05302013
Script
The Money Laundering Criminals at HSBC and Standard Chartered Continue to Skate
by Sinclair Noe
DOW
+ 21 = 15,324
SPX + 6 = 1654
NAS + 23 = 3491
10 YR YLD un = 2.12%
OIL + .45 = 93.58
GOLD + 21.00 = 1414.70
SILV + .32 = 22.88
PLAT + 31.00 = 1487.00
PAL + 8.00 = 761.00
SPX + 6 = 1654
NAS + 23 = 3491
10 YR YLD un = 2.12%
OIL + .45 = 93.58
GOLD + 21.00 = 1414.70
SILV + .32 = 22.88
PLAT + 31.00 = 1487.00
PAL + 8.00 = 761.00
So,
apparently Wall Street moved higher today because the economy looks
weaker and that means the Fed won't taper or quit QE. It's twisted
logic, but we figured it out a while back.
The
weak economic news started with this week's initial claims for
jobless benefits; applications increased by 10,000 to 354,000. One
week does not make a trend. Next week we'll get the jobs report for
the month of May. Today's figures were just a reminder that the Fed
won't have an easy path to end QE without crushing the labor market.
In
a separate report, the Commerce Department said first-quarter gross
domestic product was revised down to 2.4%, down from an initial
estimate of 2.5%. The gain in first-quarter growth follows a
sluggish increase of 0.4% in the fourth quarter. Consumer spending
increased, but that was likely due to higher prices for gasoline and
electricity. Government expenditures fell by 4.9%, up from initial
estimates of a 4.1% drop. The bulk of the decline was in military
spending. Inflation as measured by the PCE index was muted, rising
just 1.0% overall or by 1.3% excluding food and energy.
So,
the economy is slowing, the sequester cuts are just starting to kick
in and act as a drag on the economy, and inflation is running at half
the Fed's target, and the jobs market is weak. And don't forget the
Fed is finding no help in the form of fiscal policy. Against this
backdrop, it will be hard to make a case for ending QE.
There
is a market “disconnect” between the world’s gloomy outlook and
talk of tapering by the US Federal Reserve, the supposed moment when
it starts to wind down its $85bn of monthly bond purchases.
Yet the markets seem to be betting that the central banks will come
to the rescue yet again if needed.
Maybe,
but there is that slight risk the central bankers might feel the
compulsion to strike a blow against moral hazard and display their
displeasure for asset bubbles. In other words, we could see a nasty
sell-off at some point. We have been through these episodes of
putative Fed tightening twice since the Lehman crisis. Markets tanked
in 2010 and again in 2012 after the Fed turned off the spigot.
Yet
QE critics clearly have a point. As Pimco’s Bill Gross points it,
there are “bubbles everywhere”. The Credit Suisse index of Global
Risk Appetite has been flirting with the “euphoria” line, not far
short of levels seen in 1987, 2000 and 2007. There is a big market
disconnect. The Gini co-efficient of wealth inequality is soaring,
which means that all the money that's been pouring into the markets
isn't trickling down.
American
households have rebuilt less than half of the wealth lost in the
financial crisis, leaving them without the spending power to fuel a
robust economic recovery. From the peak of the boom to the bottom of
the bust, households watched nearly
40% of their net worth disappear amid sinking stock prices and
the rubble of the real estate market. Since then, Americans have only
been able to recapture 45 percent of that amount on average, after
adjusting for inflation and population growth.
The
report from the St. Louis Federal Reserve showed
most of the improvement was due to gains in the stock market, which
primarily benefit wealthy families. That means the recovery for other
households has been even weaker. The report states: “A conclusion
that the financial damage of the crisis and recession largely has
been repaired is not justified.”
The
economy is twice as large as it was three decades ago, and yet the
typical American is earning about the same, adjusted for inflation.
The notion that we can’t afford to invest in the education of our
young, or rebuild our crumbling infrastructure, or continue to
provide Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid, or expand health
insurance is absurd. Maybe the Fed should look at tapering off QE. It
doesn't really work. That doesn't mean they should eliminate
stimulus; it just means they need to inject the stimulus directly
into the veins of the middle class.
Remember
last September when US authorities decided to fine HSBC for money
laundering? It seemed a mere slap on the wrist. A new batch of emails
and letters were released to a Washington-based advocacy group,
Public Citizen, and they paint a picture of the Treasury Department
making hasty decisions following more than a 10 year investigation.
The pressure started to build when a New York state regulator
threatened to revoke the banking license of another British bank,
Standard Chartered.
