“The Obama administration’s continuation of the Bush administration’s refusal to prosecute the elite banksters (or even the vastly lower status CEOs of the fraudulent mortgage bank) that drove the crisis has made it clear that the rule of law no longer applies to wide ranges of life and that crony capitalism will continue to reign.” – Bill K. Black
I truly believe that the global commercial banking industry has carte blanch to lie and deceive its clients today. For example, US Department Attorney General Eric Holder recently testified to US Congress and made the following statement:
“Let me be VERY VERY VERY clear. Banks are not TOO BIG too jail. If we find a bank or a financial institution that has done something wrong…those cases will be brought [to justice]” (emphasis not only mine but Eric Holder’s as well).
However, when the DOJ stated it had documents that could prove beyond a reasonable doubt that HSBC had engaged in criminal activity in laundering billions of dollars for violent Mexican drug cartels, Holder held not one HSBC banker accountable and jailed no one at HSBC for these crimes and instead fined them a sum of one month’s profits that will clearly not serve as a deterrent from continuing to engage in such crimes in the future. Thus it is clear, that the only person that can prevent banks from committing crimes against you is…YOU. Furthermore, it should be abundantly clear that one needs to perform the necessary research now to understand that all assets held inside the global banking system are at very significant and imminent risk. –JS Kim
Published on Sep 16, 2013
Today, I still see the same kind of people willingly take high paying jobs with immoral banking institutions that would refuse to take a job with an organization more widely acknowledged as a crime syndicate such as a drug cartel, even though nearly all banks are just “fronts” for crime syndicates. Here’s Part I to explain why this analogy holds true to any comparison or careful inspection.
Here’s some of the transcript below:
Mr Bowe is asked by Mr Fitzgerald how they had come up with the figure of €7bn. He laughs as he is taped saying: “Just, as Drummer (then-CEO David Drumm) would say, ‘picked it out of my arse’.”
John Bowe:””They might say the cost to the taxpayer is too high . . . if it doesn’t look too big at the outset . . . if it looks big, big enough to be important, but not too big that it kind of spoils everything, then, then I think you have a chance. So I think it can creep up.”
Peter Fitzgerald, the Director of Retail Banking, is heard saying: “Yeah. They’ve got skin in the game and that is the key.”
Bowe: “So it is bridged until we can pay you back, which is NEVER”
Bowe: “Under the terms, that say repayment, they say NO”
Peter Fitzgerald: “Yeah” (they both laugh)
Bowe: “Geez that’s a lot of dosh… Jesus f—ing hell.”
William K. Black at the Public Eye Awards 2013
“2 year olds get this far better than these executives. You have to be really taught to treat People in this kind of abusive fashion. You need an organization that institutionally trains people from the beginning to behave like beasts towards their customers.” – Bill K. Black
These are “Financial Terrorists“, “Money Junkies“, and control freaks, aka psychopaths within institutional central planning. They are directing nations into another global crisis, if they continue to have their way. We, the people appear to be the only hindrance to their central authority and globalization plans.
I feel it in my gut that the minions and puppets inside institutions are planning a major catastrophic event soon to further their agenda. ~ Ron
Everett Stern, a former employee of HSBC that uncovered and blew the whistle on the company knowingly financing criminals, terrorists and drug cartels.
New and Noteworthy Regulations
CFTC: On September 9, the CFTC voted unanimously to issue a concept release regarding the regulation of automated (high-speed) trading in the U.S. derivatives market. In the document, which is a step prior to a formal rule proposal, the CFTC requests input on more than 100 questions , such as whether to expand testing and supervision of automated trading strategies and ways to limit the number of trading orders a firm can place at once.
FDIC: On September 10, the FDIC approved a final rule clarifying that deposits in foreign branches of U.S. banks are not insured by the FDIC’s Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF). The rule takes effect 30 days from publication in the Federal Register. The FDIC believed that U.S. banks seeking to comply with a new U.K. Prudential Regulatory Authority requirement that all U.K. branch depositors be treated equally were likely to change their U.K. deposit agreements so that the deposits are payable both in the U.K. and in the U.S. Such a change by U.S. banks would have made the DIF liable to pay out any shortfalls from failures of U.K. branches of U.S. banks and the FDIC rule prevents such a result. The rule will not affect deposits in overseas military banking facilities governed by the Department of Defense.
