and then you get a piece like this in
the New York Times III I don't really
know how to characterize this piece
other than saying if angel' draw Sorkin
was working in the PR department of some
trade organization that represented
these investment banks Morgan Stanley
Wells Fargo he couldn't have done a
better job nowadays Wall Street saviors
may wish they weren't they may wish they
weren't Wall Street saviors try and
guess who the Wall Street saviors are is
it the US taxpayer is it the government
that is loaning money to these banks at
0% interest is it the ones who are not
frog marching these people no Jamie
Dimon and asked almost almost
rhetorically they had last week at the
council Foreign Relations in Washington
asked what I have done Bear Stearns
knowing again no again knowing what I
know today it's really close
Wow shed a tear for this guy some of the
strongest firms during the crisis that
acquired failing banks at the behest of
the government the government forced
them to do it and buy government what
we're talking about is former goldman
sachs banker henry paulson
we're all talking about former
investment bank executives the
government JP Morgan Chase Wells Fargo
Bank of America among them have found
themselves in the crosshairs of lawsuits
brought by the government for activities
related to deals they made under
pressure from authorities really
pressure from authorities
and then they I mean just the the graphs
in this paragraph and this piece are
just stunning whether you love or hate
Wall Street I'm bringing you all this is
what's called bring the the audience
into the circle so now we are all the
same side whether you love or hate Wall
Street everybody we're here whether you
want bankers to go to jail or not well
everybody come on the recent series of
suits brought by the government may have
a profound impact on how businesses
react to being asked to provide
assistance when the next financial
crisis arrives I feel like I feel like
there could be entire departments of
universities that could give graduate
study courses on that sentence listen
carefully I'm gonna say this again I
mean I wish if if this entire program
was on video I would spend an hour just
putting this sentence up on a screen so
that you could read it whether you love
or hate Wall Street whether you want
bankers to go to jail or not the recent
series of suits brought by the
government may have a profound impact on
how businesses react to being asked to
provide assistance when the next
financial crisis arrives so somehow you
what he's saying is that despite any of
your opinions about what went on this
might affect their interest their their
willingness no not even we want to go
that far it might have a big impact on
how business is react so in other words
this massive financial crisis might have
an impact on how business is ie
investment banks because those are the
only businesses we're talking about here
might react if the government comes to
call and and bag
for them to take the government money
yeah it might and chances are they won't
now I want you to think about this as we
walk through this because he mentions
that Schneiderman's lawsuit claiming
that JPMorgan Chase misrepresented and
defrauded investors of certain mortgage
securities damages are estimated three
high of three billion the only problem
is that multiple and fraudulent
deceptive acts that the government
alleged didn't take place at JP Morgan
Chase they happened at Bear Stearns
during 2005 to 2007 now are we to
believe that no one at JP Morgan Chase
thought that there was anything wrong
with Bear Stearns we didn't know we had
to accept liability now of course you
have to go well deep into well deep into
the the piece to get to this graph it's
hard to believe that JP Morgan didn't
come out ahead or at least close to even
on the acquisition given that bears 43
story headquarters on Madison Avenue was
part of the deal so in other words even
with this liability everybody believes
JP Morgan still gonna come out ahead
just on this deal he goes on if you ran
a company again a company as opposed to
an investment bank would you help
participate in a bailout if you thought
there was a chance the government might
turn around and Sue you later for the
misdeeds of the company you're helping
to save well let's let's rephrase that
question wasn't the whole point of all
that we've been told has an aaron ross
sorkin written at least one piece saying
we needed these bailouts or the entire
financial system would have crashed
would not JPMorgan Chase Wells Fargo and
Bank of America crashed if none of this
happened so in other words there was
some self-interest aside from the fact
that he already admits they've probably
come out ahead on this anyways there was
also just survival at stake isn't that
the whole point of all of this or have
we forgotten that now we were told this
is Armageddon if you're a business would
you do this in the future well if we're
faced with financial Armageddon why
wouldn't I
aside from the fact that I've already
profited from this well and maybe now
you could extract more promises like we
don't want to be held accountable for
any liability in fact what I would say
is well we have another financial
Armageddon that we have been at the very
least encouraging because I don't think
Wells Fargo and Bank of America or
JPMorgan Chase is without fault in any
of this there's no I don't know if you
remember this aaron ross sorkin piece
but uh maybe we're gonna have to get em
retroactive immunity or the next
contracts gonna have to be we don't
accept any liability and it goes on to
say to question the whole notion of none
of this is to suggest that the
government should not hold those
responsible for fraud or other
misconduct accountable but few of the
lawsuits that the government has brought
against the banks have anything to do
with the culpability of those
individuals who were actually
responsible for the problems instead the
government is simply holding responsible
the company's shareholders who are
unlikely to have been shareholders at
the time of the misdeeds
does this really offer to turn effect or
is this just a nice way to garner
headlines ahead of an election well it
might be a nice way to garner headlines
ahead of an election but there's a
fundamental problem if government can't
sue banks because we don't know if it's
all the same shareholders because
officials at corporations change
corporations are not people you can't
the executives are responsible as usual
pay nothing if there were quote
deceptive acts the government could and
should bring cases if not criminal then
civil against the individuals can you
imagine the day that that happens what
the aaron ross sorkin piece would be
fraud isn't something a company does
it's something people do Wow
from your mouth to God's ears the
corporations are not people
I just unbelievable I will forever and
always remember andrew ross sorkin as
the brilliant man who penned that
brilliant piece around this time last
year about how I went down to Occupy
Wall Street well check it out the point
that he went down to Occupy Wall Street
is because individual bank officers
called him I think it was actually a
bank CEOs and said do I have something
to worry about now of course at that
time the idea of holding any of these
individuals responsible for this is
completely out of bat that's crazy
these are businesses yeah hold the
individuals responsible for this stuff
unbelievable unbelievable
you