HSBC Holdings Receives Nothing More Than a Slap on the Wrist

A recent article in The Wall Street Journal talks about the Justice Department’s decision to not pursue charges against HSBC for allegations made in 2012. HSBC is a major bank in the UK that admitted to neglecting to spot proceeds from drug trafficking in Mexico and also did not flag transactions by countries under economic sanctions. Rather than being prosecuted, the bank was allowed to admit guilt, improve its controls, and make a few other minor changes. Both Republican and Democrat lawmakers view the decision as a slap in the wrist for a company that admitted to engaging in extreme illegal activity. While former Attorney General Eric Holder says his remarks were misinterpreted (see below), the fact that HSBC is no longer being prosecuted lends credence to the idea that the government seems incapable of handling corruption within some of the world’s largest corporations.

See this previous post for a further discussion on companies being too big to fail.

SaveSave

Individuals Causing the 2008 Housing Crisis Receive No More Than a Slap on the Wrist

Following the 2008 housing crisis, several of the banks involved paid large settlement fines. JPMorgan Chase was one of those banks. The Justice Department used evidence from an anonymous whistleblower in the prosecution, but until recently the whistleblower remained anonymous. Matt Taibbi recently released an article in Rolling Stone describing why the whistleblower, Alayne Fleischmann, has gone public with what she knows. Ironically, the Justice Department wasn’t committed to bringing “justice” to those individuals who contributed to the fall of the economy through fraudulent activities. In fact, Attorney General Eric Holder said the following:

“I am concerned that the size of some of these institutions becomes so large that it does become difficult for us to prosecute them when we are hit with indications that if you do prosecute, if you do bring a criminal charge, it will have a negative impact on the national economy, perhaps even the world economy, and I think that is a function of the fact that some of these institutions have become too large.”

What is the Justice Department doing if they aren’t bringing justice to those responsible for major crimes? When Fleischmann realized that much of what she reported to the SEC and the Justice Department was not being fully pursued, she decided she had to go public with what she knew.

Connections Between the Big Banks and Holder's Justice Department: No Wonder There Aren't Criminal Cases

Eric Holder (from The Guardian)

A story in The Guardian discusses connections that Eric Holder and Lanny Breuer have with a law firm, Covington & Burling, that represents several big banks. The Guardian article gets key information from an NPR story including this connection between Holder and Breuer and the big banks:

Justice Department Admits They're Soft on Fraud

As I've said in several posts in the past, including this one, the Justice Department under this administration is very soft on prosecuting fraudsters. As a result, the key players who caused the mortgage meltdown have been essentially given a "get out of jail free" card. Interestingly, Eric Holder, head of the Justice Department has even admitted that they don't prosecute fraudsters. In Holder's view, doing so would hurt the economy! Amazing!! This definitely explains a lot... Here is a great write up of this absurd and twisted logic by Barry Ritholz...It's pretty short and well worth reading.

More on Fraud and the US Department of Justice

In several recent posts, I've been critical of the US Department of Justice's extremely poor record of prosecuting Wall Street executives who were a big cause of our current economic crisis. The executives of numerous large financial institutions took home hundreds of millions in compensation while pushing their firms to commit illegal business practices. It's obvious that basic mortgage fraud was rampant in many organizations and yet virtually no one has gone to jail yet.

Surprisingly, the lack of vigilance by the current administration is so blatant that even the NY Times has published an editorial by one of its columnists that says the current Democratic administration panders to business more than past GOP administrations did! I'd like to see a study of how often the NY Times has compared a Democratic administration to a Republican one and found the scale tipped to the GOP side of things. It has to be rare.

I recommend reading the analysis that this editorial gives and see if you agree with the bottom line that this editorial makes:

Amazing, isn’t it? George W. Bush has turned out to be tougher on corporate crooks than Barack Obama.

Wow--from the NY Times no less! Can Eric Holder and President Obama fall any further than that?!