Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

The Straight Story

(48,121 posts)
Thu Dec 13, 2012, 02:46 PM Dec 2012

HSBC was too big to indict. Could have impacted economy.

Too Big to Indict

It is a dark day for the rule of law. Federal and state authorities have chosen not to indict HSBC, the London-based bank, on charges of vast and prolonged money laundering, for fear that criminal prosecution would topple the bank and, in the process, endanger the financial system. They also have not charged any top HSBC banker in the case, though it boggles the mind that a bank could launder money as HSBC did without anyone in a position of authority making culpable decisions.

Clearly, the government has bought into the notion that too big to fail is too big to jail. When prosecutors choose not to prosecute to the full extent of the law in a case as egregious as this, the law itself is diminished. The deterrence that comes from the threat of criminal prosecution is weakened, if not lost.

In the HSBC case, prosecutors may want the public to focus on the $1.92 billion settlement, which includes forfeiture of $1.26 billion and other penalties, as well as requirements to improve its internal controls and submit to the oversight of an outside monitor for the next five years. But even large financial settlements are small compared with the size of international major banks. More important, once criminal sanctions are considered off limits, penalties and forfeitures become just another cost of doing business, a risk factor to consider on the road to profits.

There is no doubt that the wrongdoing at HSBC was serious and pervasive. Several foreign banks have been fined in recent years for flouting United States sanctions against transferring money through American subsidiaries on behalf of clients in countries like Iran, Sudan and Cuba. HSBC’s actions were even more egregious. According to several law enforcement officials with knowledge of the inquiry, prosecutors found that, for years, HSBC had also moved tainted money from Mexican drug cartels and Saudi banks with ties to terrorist groups.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/12/opinion/hsbc-too-big-to-indict.html?garyjohnson&_r=1&

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
HSBC was too big to indict. Could have impacted economy. (Original Post) The Straight Story Dec 2012 OP
Anything that's "too big to X" is too big. n/t gkhouston Dec 2012 #1
Was just gonna say that. closeupready Dec 2012 #2
If it's to big they need to force it to split appart. This BS of letting big Corps. and teddy51 Dec 2012 #3
steal big so the law looks the other way Angry Dragon Dec 2012 #4
kr. can't jail the crooks because they're just too big! HiPointDem Dec 2012 #5
k&r The DOJ is fucking useless. theaocp Dec 2012 #6
Too big to fail. Too big to indict. When are these fuckers gonna start paying for their crimes??? Initech Dec 2012 #7
 

closeupready

(29,503 posts)
2. Was just gonna say that.
Thu Dec 13, 2012, 02:50 PM
Dec 2012

If it's so big that it threatens the financial sovereignty of the US, then it's too big, period.

 

teddy51

(3,491 posts)
3. If it's to big they need to force it to split appart. This BS of letting big Corps. and
Thu Dec 13, 2012, 02:54 PM
Dec 2012

companies get away with breaking laws is BullShit.

theaocp

(4,237 posts)
6. k&r The DOJ is fucking useless.
Thu Dec 13, 2012, 04:20 PM
Dec 2012

Don't these assholes have CO and WA to fuck with? Seriously, how the fuck does Obama pick a goddamn cabinet? These people are harmful!

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»HSBC was too big to indic...