ShareThis Page

Kid gloves for Wall St.

| Tuesday, Nov. 5, 2013, 9:00 p.m.

The Washington Post story “Justice Department, JPMorgan Chase bank reach $13B settlement on faulty mortgages” (Oct. 20 and and other reports loudly announced that JPMorgan is “settling” civil complaints with federal regulators. While $13 billion might sound like a whole lot of money to mere mortals, to Morgan, it doesn't come to “pin money.”

Interestingly, no individuals are held responsible, let alone punished, and remember, it's individuals who set policy and make decisions that govern the actions of banks and financial houses.

Regarding Justice “holding open the door to criminal action,” nobody is holding their breath, or very few are, given the kid-glove treatment Wall Street has received from President Obama et al .

Additionally, respecting the egregious nature of bank and financial-house antics in the home mortgage racket, remember “robosigning,” for instance. How come Justice, under Eric Holder, Obama's attorney general, has yet to commence the first prosecution of any high-level executives, remembering that it's individuals who make decisions, who set policy?

Am I simply an evil-minded old man, or does the adage about “where there's smoke, there's fire” still hold true? For there is not only smoke regarding the kid-glove treatment of bankers and financial types, there is a really terrible smell.

How come so little from Obama et al. here, compared with so much from them regarding other things — Operation Fast and Furious, for instance? How come, indeed.

Alan Schultz


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.