17:30 AM
From: RetiredNow  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 149317
 
Chinu, you have been an apologist for the TBTF Banks despite their crimes, as if the lack of prosecutions somehow means they aren't guilty despite all the evidence. This is one of many reasons the American people have lost faith with Obama and his AG Holder. He prosecutes the little guy and the whistleblower, but he does nothing to the biggest criminals in the land. He's a selective Executive office, picking and choosing which laws to enforce. It's a disgrace. Read the article below to understand why not prosecuting the bankers is a crime in and of itself. Ritholtz is known for being an economic optimist and has said that Keynesianism works. So he's not a rightwing blogger by any stretch. It's remarkable that he and I agree on this topic, given that you know I am very conservative when it comes to economics and monetary matters, and Ritholtz is no conservative.

-------------

The Reasons Bankers Weren't Busted

11 SEP 9, 2014 7:57 AM EDT
By Barry Ritholtz

bloombergview.com

“There Were No Convictions of Bankers for Good Reason” is the headline of a post 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.
At least that is why according to Pomerantz. It should surprise no one that a lawyer who spent much of his career representing financial institutions and their executives wouldn't see any prosecutable crimes. Fortunately, it is easily refutable, which is our task for today and tomorrow.

Pomerantz's claim is, along with other like it, what we should expect from corporate management and its hired apologists. But this exercise in cynical spin also does significant damage to respect for the rule of law and undermines respect for legal institutions and the legitimacy of elected officials.

I have been following the absence of legal prosecutions since 2008, and have posted on that subject more than 500 times. But this isn’t the obsession of one lone crank (i.e., me). Many others in banking, law enforcement and government who aren't on the payroll of banks have reviewed the events of the financial crisis and have reached the same conclusion -- that the law was broken repeatedly by bankers.

Start with the Department of Justice’s own Audit Division. The Office of the Inspector General issued a scathing report on the department's prosecutorial incompetence. It is difficult to give a fair read of the 57-page summary and not come away with an understanding of the serious criminality among bankers and the professionals who worked for them.

Other observers, such as Bill Black, have also detailed many criminal acts committed by bankers during the 2007-09 financial crisis. Black is a respected professor of economics and law. He perhaps is best known for exposing congressional ethical lapses and corruption during the savings and loan crisis, and is the author of "The Best Way to Rob a Bank is to Own One: How Corporate Executives and Politicians Looted the S&L Industry."

Josh Rosner, a banking analyst for many years, and co-author (with the New York Times's Gretchen Morgenson) of "Reckless Endangerment: How Outsized Ambition, Greed, and Corruption Created the Worst Financial Crisis of Our Time," also looked at the issue of law-breaking. He put forth a scathing analysis focused exclusively on what he saw as the wrongdoing and regulatory violations by JPMorgan Chase & Co. (See this report).

At the state level, we find all manner of political interference with prosecutions. Consider Florida. When the state's newly elected attorney general took office, she immediately stopped her predecessor's " Fraudclosure" investigations into banks' hyperfast foreclosures mills. As it turned out, the banks and law firms involved in these investigations were large campaign contributors to the new AG. Despite the prior attorney general’s overwhelming evidence of law-breaking, no prosecutions were brought. To my mind, this was proof of corruption and crony capitalism, not proof of innocence.

Political access and lobbying go part way toward explaining the absence of prosecutions and, therefore, the lack of convictions. To understand why there were no convictions of senior bankers, you need to understand a bit of criminal law in the U.S. The American form of jurisprudence requires a criminal indictment to bring someone to trial. No indictment, no trial, no conviction. Where bankers and their lawyers have been so successful is stopping prosecutions before they begin. You don’t get to the conviction part if prosecutors don't bring indictments.

As we have repeatedly shown, Treasury Department officials, including former Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, had convinced prosecutors in the Justice Department of the dangers of prosecuting banks and bankers for the economy. This showed up in the news coverage over the years, and is still going on. Just consider this recent Bloomberg News article with the headline “Criminal Charges Against Banks Risk Sparking Crisis.''

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.