Failure To Prosecute Banking THIEVES Legitimizes The Revolutionary Worldview

[JackRiddler]

33. Fraud laws are flexible enough.

There is no doubt the ratings agencies participated in fraud to label as AAA securities the banks knew would fail and they were paid to not evaluate. Their "freedom of opinion" defense can be overcome. Fraud is always presumed to be creative. (Read the Black stuff.)

In fact, these disgusting SEC settlements in the Goldman/Paulson and recent Citi cases, wherein the animals intentionally packaged and sold securities they knew would fail and also bet against them, are all about letting the criminals go free without acknowledging what they've done for a tiny fraction of their winnings.

Then there are the millions of frauds with mortgage title through MERS. Once again, many AGs are moving to let them get away with it by allowing a "settlement" for a tiny fraction of the damage done.

The authorities in the US arrest thousands of people every year on suspicion of having small quantities of drugs. If $500,000 of marijuana was thought to be at Goldman Sachs, the place would be raided and a whole bunch of people who would later get off altogether would in the meantime be hogtied and spend a night or two in jail. This can be a life-changing experience. The presumption of the police and prosecutors would be that the whole place is a criminal organization; let the courts sort out who gets a presumption of innocence. That's how it works in real life with minor drug cases. Yet frauds worth trillions emanated from these places and they are treated with extreme deference and respect. Even small punishments for these criminals would mean so much, compared to that. It really doesn't take much of a punishment to deter a great many white-collar criminals. But when instead you rescue their criminal enterprises and make sure they get their bonuses and invite them to continue their plunder operations, they will do worse every time.