| By: DSWright Thursday November 21, 2013 7:09 am |
Tweet
US Attorney General Eric Holder
One of the first to cry foul was FDL Alum David Dayen who called the settlement by DOJ a “bait and switch.”
Glen Ford of the Black Agenda Report went even further. Ford said Wall Street had become “untouchable” and that Attorney General Holder was merely a tool for finance capital.It’s beyond clear that giving away indemnity for illegal foreclosures to get the resources to prosecute the “real” fraud was a bait-and-switch. The very premise was flawed; you don’t indemnify one set of crimes to get to the other, you prosecute wherever possible. This idea of a “new aggressiveness” from the Justice Department on prosecuting big banks is hokum. The giveaways may be sneakier and more well-hidden, but they’re still giveaways. And accountability is still nowhere to be found.
For the people in the know and following the issue the “historic” settlement is anything but. Rather than setting new precedents for the deterrence of financial fraud the settlement is reinforcing preexisting corrupt standards of behavior with the seal of the United States Government over it.However, it is wrong to deride Holder and Obama as merely timid in the face of Wall Street’s awesomely destructive power. Rather, they are instruments of finance capital’s hegemony. Holder has ruthlessly maneuvered every case against the oligarchs into his own jurisdictional arena, in order to protect the banksters from aggressive prosecution by wayward state officials. Holder’s “settlements” are designed to insulate the banks from the rule of law, since, at this stage of systemic decay, the Lords of Capital can no longer function within existing legal constraints.
Eric Holder, a former and likely future Wall Street lawyer, has proven once again that he cares more about helping Wall Street than serving the public interest.
1 CommentOne Response to “Department of Justice Already Under Fire For JPMorgan Settlement”
Is not protecting criminals especially when one is the prosecutor, the one charged with upholding the law, and the rule of law, not a crime in and of itself?
Obama and Holder are “upholdering” the law … which means neither give a rat’s ass FOR the law, for actual justice, or for civil society.
From the use of drones to the coddling of Wall Street, we have not timidity but blatant thumbing of the upheld noses at the truth, at humanity, and at reason.
When does the question of the actual legitimacy of a government come to a point where it cannot, in good conscience, be ignored or unasked?
Most excellent and exquisite rabble rousing, DS, thank you.
DW
Obama and Holder are “upholdering” the law … which means neither give a rat’s ass FOR the law, for actual justice, or for civil society.
From the use of drones to the coddling of Wall Street, we have not timidity but blatant thumbing of the upheld noses at the truth, at humanity, and at reason.
When does the question of the actual legitimacy of a government come to a point where it cannot, in good conscience, be ignored or unasked?
Most excellent and exquisite rabble rousing, DS, thank you.
DW
Some time back I sent a letter to the Justice Dept. on the apparent suicide of the Washington D.C. Madam.
ReplyDeleteI stated that it was certain that it was not suicide but infact murder. Just two days before her death she was interviewed and stated-
" I'm looking forward to going into court and I'm not depressed or unhappy or contemplating suicide so If I should meet my death in the
next few days, I was murdered. The letter i sent was aprox. a year ago and I have heard nothing in the press or received a reply.