patrick.net

Eric Holder doesn't have to answer to anybody. If I were him I would initiate a coup. Since he's an Obama man, he would have the support of about 52% of the US population with out question.

WTF....did you not ready the intro or are you stoned off your ass from some of that bomb-ass weed Don Roberto just brought back from Kingstown using his thousands and thousands of real estate rental windfall dollars?

No one is talking about bringing down the economy. They're talking about large-scale money laundering on an institutional basis.

In the real world 'the Law' is merely one of many weapons to abuse and take advantage of others. So in this case they only took money but chose not to take prisoners. There are so many laws they can go after anyone almost.

HSBC is a really shitty bank, money laundering or not. I recommend anybody else.

bob2356 says

So you are saying ease of prosecution is the primary driving factor on what crimes the justice department prosecutes

Ease of prosecution is the primary driving factor for every prosecutor, period. Why do you think so many criminal cases are settled with plea bargains?

What information do you personally have about what went on at HSBC that leads you to believe that prosecuting this case would have been worthwhile?

Kevin says

Ease of prosecution is the primary driving factor for every prosecutor, period. Why do you think so many criminal cases are settled with plea bargains?

True, but the settlement was with the corporation, there was no prosecution or settlement at all with the officers of the corporation. Not the same thing.

Why do I need to have to have personal information to agree with hundreds of publications that are outraged that the case against the executives involved was dropped? Read, or at least skim it's really big, the senate report or look at the witness testimony. http://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/investigations/hearings/us-vulnerabilities-to-money-laundering-drugs-and-terrorist-financing-hsbc-case-history. Then try to tell me the executives involved didn't go to great lengths to circumvent the law. That makes them culpable and prosecutable.

Here's a somewhat hysterical (to be expected, it comes from the San Francisco) but nicely written piece that puts a lot of the opinions about the case in one spot. http://www.globalresearch.ca/fraud-money-laundering-and-narcotics-impunity-of-the-banking-giants-no-prosecution-of-hsbc/5317406

Decisions made at the Justice department about cases this public and this big are always highly political. I don't believe Holder made this call without the white house, aka Obama, being very involved.

AF why are you being so kind? Put them in a comfy warm jail cell? Wouldn't public drawing and quartering after being forced to watch their families broken on the wheel be much more appropriate? Just a thought.

APOCALYPSEFUCK is Shostakovich says

The laundering of criminal revenue was a continuing enterprise.

You have evidence that the DoJ doesn't?

bob2356 says

there was no prosecution or settlement at all with the officers of the corporation

Criminal charges based around a corporation's activities have an extraordinarily low rate of success. I can count on one hand the number of successful prosecutions for criminal wrongdoing against officers of a company in my lifetime.

The bar is very high:

- You have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the company's activities were criminal.

- You have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the officers were complicit in the criminal activity.

So, maybe they really did let a good case go because of politics. I don't know. I do know that nobody on this thread knows what actual guilt exists.

Kevin says

So, maybe they really did let a good case go because of politics. I don't know. I do know that nobody on this thread knows what actual guilt exists.

No one on this thread knows if guilt or innocence exists. That would be up to a jury to decide wouldn't it? We are discussing if there should have been a prosecution or not. There are plenty of people in positions to know the details better than you or I that think the case should have been pursued. After reading a pretty big chunk of the Senate report I personally can't believe the case was dropped.

Even if the case were unsuccessful it would still make the point that executives can't use the it looked like a duck, waddled like a duck, quacked like a duck, but we didn't realize it was a duck excuse without consequences. That's worthwhile in and of itself.

When you are designing teller windows to accept a certain size briefcase that holds a certain amount of money, that isn't negligence.

Of course Banks launder lots of drug money and do so knowingly. If they didn't, we'd see towers made of $20 and $100 bills rising in the Andes because the Drug Cartels, which handle countless billions a year, would have no where to put it.

However, if you're a contractor carrying a few thousand dollars in cash, better hope the cops don't stop you.

MisdemeanorRebel says

Betcha three beers Holder gets a nice job in a big Wall Street/DC lawfirm connected to the banking industry after he leaves office.

I'd suck my own dick over this but so obvious now it's boring that it came true.

ANYWAY.

Remember Elliot Spitzer?

Went from being the Democrat Wonder Boy to the NYT screaming he used Public Credit Cards to pay hookers (turned out to be false, he used his own money).

Gee, if there was only some reason in late 2008 that the Governor of New York who was known as a Gadfly to the Banking industry was suddenly found to be banging prostitutes.