Wall Street Crooks Spent Billions To Silence Whistle-Blower; It Didn’t Work
The Young Turks * Published on Nov 17, 2014
“She tried to stay quiet, she really did. But after eight years of keeping a heavy secret, the day came when Alayne Fleischmann couldn't take it anymore.
"It was like watching an old lady get mugged on the street," she says. "I thought, 'I can't sit by any longer.'"
Fleischmann is a tall, thin, quick-witted securities lawyer in her late thirties, with long blond hair, pale-blue eyes and an infectious sense of humor that has survived some very tough times. She's had to struggle to find work despite some striking skills and qualifications, a common symptom of a not-so-common condition called being a whistle-blower.
Fleischmann is the central witness in one of the biggest cases of white-collar crime in American history, possessing secrets that JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon late last year paid $9 billion (not $13 billion as regularly reported – more on that later) to keep the public from hearing."* The Young Turks host Cenk Uygur breaks it down.
*Read more here:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-9-billion-witness-20141106
- I believe that the Attorney General has mistaken ''culture with sewerage.'' I think that the way you go at it Eric is, you start by cleaning your glasses so things won't look so diffuse. You can start with reading this article.
Then you start ''prosecuting the insulation'' and I swear you'll be surprised at how fast you start locking up those ''mis-cultured top executives who actually ordered the frauds to begin with.''
As Terence McKenna told us many years ago: ''Culture is not your friend.''
= new reply since forum marked as read
..we'd be prosecuting until climate change rendered it all a moot point. I suppose we can only hope that whatever species replaces us will learn from our mistakes.
- But in the interim, I'd settle for Jamie and Lloyd's head on a platter. For starters.
JP Morgan Chase (JPM)
JP Morgan Chase has a derivative exposure of $70.151 Trillion dollars.
$70 Trillion is roughly the size of the entire world's economy.
The $1 Trillion dollar towers are double-stacked @ 930 feet (248 m).
JP Morgan is rumored to hold 50->80% of the copper market, and manipulated the market by massive purchases. JP Morgan (JPM) is also guilty of manipulating the silver market to make billions. In 2010 JP Morgan had 3 perfect trading quarters and only lost money on 8 days. Lawsuits on home foreclosures have been filed against JP Morgan. Aluminum price is manipulated by JP Morgan through large physical ownership of material and creating bottlenecks during transport. JP Morgan was among the banks involved in the seizure of $620 million in assets for alleged fraud linked to derivatives. JP Morgan got $25 billion taxpayer in bailout money. It has no intention of using the money to lend to customers, but instead will use it to drive out competition. The bank is also the largest owner of BP - the oil spill company. During the oil spill the bank said that the oil spill is good for the economy.
JP Morgan Chase also received a SECRET $391 billion dollar bailout from the Federal Reserve.
In 2012, JP Morgan (JPM) took a $2 billion loss on "Poorly Executed" Derivative Bets.
MORE
...to all the marijuana cases now in prison so as to make room for 'em!
- There's always a silver lining if you look hard enough and squint your eyes just so......
- ''Bernie-proofed.'' I'm not suggesting we give up on Bernie. Just the system.
Nations are like a suit of clothing. Over time it needs small repairs. And over a longer time total replacements (patches). They'll get too short to cover everything and eventually become thread-bare and unkempt. Pretty soon, its all falling apart. Some parts of the country's body aren't covered or protected anymore -- and no one cares. Just so long as the ''important parts'' are covered. Like now.
This is the suit we want Bernie (or fill-in-the-candidate-of-choice) to make everything all better in. A system designed to keep TPTB in-charge and in control.
It's time for a new suit of clothing. One that fits the new ''US''.......
...and don't believe in the power of anyone to improve my reality other than me. By not placing the outcome for my happiness upon the performance of others, I avoid the inevitable disappointments.
- Buddhists have a saying I try to live by, that roughly translates:
If you're depressed, you're living in the past.
If you're anxious, you're living in the future.
If you are at peace, you're living in the NOW.
- Particularly when prosecuting under RICO. The conspiracy continues indefinitely until the conspirator confesses to the authorities. And most importantly, to prove conspiracy one does not have to show any overt action on the part of the conspirator.
Conspiracy is a continuing offense. For statutes such as 18 U.S.C. § 371, which require an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy, the statute of limitations begins to run on the date of the last overt act. See Fiswick v. United States, 329 U.S. 211 (1946); United States v. Butler, 792 F.2d 1528 (11th Cir. 1986). For conspiracy statutes which do not require proof of an overt act, such as RICO (18 U.S.C. § 1961) or 21 U.S.C. § 846, the government must allege and prove that the conspiracy continued into the limitations period. The crucial question in this regard is the scope of the conspiratorial agreement, and the conspiracy is deemed to continue until its purpose has been achieved or abandoned. See United States v. Northern Imp. Co., 814 F.2d 540 (8th Cir. 1987); United States v. Coia, 719 F.2d 1120 (11th Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 973 (1984).
An individual's "withdrawal" from a conspiracy starts the statute of limitations running as to that individual. "Withdrawal" from a conspiracy for this purpose means that the conspirator must take affirmative action by making a clean breast to the authorities or communicating his or her disassociation to the other conspirators. See United States v. Gonzalez, 797 F.2d 915 (10th Cir. 1986).
link
...in which state lines were crossed and/or where federal regulations or laws apply (as in this case) to the business activity. It would be the best approach in a perfect world, because the burden of proof threshold is so low. But then this isn't anything like that though, is it?
- In the end, the creation of laws reflect the failure of the social design. This case is no different.
It's almost like dead legislation that promised hope...but, fell flat. There have been few cases brought because of RICO.
Was it a "false hope" promise....that nothing would come of it..even though it was to "catch out Mafia Bosses?"
What about the Poppy Trade in Afghanistan....and other instances of Corporations (multi-national) all going about "Business as Usual?"
If we don't have a US Attorney General who takes this stuff seriously...then, what can we Citizens DO?
