> and monitor all of its branches for criminal activity, and they basically did that--but not as much as the US demanded I'm not convinced that it wasn't compl

> and monitor all of its branches for criminal activity, and they basically did that--but not as much as the US demanded I'm not convinced that it wasn't completely obvious. The Mexico unit shipped $7 Billion to the US unit. Why did Breuer call it "stunning failures of oversight"? > You don't send an executive to jail because a guy several layers down did something wrong So why are the bonuses of those execs being cut if they are not to blame? Again, why did Breuer call it "stunning failures of oversight"? I'm also not convinced they won't use this as a horrible excuse to unnecessarily increase monitoring, while the entire thing was plainly visible under an existing system. I would like cash to stay private, can i really not have that without something like this being invisible? http://money.cnn.com/2012/12/10/news/companies/hsbc-money-laundering/ http://money.cnn.com/2012/12/10/news/companies/hsbc-money-la...