3 ms·
"There aren't any criminal prosecutions because it's hard to prove that there was fraud." That's nonsense. The following exchange takes place in the documenta
by pmorici 14y ago
"There aren't any criminal prosecutions because it's hard to prove that there was fraud."
That's nonsense. The following exchange takes place in the documentary where Breuer admits the reason these banks aren't prosecuted is because it is basically government policy not to...
"""
MARTIN SMITH: You gave a speech before the New York Bar Association. And in that speech, you made a reference to losing sleep at night, worrying about what a lawsuit might result in at a large financial institution.
LANNY BREUER: Right.
MARTIN SMITH: Is that really the job of a prosecutor, to worry about anything other than simply pursuing justice?
LANNY BREUER: Well, I think I am pursuing justice. And I think the entire responsibility of the department is to pursue justice. But in any given case, I think I and prosecutors around the country, being responsible, should speak to regulators, should speak to experts, because if I bring a case against institution A, and as a result of bringing that case, there’s some huge economic effect — if it creates a ripple effect so that suddenly, counterparties and other financial institutions or other companies that had nothing to do with this are affected badly — it’s a factor we need to know and understand.
"""
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-01-23/assistant-attorney-general-admits-tv-us-justice-does-not-apply-banks http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-01-23/assistant-attorney-...
- pdonis 14y agothe reason these banks aren't prosecuted is because it is basically government policy not to And the reason for that is that it was government policy that created the situation in the first place: wanting everyone to own a home, whether they could afford it or not, and allowing banks to play games to offset the inevitable losses from being forced to give mortgages to people who couldn't afford them. And it was government policy that called a lot of the shots once things started to go south: they were telling banks who had to merge with who, who had to declare bankruptcy, etc. I'm not saying the banks aren't culpable: they took risks with money that wasn't theirs to risk, it was their depositors'. But the government is culpable too.
- patrickgzill 14y agoYou are both right and wrong. The total amount of support given to the banks was far greater than the total amount of ALL residential mortgages everywhere in the USA. Total support given in all the various ways was over $10 Trillion, while the total value of all residential mortgages is under $4 Trillion.
- pdonis 14y agosupport given to the banks Support given by the government, right? That would make the government, if anything, more culpable. total value of all residential mortgages It's true that my previous comment applied to residential mortgages, but as I understand it, the real estate bubble was not limited to residential; it included commercial and industrial real estate as well. Certainly in my local area there has been lots of overbuilding of office and industrial space. So the correct number to compare with the total of government support given is the total of all mortgages, not just residential.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]