Jamie Dimon Requested Meeting with Eric Holder in bid for deal to end probes, avoid criminal charges

[KoKo]

(Oh to have been a "fly on the wall" in that meeting)

-----------

JP Morgan chief meets Holder in bid for deal to end probes, avoid criminal charges
by Danielle Douglas and Sari Horwitz,Washington Post

The sage of Wall Street journeyed to Washington on Thursday, but Jamie Dimon’s visit was unlike any the JPMorgan Chase chief has made before.

Dimon sought a meeting with Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. in an urgent bid to dispose of multiple government investigations into the bank’s conduct leading up to the financial crisis — and avoid criminal charges. The deal that Dimon discussed with Holder would involve paying the government at least $11 billion, the biggest settlement a single company has ever undertaken, according to several people familiar with the negotiations.





----------

For Holder, 62, meanwhile, a landmark settlement with JPMorgan could help quiet criticism that the Justice Department has failed to hold Wall Street accountable for sparking the housing market’s crash and the ensuing recession. Holder was criticized by lawmakers and consumer advocates this year for saying that some banks had become too big to prosecute.

Holder has taken a direct hand in the negotiations and, in an unusual move, held a 50-minute meeting with Dimon on Thursday. The meeting was “civil,” according to a person familiar with the negotiations, but the talks could still fall apart.

The discussion centered partly on whether the bank could avoid criminal prosecution if it paid the fine and whether it would have to admit guilt. Asked about the negotiations in an unrelated news conference, Holder acknowledged the meeting but snapped at a reporter who suggested that “prison time” was not part of the talks. “You weren’t in the room when I said I was talking to them,” Holder said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/jpmorgan-chief-dimon-meets-with-justice-department/2013/09/26/0d4d2034-26be-11e3-b3e9-d97fb087acd6_story.html?hpid=z3

[tblue]

1. Bribe? Threat?

Come on, Eric! Do your freaking job. What was Dimon bribing or threatening you with? Is it a secret? And why so defensive?

[G_j]

28. A Bribe

by any other name should smell so foul..

[KoKo]

31. In some time in the past in our memory...it would have Stunk...

But, these days....it's just about "Cutting the Best Deal." Jamie is always so well put together...reminds me of the adoration of "Dot Com Era" where the Entreprenuer...(swindler/crook) was hailed on CNN and CNBC and elsewhere as "Masters of the Universe" and then the Crash Came.

He's just the "Second Wave" of the Swindlers who drove us into "Austerity" while Alec and Koch Brothers managed to achieve what the Religious Right on their Own couldn't manage.

Now they are all "Bed Mates."

[Romulox]

2. Bring your checkbook, Jamie! nt

[CanonRay]

3. I'd rather see him do a couple of years

that just write another check. So apparently you can avoid jail if you get a face to face with Holder? Is that available to everyone, or just rich white guys?

[PADemD]

12. 30 years would be nice.

Bernie Madoff got 150 years.

[gtar100]

20. That was because he fleeced other rich people.

Stealing from the middle class and poor would probably have gotten him a slap on the wrist if the case even saw the light of day.

[DireStrike]

4. "a settlement ... could help quiet criticism that (they) failed to hold Wall Street accountable" ?!

WHAT

NO

NO.


They give back some of the money they stole and get to walk away?!

FUCK that. Don't ANYBODY quiet your criticism due to fucking SETTLEMENTS.

[annabanana]

6. Yeah.. How the HELL does THAT work?. . . .n/t

[DireStrike]

9. Don't worry, even the Wapo commenters aren't falling for it.

Except they are calling it "shareholder money", so they've fallen for a different trick, and forgotten that the money is stolen in the first place.

As if being forced to pay some face-saving blood money can actually hurt shareholders of one of the companies that runs the country.

[Hydra]

21. *lmao*

So True!! Gotta love the message control.

Jaime Dimon: "I'm getting fucking tired of this 'legal" crap hiding in the background. How much do I have to pay you off to make it disappear?"

Obama Admin: "We're holding them accountable!&quot Remember when Nancy used to say that, and even Wolf Blitzer said "What's that mean?&quot

[LuvNewcastle]

5. Holder could get 11 billion (or more) AND prison time.

If I were him, the only thing I would give Dimon is maybe a reduced sentence if he turns all his records over to the Justice Dept. I'm sure Holder is being threatened, and his heart probably isn't really in this, but simply paying a fine isn't how it works. Everyone will be watching if Dimon is allowed to buy himself out of this.

[annabanana]

7. Hey HOLDER!.. Don't take that call.

Let it go to voicemail and simmer.

[Ichingcarpenter]

8. Crime lord pays off crooked cop

So he can continue his business as usual.