- On September 12, responding to pressure from Congress, the CFPB issued a bulletin stating that payroll card accounts are covered by the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (EFTA) and Regulation E. The bulletin emphasizes that the fee disclosure and error resolution provisions of Regulation E apply to payroll cards and that employers may not require employees to receive their wages by payroll card. In July, a group of Democratic Senators wrote to the CFPB and the Department of Labor urging that “swift action” be taking regarding prepaid payroll cards and expressing concern that the “excessive fees” and other practices associated with payroll cards may violate the EFTA and its implementing regulation, Regulation E.
- On September 13, the CFPB issued final amendments to its Mortgage Servicing and Loan Originator Compensation rules. Among other things, the amendments clarify what servicer activities are prohibited in the first 120 days of delinquency, facilitate servicers’ offering of short-term forbearance plans and revise the effective dates of many of the loan originator compensation rule provisions to align with other mortgage rule effective dates.
READ MORE: publicpolicybulletin.com
Thank Findsen Law for this Bill Black Blog entry below:
Bill Black on How the Mortgage Banker’s Association Fooled the FBI
William K. Black, author and law and criminology professor, and ex-bank regulator extraordinaire, has an investigative series on how the FBI and the Department of Justice have failed the American homeowner/taxpayer. The thesis of this third part of his series is below, and the full article is here:
The MBA conned the FBI into a “partnership” with the trade association of the “perps.” In my prior column I showed the first product of the partnership – a poster warning customers not to defraud banks but ignoring banks defrauding customers. This column discusses the more consequential and damaging product of the FBI/MBA partnership. The MBA presented a definition of “mortgage fraud” under which the bank is always the innocent victim and never a perpetrator. Because the FBI and DOJ did not draw on the banking regulators’ expertise due to the death of criminal referrals by the agencies the FBI fell for the MBA con.
The second product of the MBA and the FBI’s Faustian bargain is a purported definition of “mortgage fraud.” The FBI’s March 8, 2007 press release announcing its “partnership” with the FBI contained the same fake definition as the FBI’s 2010 mortgage fraud report quoted below. Note that the MBA con of the FBI was so successful that the FBI parrots the definition uncritically, year after year, as if it were revealed truth. Unlike Gaul, all mortgage fraud is divided into only two parts – and the bank and its elite officers are always the victims.
The FBI’s 2010 report is a Tea Party fantasy due to the MBA’s con. It reports only on the vastly smaller and less damaging mortgage frauds by lower social status individuals who exploited the fraud vulnerabilities that the officers controlling the lenders created when they gutted their underwriting and suborned their internal controls to make it possible to make hundreds of thousands of bad loans pursuant to the accounting control fraud “recipe” for a lender. The FBI report ignores the twin massive control frauds by mortgage originators that drove the financial crisis and led to endemic fraud in the sale of fraudulently originated mortgages to the secondary market. The MBA has conned the FBI in 2007, and the FBI has remained conned. The result is that the FBI operates under a faux definition of “mortgage fraud” in which it is conceptually impossible for the banks and their controlling officers to be criminals. The FBI is treating even the Nation’s most fraudulent mortgage lenders as the innocent “victims” of fraud by primarily low social status customers who often lack any financial sophistication.
*Remind everyone in your discussions this is not merely corruption, or merely a few institutions, but rather it is SYSTEMIC from governmental, regulatory, judicial, and other institutions with the top Executives and officials abusing institutional authority with impunity.
“System is So Flawed That Fraud is Mathematically Guaranteed” – Bill K. Black
Reblogged this on Spartan of Truth.
Is the recent Navy yard shooting event the excuse that will be used in an attempt to justify the reasoning to forcefully take personal arms and private property away from the people? If so will it spark violence and armed rebellion?
I do not have the answers to these questions, but here is what President Obama is reported (by CBS and Reuters) to have decided:
“In the wake of the shooting at the Navy Yard, Obama spokesman Jay Carney said the president is implementing executive actions and reiterated his commitment to strengthening gun laws, including expanding background checks to sales online and at gun shows.” – http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/09/17/carney-obama-implementing-executive-actions-following-navy-yard-shooting/
Sounds reasonable, but the details will be revealed when the People learn what executive decisions are being made and how they will be implemented/enforced…
What Jay Carney (spokesman) says may or may not be true; what matters is by what “authority” has a President to implement “executive actions” on the People without the consent of the People, or in violation of the U.S. Constitution?