Public
Citizen is hoping to obtain even more documents under the Freedom of
Information Act. The New york Department of Financial Services
determined that Standard Chartered had laundered $250 billion in
illegal transactions over nearly a decade of business with
US-sanctioned countries including Libya, Burma and Sudan. The bank
was fined $327 million.
HSBC
took money laundering to the next level. In total, the bank's US and
Mexican units failed to monitor more than $670 billion in wire
transfers and more than $9.4 billion in purchases of US dollars from
HSBC Mexico. - Bloomberg
HSBC
laundered billions for murderous drug gangs around the world; in
Mexico, they changed their teller's cages to accommodate the boxes of
drug cash. HSBC aided Iranian entities to evade US financial
sanctions on Iran. If Iran ever develops nuclear weapons, we can
thank HSBC and Standard Chartered. HSBC
aided terrorist organizations including Hamas, Hezbollah, and al
Qaeda.
HSBC
was fined $1.9 billion.
Now,
Judge John Gleeson is considering cancelling December’s
so-called deferred prosecution agreement that gave HSBC immunity from
money laundering claims. This could leave the bank open to criminal
prosecution and a ban from operating in America. However, HSBC
disputes this.
The
US Department of Justice (DoJ) is reportedly challenging Mr Gleeson’s
need to sign off on the deal. The judge last mentioned the case in
February, stating that he had not yet approved nor disapproved of the
settlement.
In
a statement, HSBC said: “For more than two years, our new
leadership team in both New York and London has been implementing
reforms and new controls, investing in compliance systems and staff,
and putting in place the most effective global standards across our
network to combat financial crime on a global basis.
“We
are focused on taking all necessary steps to fulfill our obligation
under the agreements with the US and UK governments, and on
implementing effective global standards across HSBC.”
That
would sound more credible if only they had stopped laundering money.
In March, fresh money laundering and tax evasion allegations surfaced
in Argentina.
Standard
Chartered was forced to admit it had violated the International
Emergency Economic Powers Act, and if they didn't misbehave, then the
charge would be dismissed in two years. It only took a couple of
months for Standard Chartered's Chairman John Peace to lie to
reporters, and investors by claiming there was no “willful
intention” to violate financial rules. US regulators then forced
Chairman Peace to write an apology for lying about money laundering.
Nobody
went to jail.
Nobody.
On
Wednesday, the Department of Justice announced arrests for money
laundering. The DOJ statement says: "Today,
we strike a severe blow against a professional money laundering
enterprise charged with laundering over $6 billion in criminal
proceeds."
Nope,
not Standard Chartered, not HSBC; they arrested some guy running an
online mish-mash out of Costa Rica called Liberty Reserve, or as the
Department of Justice described it: “a massive criminal
enterprise”, and “the
largest international money laundering prosecution in the history of
the Department."
It
sounds like puffery, but it's true, I guess. The Department of
Justice did not prosecute HSBC or Standard Chartered for a combined
$929 billion in money laundering. Now, that would have been something
to brag about, but they handed out deferred prosecution agreements,
which have been violated. Of course, the judge hasn't signed off on
the deferred prosecution agreement; apparently feeling a twinge of
remorse in letting these criminals off the hook in light of the fact
that 35,000 people were brutally murdered at the hands of drug
traffickers in Mexico, who then laundered money through HSBC. Or
maybe the judge can't reconcile how HSBC faces no jail time, while
the FBI
reports
that in 2011 there were 663,032 arrests in this country for marijuana
possession.
Meanwhile,
the Washington Post reports the
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency is expanding a probe that
began in 2011 with allegations that JPMorgan Chase was using
error-filled documents in lawsuits against debtors.
The
regulatory agency is examining the process several banks use to
verify consumers’ outstanding debt before taking legal action.
If
it sounds familiar it is. Remember the housing crisis, and how
mortgage servicers were accused of falsifying records and
robo-signing thousands of documents without review? The banks did
pretty much the same thing, filing thousands of lawsuits against
delinquent credit card holders. Consumer
lawyers began noting a number of collection cases built on shoddy
records.
Authorities in California, for example, say JPMorgan flooded
the courts with lawsuits against credit card holders based on flimsy
evidence that cardholders were in default. California Attorney
general Kamal Harris filed a case against JPMorgan. Iowa attorney
general Tom Miller is organizing a 50 state effort, a replay of the
50 state attorney general effort on mortgages. So, the OCC is now
getting involved because it looks bad when the state AG's take the
reins and the federal regulators act like they're in a coma.
A
former JPMorgan employee claims nearly 23,000 delinquent accounts
were riddled with inaccuracies. The bank fired her; she sued; the
case was settled out of court.
And
still, none of the banksters has been jailed.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.