Clinton is merely a representative of the corporate wing of the Democratic party. How anyone can believe her tough talk on the bankers is beyond me. As if she is going to bring up folks for prosecution that have donated millions to her campaign. How stupid can people be? Obama received more money from Wall Street than anyone else has and wallah not one of the high-level managers were brought up for prosecution. Can anyone say quid-pro-quo.
1 Like
You still haven’t pointed out what laws were broken…
They made a profit and profits are immoral.
1 Like
It’s ok, Bernie didn’t know either.
Zeppelin my friend, please don’t get your hopes up. Even if Hillary is indicted before they hand her the nomination Bernie will NOT be the democrats nominee. They will screw him out of it and hand it to someone else. Keep in mind that the party bosses make the rules and they will not allow Bernie the old socialist to get crushed in a general election as he surely would… Not happening…no more than the RNC is going to allow Trump to become the nominee if he doesn’t show up with 1237 delegates in the bag. And I don’t see that happening. It’s going to be quite funny if Hillary gets indicted and The Donald does not get to 1237 (which is more probable?). The two candidates that lead all the way may not be representing their party. Quite an odd year.
Anyway… just take a deep breath and forget about Bernie as the rest of the country will do in just a few short months.
Excellent post you have nailed it.
I imagine that’s why Zep hasn’t regurgitated a law(s) yet.
Funny Bernie has been showing to beat every Republican by wider margins than Clinton.
While I may not have the exact statutes here are some things in regards to the laws that were broken.
Because of the way mortgages were sold and resold during the real estate bubble, documentary evidence of ownership is often either missing or not available when the court reviews the foreclosure. Foreclosure defense attorneys also recently uncovered instances of lenders violating laws governing the recording, notarization, and assignment of mortgages. In some cases, major mortgage lenders temporarily ceased foreclosure activities pending internal investigations of their foreclosure practices. Violations of federal fair lending rules and other federal and state laws regarding consumer transactions may also provide legal defenses against foreclosure.
So people were foreclosed on w/o any evidence of ownership of mortgage.
And I may not have the time to respond to every post when you determine a time that is satisfactory to you.
Have you ever heard of robo-signing? It is against the law and certainly immoral. If it isn’t you can explain why not.
And you do not understand that most people even in this crazy election cycle are not really paying attention until well after labor day. Also, when it comes down to one on one and a real choice Bernie would lose by monumental proportions. As I have said many times cross party polls are not a good indicator at this early stage. Either way though Bernie will not be the nominee. You’ll have to trust me on that one.
Well, that’s convenient.
People are foreclosed on because they’ve failed to pay their mortgage, but you want to bring criminal charges against high-level management for a paperwork issue?
That’s assuming the above is even true of course.
But you have time to continue to repeat false information, interesting.
And company’s are paying the price for it:
Paying money for breaking the law is one thing. Being prosecuted for it is another.
The onus is on you to prove individuals at these banks broke the law and should be punished. People are innocent until proven guilty in this country.
You and Bernie can’t even name a single law that was broken…
True story:
Why would JPMorgan fork over 50 million dollar f they didn’t do anything wrong? They made far more and this is just a cost of doing business.
Did I say they didn’t do anything wrong? Do you not understand how our legal system works?
How exactly did they make “far more” off the loans they robo-signed into foreclosure? Maybe they mitigated more than $50M in losses, that I don’t know, but they didn’t make money by ending these loans. That’s literally the opposite of how it works.
And lemme tell ya, JPMorgan doesn’t consider what amounts to a $50M fine as “a cost of doing business”. Even for them that’s a hit.
The whole reason they forked over the money was in lieu of any prosecution. They made far more in the course of doing illegal business than the 50 million fine. They took back homes illegally that didn’t belong to them as they already sold the paper so they made money on the way up and down. Highly immoral and also illegal. Whether $50M is a big number for them or not(I doubt it)doesn’t matter. They should not be able to buy themselves out of prosecution.
Actually they do. It is considered an operational risk loss, a cost of doing business and is recorded as such in the bank’s books. And yes, $50M is nothing for them, as accrued profits from the product in question offset the losses.
If you make, let’s say, a profit of a couple of hundred million from a “gray area” service or product, and then pay a “fine” of $50M you’re still in the positive.
The most notorious example being HSBC, as they forked out billions in settlements with the US government, which still made sense to them, as profits from these practices netted much, much more that the cost of the settlement.
http://www.hsbc.com/news-and-insight/2012/hsbc-announces-settlements-with-authorities