Jeff Macke, writing on Yahoo Finance, reconfirms that the banks too big to fail are running the show in cahootz with their revolving door colleagues at the Department of Justice (and elsewhere in government, including the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)):

Ritholtz Wealth Managment CIO and Big Picture editor Barry Ritholtz says JPMorgan has shelled out about $11 billion in fines and spent around $16 billion in legal fees in the last few years. "This is just the cost of doing business for these mega banks."

There's the rub. Paying off regulators and settling criminal charges is only supposed to be the "cost of doing business" for criminals. When the FBI goes after the Mafia the stated goal was putting them out of business. There is no specific goal when it comes to cracking down on Wall Street. Only a portion of the settlements collected go[es] to the actual victims.

Remember, as the Cosa Nostra or the narcos consider, such "payoffs" (fines in this case) are just factored in as an expense in order to make a large profit. Remember, Jamie Dimon and his cohorts with their hands on the majority of America's banking money aren't paying a cent from their own pockets. Neither do the dons or the drug kingpins.

Ritholtz offers a related explanation for the lack of prosecutorial zeal. "The single greatest innovation of the banking sector has been to convince the Justice Department and Treasury that if you prosecute us for our crimes we'll send the economy back into the abyss." He thinks its "a bunch of hooey" but there's something holding the government back when it comes to pursuing an end game with the mega banks and it's obviously not an absence of violations.

The banks are making enough money to pay off the regulators and satisfy shareholders. It's a good business....


http://truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/18221-the-wall-street-protection-racket-pay-the-government-fines-and-bankers-don-t-get-prosecuted

The outrageous List of JP Morgan Crimes and Settlement


http://www.whiteoutpress.com/articles/q32013/the-outrageous-list-of-jp-morgan-crimes-and-settlements/

[LuvNewcastle]

11. That's exactly what it is.

They do whatever the fuck they want until they get caught, and then they buy their way out of it. It reminds me of a rich kid who keeps getting in trouble and his father keeps bailing him out. When is the government finally going to tell him that he can't buy his way out of this one?

Another thing, how much do these companies make? They can afford to pay 11 billion in fines and 16 billion in legal fees and still remain a profitable business? The wealth of these companies is staggering! I can't imagine anything they could possibly do that would earn that amount of money. It's fucking obscene. And all these companies can do is dream up more ways to take money from the little guy. It is way past time for their day of reckoning.

[Ichingcarpenter]

16. JPMorgan chase Total assets US$ 2.509 trillion (2012)

is a lot of money to play with when they can control the game

You want to bet that they have great write offs on taxes?

Unless regulators explicitly forbid JPMorgan Chase from writing off an $800 million settlement as a tax deduction, taxpayers could end up shouldering 35 percent of the cost of the settlement.

“Federal law forbids companies from deducting public fines and penalties from their taxes, but payments made as part of a settlement are treated differently. Companies that negotiate penalties through a legal settlement typically manage to deduct these penalties as a tax write-off unless their settlement agreement specifically forbids it. In essence, companies are allowed to receive a tax subsidy for their wrongdoing.

“The bank’s admission of wrongdoing for not responding more quickly to the problem would not in itself be enough to stop the bank from using the expense as a tax write off. Agencies must be explicit about prohibiting the write off, as the SEC did with Goldman Sachs in 2010 and the EPA and State Department typically do.

“When corporations treat their settlement fines as an ‘ordinary and necessary’ cost of doing business and take them as a tax write-off, ordinary Americans are left to pick up the tab. Every dollar that companies write off must be paid for through cuts to public programs, higher taxes or more government debt. That is unacceptable.

“Congress should close the settlement loophole to stop corporations like JPMorgan Chase from ripping off the American taxpayer.”
http://www.uspirg.org/news/usp/jpmorgan-shouldn%E2%80%99t-receive-tax-windfall-london-whale-penalty

[LuvNewcastle]

18. Letting them right off the fine essentially has the rest of us

paying the penalty. They don't miss a trick, do they? I'm not optimistic about getting that loophole closed, though. We'd have a hard time getting it done even with a Democratic Congress.

[Divernan]

26. Exactly! To Dimon/JPMorgan, $11 billion is chump change. And we're the chumps.

Not Obama or Holder. After this term they'll both be raking in megabucks with board memberships, speaking fees, consultancies, etc. The One Percent awaits them with open arms and they're not going to jeopardize that.

[Doctor_J]

10. There are no fines that will deter these racketeers

they'll just steal enough next time to cover their losses. Prison - real federal prison.

[TheKentuckian]

13. Since the answer was come on over rather than a subpoena or and arrest warrant, the reporter

was probably to close to the truth to grind Holder's gears. He has no room to be defensive, he has already stated these folks are "too big to prosecute" so unless he has changed his mind, he should resign and never be trusted with any stewardship again. Other than in voting rights he has been fucking abysmal and embarrassing and even there, it is hard to say he has been effective and I don't chalk the efforts there to altruism as much as political survival, how would Democrats possibly win shit if minorities are disenfranchised en mass? Make no mistake, I'm glad they know how their bread is buttered when the rubber has to meet the road enough to resist throwing us off the rolls but I no longer see it as a "good guy" thing but a protect the ability to get elected thing.

