BackPage 1 of 2Next
FOLLOW BOREME
TAGS
<< Back to listing
TYT - HSBC too big to jail

TYT - HSBC too big to jail

(8:12) So shocking that this could even happen. Cenk Uygur runs through the background of the US authority's decision NOT to prosecute top management at HSBC after the bank was caught red-handed in laundering billions for drug cartels and terrorist organisation, including believe it or not, Al Qaeda.
Next video, details of HSBC's dealings.

Share this post

You can comment as a guest, but registering gives you added benefits

Add your comment
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1768 days ago)
Cenk, imposing a 1.9 billion dollar fine on a company is not what I call letting them get away with it. Can your company handle a 1.9 billion dollar fine? Additionally, this is a British bank violating US banking laws so what did you expect -- the US to invade the UK and take the executives hostage? Do you feel executives of a company should go to jail for the actions of their employees? So if I accept a deposit from a drug lord, or terrorist, should my CEO be held accountable for that transaction? Or, are you telling us that the CEO of HSBC took that money himself? Where did you see that 21.9 Billion in profit? I was able to find that they only made 13 Billion EU (about 17B US dollars) for 2011. Even if you say it's pre-tax dollars, you're comparing a pre-tax profit to an after-tax fine? Comparing HSBC to a drug mule is not a good comparison. HSBC did not sell drugs to earn that money and was not caught in the possession of drugs. Big difference. I go through anti-money laundering training every single year and I can tell you that you do not always know the source of the money that people deposit in your bank. How many times have you deposited money where they asked you how you got that money? Also, why don't you just state the facts and keep your opinions out of the news you're reporting like you said you do in this video: LINK
ReplyVote up (138)down (139)
Original comment
Cenk, imposing a 1.9 billion dollar fine on a company is not what I call letting them get away with it. Can your company handle a 1.9 billion dollar fine? Additionally, this is a British bank violating US banking laws so what did you expect -- the US to invade the UK and take the executives hostage? Do you feel executives of a company should go to jail for the actions of their employees? So if I accept a deposit from a drug lord, or terrorist, should my CEO be held accountable for that transaction? Or, are you telling us that the CEO of HSBC took that money himself? Where did you see that 21.9 Billion in profit? I was able to find that they only made 13 Billion EU (about 17B US dollars) for 2011. Even if you say it's pre-tax dollars, you're comparing a pre-tax profit to an after-tax fine? Comparing HSBC to a drug mule is not a good comparison. HSBC did not sell drugs to earn that money and was not caught in the possession of drugs. Big difference. I go through anti-money laundering training every single year and I can tell you that you do not always know the source of the money that people deposit in your bank. How many times have you deposited money where they asked you how you got that money? Also, why don't you just state the facts and keep your opinions out of the news you're reporting like you said you do in this video: LINK
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (1767 days ago)
Companies are not and should not be above the law nor should they have different rules. That is not just or okay. End of story
ReplyVote up (169)down (142)
Original comment
Companies are not and should not be above the law nor should they have different rules. That is not just or okay. End of story
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Outraged citizen (1768 days ago)
Their fine is paltry in comparison to their assets. The Executives are responsible and should be jailed.
ReplyVote up (144)down (143)
Original comment
Their fine is paltry in comparison to their assets. The Executives are responsible and should be jailed.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (1767 days ago)
Invade England?? Do you live under a rock?? Have you heard of extradition??
ReplyVote up (145)down (145)
Original comment
Invade England?? Do you live under a rock?? Have you heard of extradition??
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (1767 days ago)
Sounds like you didn't watch the second video. Cenk gives some details that indirectly answer your questions. Here's a quote from the Guardian (a respectable UK newspaper) describing HSBC's dealings with drug cartels: "The US department of justice said HSBC had moved $881m for two drug cartels in Mexico and Colombia and accepted $15bn in unexplained "bulk cash", across the bank's counters in Mexico, Russia and other countries. In some branches the boxes of cash being deposited were so big the tellers' windows had to be enlarged." LINK Can you imagine your bank accepting $15 billion of unexplained cash and top management not knowing about it? If so, you need new top management.
ReplyVote up (139)down (146)
Original comment
Sounds like you didn't watch the second video. Cenk gives some details that indirectly answer your questions. Here's a quote from the Guardian (a respectable UK newspaper) describing HSBC's dealings with drug cartels: "The US department of justice said HSBC had moved $881m for two drug cartels in Mexico and Colombia and accepted $15bn in unexplained "bulk cash", across the bank's counters in Mexico, Russia and other countries. In some branches the boxes of cash being deposited were so big the tellers' windows had to be enlarged." LINK Can you imagine your bank accepting $15 billion of unexplained cash and top management not knowing about it? If so, you need new top management.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1767 days ago)
