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

General Discussion

Nye Bevan

(25,406 posts) Thu Jan 3, 2013, 02:01 PM Jan 2013

0

With Elizabeth Warren as Senator, are we more likely to see prosecutions of top bankers?

Given that Senator Warren is on the Banking Committee and has subpoena powers, I would assume that if she thinks that the Justice Department is failing to pursue prosecutable cases against senior bankers, she would raise holy hell about it. I think with Senator Warren in place we can rest assured that if any top banker is not being prosecuted it is because there is simply insufficient evidence of criminality.

4 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

With Elizabeth Warren as Senator, are we more likely to see prosecutions of top bankers? (Original Post) Nye Bevan Jan 2013 OP

The running of the 5-year statute of limitations will give virtually all of the banksters immunity. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #1

Doubt it. mmonk Jan 2013 #2

Nnnnnnope cherokeeprogressive Jan 2013 #3

The general assumption is that what they all did was illegal in the first place. Ikonoklast Jan 2013 #4

AnotherMcIntosh

(11,064 posts)

1. The running of the 5-year statute of limitations will give virtually all of the banksters immunity.

Reply to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 02:11 PM

Jan 2013

Thanks to Holder's inaction, the five-year period is almost up.

mmonk

(52,589 posts)

2. Doubt it.

Reply to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 02:18 PM

Jan 2013

Our government is run by Goldman Sachs.

cherokeeprogressive

(24,853 posts)

3. Nnnnnnope

Reply to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 02:24 PM

Jan 2013

Ikonoklast

(23,973 posts)

4. The general assumption is that what they all did was illegal in the first place.

Reply to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 02:33 PM

Jan 2013

For the most part, it wasn't.

Reply to this discussion

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»With Elizabeth Warren as ...