This is all fucking bullshit, the common citizen doesn't get away with stealing a thousand dollars by paying a ten dollar fine after a friendly meeting with the Chief of Police. Crooks fucking run this place.

[Ilsa]

14. While I'm glad any of them could end up in prison,

what's a few years when you get to haul away billions for your retirement and family?

The thieves need to pay it all back and do the time. Without that, crime pays and there'll be a repeat.

[Taitertots]

15. Why is the fine always less than the take?

It is like catching a bank robber and only fining them half of what they stole.

[NuclearDem]

17. I'm pretty sure he has a few cars or vacation homes that could be seized

As proceeds from criminal activity.

Maybe if the 1% sees some of their toys being repossessed it might do some good.

[Divernan]

19. Admission of guilt opens door wide to slam dunk civil suits for far more than $11 Billion.

The key statement in this report is: The discussion centered partly on whether the bank could avoid criminal prosecution if it paid the fine and whether it would have to admit guilt.

The standard of proof is far stricter in criminal cases, i.e., beyond a reasonable doubt, as compared to civil cases, i.e, "more likely than not", that is a preponderance of the evidence, by even the smallest degree.

Federal jury instructions provide that proof beyond a reasonable doubt is "proof of such a convincing character that a reasonable person would not hesitate to act upon it in the most important of his own affairs."

In civil litigation the standard of proof is either proof by a preponderance of the evidence or proof by clear and convincing evidence. Both are lower burdens of proof than beyond a reasonable doubt. . A preponderance of the evidence simply means that one side has more evidence in its favor than the other, even by the smallest degree.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Standard+of+proof

THAT IS WHY IT IS SO CRITICAL THAT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT GETS A CONVICTION OF CRIMINAL WRONG-DOING BY JPMORGAN.

Here's how it works: Once there is an admission of criminal guilt, or a criminal conviction of guilt on record in regard to financial dealings, each and every individual victim of said criminal financial dealings can file a civil action. The civil court takes note of the guilt and all that remains to be litigated is the value of the damages. Like I said, slam dunk!

Putting Dimon and other top-level JPMorgan executives in jail would make us all feel good, but it's the admission of guilt, or a trial resulting in a finding of guilt, which opens the door to making whole all the victims of Dimon's actions.

I believe Obama will instruct or has already instructed Holder to settle for money alone, and NEVER put his financial backers into prison, or demand an admission of guilt which would gut J P Morgan. All they'll do now is negotiate the amount of the settlement. And who here seriously believes the victims of Dimon's actions will get more than pennies on the dollar, and only after jumping through all kinds of hoops to document their losses.

Dog Forbid that Obama ever come through with transparency to reveal how that $11 Billion, or whatever the final amount is, was arrived at!

[tularetom]

22. Personally I think Holder is the biggest disappointment of Obama's presidency but

he could become the best choice the president ever made if he only did one thing - put that fucking crook and a few others like him in jail.

Just to signal the rest of them that the country is no longer willing to tolerate their shit.

[Divernan]

23. Jailing Dimon more than a "signal"; it allows civil suits by all the victims.

[warrant46]

27. Eric Holder is very timid around the 1% and their agents

He does much better arresting and busting terminal cancer patients who smoke THC

[Red Oak]

24. What do the victims of any crimes receive?

What bothers me is that a fine, even an $11B dollar one, does nothing for the victims.

The Government can take the $11B and recycle it right back to the bank if they want to.

What do the victims of the crime receive? Anything?

[Divernan]

25. If anything, it will be pennies on the dollar. That's why civil suits are necessary.

[LittleGirl]

29. Arrest that Criminal !!! eom

[Enthusiast]

30. This should have 280 recommendations instead of 28.

I don't get it. This blatant criminality should be punished.

[malaise]

32. Throw away the keys

[BelgianMadCow]

33. So why, the eff, is Dimon getting to plead his case directly with Holder?

asked NakedCapitalism

I got this e-mail from a law school professor this evening:

wtf is with Eric Holder personally meeting with Jaimie Dimon? Since when do other targets of investigations get such access and solicitude? Do you think any AG would have met with Michael Milken when he was being investigated? Unreal.

It should be no surprise by now to see the degree to which Administration officials toady and scrape to the banks. Oh yes, you’ll witness the occasional stern word in public from Obama and his minions to maintain the appearance that that they operate independently of their financial lords and masters. But Holder has been so absent from any meaningful action that it’s surprising to see him pretend to play a hands-on role. I’d was certain he had forgotten how to practice law, since his main job seemed to be acting as propagandist for Team Obama enforcement theater.