Thanks for that link but it was clear about the timeframes were 10 years of deposits. So it was like 1,500,000 individual transactions of $10,000 each over a 10 year span using thousands of different people and accounts? You think the CEO's that have never been in that branch should still be responsible for drug money being accepted in Mexico? And you also feel that a corporations CEO should be put in jail for US crimes committed by a British bank in a foreign country like Mexico? Why do you think drug lords do things like this in other countries besides the US?
ReplyVote up (122)down (170)
Original comment
Thanks for that link but it was clear about the timeframes were 10 years of deposits. So it was like 1,500,000 individual transactions of $10,000 each over a 10 year span using thousands of different people and accounts? You think the CEO's that have never been in that branch should still be responsible for drug money being accepted in Mexico? And you also feel that a corporations CEO should be put in jail for US crimes committed by a British bank in a foreign country like Mexico? Why do you think drug lords do things like this in other countries besides the US?
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (1767 days ago)
You would have thought the bit "…boxes of cash being deposited were so big the tellers' windows had to be enlarged…" might have aroused some interest from top management. Also I suggest you watch the second video to hear about HSBC's own internal warnings that their dealings were way too blatant.
ReplyVote up (128)down (132)
Original comment
You would have thought the bit "…boxes of cash being deposited were so big the tellers' windows had to be enlarged…" might have aroused some interest from top management. Also I suggest you watch the second video to hear about HSBC's own internal warnings that their dealings were way too blatant.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1767 days ago)
Boxes of cash isn't really that much if they are 1 dollar bills versus 100 dollar bills. Also, I did watch the second video and Cenk quoted so many incorrect facts that it was annoying. Besides, all those warnings mean that they were being reported through the proper channels but the government was so backlogged that they couldn't investigate all of the reports. Is that the bank's fault the government failed in their duties until 10 years later?
ReplyVote up (132)down (134)
Original comment
Boxes of cash isn't really that much if they are 1 dollar bills versus 100 dollar bills. Also, I did watch the second video and Cenk quoted so many incorrect facts that it was annoying. Besides, all those warnings mean that they were being reported through the proper channels but the government was so backlogged that they couldn't investigate all of the reports. Is that the bank's fault the government failed in their duties until 10 years later?
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (1767 days ago)
It's not the value of the boxes so much as the enlarging of the teller's window that would have been noticed. And are you saying HSBC is not to blame for laundering money because the government took 10 years to catch them? Surely I'm misunderstanding you.
ReplyVote up (140)down (145)
Original comment
It's not the value of the boxes so much as the enlarging of the teller's window that would have been noticed. And are you saying HSBC is not to blame for laundering money because the government took 10 years to catch them? Surely I'm misunderstanding you.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1767 days ago)
What I'm saying is that you non-bankers are quick to judge the CEO of a large bank without knowing all the facts. You do not know how big each transaction was money wise. Perhaps they were all lower than the governments' standards for raising alerts. You do not know that. Why should the CEO be responsible for their employees in a branch in another country anyway? According to the government, you can be prosecuted as an individual (teller) if you take cash money knowing it's from an illegal source without reporting it. Did the CEO accept that money or did a teller do it?
ReplyVote up (122)down (155)
Original comment
What I'm saying is that you non-bankers are quick to judge the CEO of a large bank without knowing all the facts. You do not know how big each transaction was money wise. Perhaps they were all lower than the governments' standards for raising alerts. You do not know that. Why should the CEO be responsible for their employees in a branch in another country anyway? According to the government, you can be prosecuted as an individual (teller) if you take cash money knowing it's from an illegal source without reporting it. Did the CEO accept that money or did a teller do it?
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (1767 days ago)
US authorities have already made judgement - guilty but too big to jail because of "collateral consequences", a fine of $1.9 billion, and CEOs punished by deferring a part of their bonuses for 5 years. So shareholders lose a bit, CEOs lose the potential revenue that part of their bonus might have made over 5 years, bank charges will probably go up, and it's business as usual.
ReplyVote up (137)down (150)
Original comment
US authorities have already made judgement - guilty but too big to jail because of "collateral consequences", a fine of $1.9 billion, and CEOs punished by deferring a part of their bonuses for 5 years. So shareholders lose a bit, CEOs lose the potential revenue that part of their bonus might have made over 5 years, bank charges will probably go up, and it's business as usual.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (1767 days ago)
Being a banker, maybe you can answer this: Why should jailing HSBC CEOs mean the bank lose its banking licence? I think I know the answer, just interested in your take.
ReplyVote up (129)down (140)
Original comment
Being a banker, maybe you can answer this: Why should jailing HSBC CEOs mean the bank lose its banking licence? I think I know the answer, just interested in your take.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1767 days ago)
Sorry but I'm not sure because I'm not an expert in British law. Still, I don't understand why a CEO should be held accountable for the actions of the company's employees. For example, let's say I own a company and I hire someone and they enter a bar and rob the place and get caught. Should I, as their employer, go to jail too?
ReplyVote up (126)down (135)
Original comment
Sorry but I'm not sure because I'm not an expert in British law. Still, I don't understand why a CEO should be held accountable for the actions of the company's employees. For example, let's say I own a company and I hire someone and they enter a bar and rob the place and get caught. Should I, as their employer, go to jail too?
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Cgermany0 (1767 days ago)
You should if you as the employer benefit from the robbery.
ReplyVote up (132)down (132)
Original comment
You should if you as the employer benefit from the robbery.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (1766 days ago)
It was US authorities who decided not to drag HSBC through the courts, not because of any doubt of securing a conviction, but because it would result in the bank losing its banking license, what they termed as 'collateral consequences'. Or at least that was their excuse. When Bob Diamond of Barclays Bank was forced to resign because of Libor rate fixing, Barclays didn't lose its banking licence, it just lost Bob Diamond. I can't see what the problem is with jailing a few top execs at HSBC and replacing them with hopefully a new breed of banker - one who sees a bank as a service to society rather than a money making machine for its top executives, whatever the cost or consequences to the rest of society. After all, as far as I can tell, no one at HSBC has denied guilt or claimed ignorance.
ReplyVote up (137)down (138)
Original comment
It was US authorities who decided not to drag HSBC through the courts, not because of any doubt of securing a conviction, but because it would result in the bank losing its banking license, what they termed as 'collateral consequences'. Or at least that was their excuse. When Bob Diamond of Barclays Bank was forced to resign because of Libor rate fixing, Barclays didn't lose its banking licence, it just lost Bob Diamond. I can't see what the problem is with jailing a few top execs at HSBC and replacing them with hopefully a new breed of banker - one who sees a bank as a service to society rather than a money making machine for its top executives, whatever the cost or consequences to the rest of society. After all, as far as I can tell, no one at HSBC has denied guilt or claimed ignorance.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1765 days ago)
Latest comment: HSBC did go through the courts -- that's why they got a fine. My issue is about everyone wanting to jail the CEOs. Can the US drag those CEOs from Brittan into US courts. Wouldn't they need to extradite them to the US? Not sure what our treaty is with the UK on suspected criminals that we want to go through our courts. Besides, committing a crime in one country may not be punishable in another (IANAL).
ReplyVote up (124)down (137)
Original comment
Latest comment: HSBC did go through the courts -- that's why they got a fine. My issue is about everyone wanting to jail the CEOs. Can the US drag those CEOs from Brittan into US courts. Wouldn't they need to extradite them to the US? Not sure what our treaty is with the UK on suspected criminals that we want to go through our courts. Besides, committing a crime in one country may not be punishable in another (IANAL).
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
glortman glortman (1767 days ago)
The point is that rich people (or corporations) get away with crimes and poor people don't. It has little to do with banker and non-banker, and more to do with justice and injustice. Some people in the bank knew what was going on. Those people should pay for the crimes.
ReplyVote up (134)down (151)
Original comment
The point is that rich people (or corporations) get away with crimes and poor people don't. It has little to do with banker and non-banker, and more to do with justice and injustice. Some people in the bank knew what was going on. Those people should pay for the crimes.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (1767 days ago)
Invade England?? Do you live under a rock?? Yes the international company is English but you do know that the American part of the Company is American registered i.e American regardless of the owners.
ReplyVote up (134)down (149)
Original comment
Invade England?? Do you live under a rock?? Yes the international company is English but you do know that the American part of the Company is American registered i.e American regardless of the owners.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
RELATED POSTS
Is gold the biggest fraud in history?
Is gold the biggest fraud in history?
Who benefits when a business goes cashless?
Who benefits when a business goes cashless?
Exposing economic myths in the 2017 UK election
Exposing economic myths in the 2017 UK election
TYT - Trump owes big money to Deutsche Bank
TYT - Trump owes big money to Deutsche Bank
Is Goldman Sachs evil?
Is Goldman Sachs evil?