Eric Holder Admits Some Banks Are Just Too Big To Prosecute

reply to post by Happy1


I get soooo angry about JON CORZINE's "I just don't know where 2 billion dollars went"

I agree that no one has the balls to bring big banks to justice. Stop and think about it...Who has paid the path for all our elected officials? You really think they would just bank-roll their stroll into controlling our lives without a little blackmail material? What would happen if the people found out all their leaders were on the banker's pay roll, had a little fling, or did something even worse? Oh, wait a minute...most of us do. And still do nothing about it. All people do is talk and complain. But really, what is being done by the American people that are being stomped into the ground, taken for everything the banks think they are worth? A little bitch and moan is all. We all know what is going on. But no one is willing to do anything to stop it. A post on here won't stop them. A little protest won't stop them. Tell me, in honesty, what will be done to stop this terrible deed? Nothing! Absolutely nothing. People are too worried about getting involved. Too worried about having to take care of their own selves and families to worry about such a thing as punishing big banks for bring them to their knees, just like the good little servants we all are. Even I am guilty of this very demeanor. I have to struggle everyday just to make sure my son eats before I do. And it's not the healthiest of foods for either us of ingest. But it is the life of a servant. Bow! Bow, you lovely little sheep and keep thinking that doing something is worse than not doing anything. Just my two cents. And if you don't mind, I need at least one and half penny back for taxes.

reply to post by jdub297


To big to prosecute?

I think Texas would disagree...

While we are at it maybe Holder should be prosecuted as well... After all, he is an incompetent boob who has never read the Constitution. If we are going to start, then lets start at the top and work our way down, starting with Holder, then the banks.

reply to post by beezzer

I thought "Too confusing to obey" was the excuse Charlie Rangel and Timothy Geithner both used with regard to their cheating on U.S. Taxes. Only in America can a man in arrears with the IRS become the technical head of it, eh?

We just have a peachy bunch of Officials all around, don't we? All so fully capable and eager to do their jobs.

Originally posted by beezzer
So we have;
"Too big to fail"
"Too big to prosecute"

What's next?

This document is "Too wordy to read" (Constitution)
This document is "Too complicated to understand" (Bill of Rights)
Obama is "Too eager to step down" (After 2 terms)
The law is "Too confusing to obey" (Fast & Furious)

In my humble opinion, Eric Holder is "Too stupid to work as AG!"

edit on 6-3-2013 by beezzer because: (no reason given)

"You'll know what's in it when we pass it."

We're being led around by the nose (or worse) and lied to so regularly that it's not even newsworthy anymore.

Funny thing, I've checked NBC, ABC, CBS, NYT, Slate abd Salon; no mention whatsoever! The closest anyone comes is this:

Eric Holder to Senate Judiciary Committee: Aaron Swartz Case Was “A Good Use of Prosecutorial Discretion"

www.slate.com...

What happened to HuffPo that they would break rank and put the Obama DoJ in a bad light when none of their colleagues will do it?

jw

reply to post by krakenpit
I so agree with you - If I still had chidren to take care of, I would just keep holding on. Mine are grown now, and I feel for all of you that have kids right now.

It's like we're all waiting for something big and bad to happen, we know this is un-sustainable - to use one of their UN slogans.

We know they are not looking out for us little, itty-bitty, tax payers and slaves.

perhaps some one from iceland will send mr holder a message explaining how they did it.....this guy makes me so mad

reply to post by jdub297


Hhmm,
Or maybe a trade off like: you do not pursue prosecution , and we will cease to
investigate Fast and Fury.

Sounds really messy and an unacceptable position from his office.
I am not feeling confident . Are you?

With Mr. Holder stating that the banks are to big to prosecute, he is telling the truth. The banks control the money and the money controls the government. The AG therefore is fighting from a losing position since the banks can and would simply bleed the government dry of any and all funds. Their pockets (the banks) have unlimited depth, the government does not. Every penny the government gets it owes to the Federal Reserve plus interest. In order to fight the banks it's forced to borrow from the Federal Reserve, whereas the Federal Reserve is a private bank, can just simply help a fellow bank out by giving unlimited funds at 0 interest and no pay back required (bailout).

From the bankings point of view, they could care less what law the government passes since they control the money. Whats the AG going to do without any money...nothing. Before anyone cries any further, I suggest you educate yourself regarding the Federal Reserve and the banking system. It's a dog and pony show for the masses and you have ringside seats.

Originally posted by beezzer
So we have;
"Too big to fail"
"Too big to prosecute"

What's next?

This document is "Too wordy to read" (Constitution)
This document is "Too complicated to understand" (Bill of Rights)
Obama is "Too eager to step down" (After 2 terms)
The law is "Too confusing to obey" (Fast & Furious)

In my humble opinion, Eric Holder is "Too stupid to work as AG!"

edit on 6-3-2013 by beezzer because: (no reason given)

Don't forget that our first glimpse of Holder's idea of "prosecutorial discretion" was his handling of Marc Rich's tax-evasion and fugitive from justice pardon under Bill Clinton's DoJ.

Eric Holder’s intercession on behalf of fugitive Marc Rich is so inexplicable that he has always viewed ignorance as his best defense. It’s as though Holder believes that a deputy attorney general looks better for having remained studiously unaware of critical facts in a criminal case before throwing his weight around. But that’s Holder’s story, and he’s sticking to it: even if it turns out not to be true.

Unpardonable: Holder’s Marc Rich Shuffle

Some people saw this coming before his confirmation; some saw Holder's grilling as a racist attack upon Obama's ability to populate the cabinet with the socialists, anarchists and OWG advocates of his choice.

This is what many low-information people voted for, and actually WANT in their government.

You get what you deserve when you have no idea what's going on or what's at stake, or a stake in the outcome.
None of the taxpayer-dependent majority who voted in 2012 should complain. In fact, they'll find a way to blame others for Holder's complete lack of ethics and repsonsibility..

well this tells me two things that the government has said are false for years.

1. apparently, some people are above the law.

2. and some banks do run our government.

This thread inspired me to come up with this rhyme.

Too big to fail, that ship has sailed. Too big to prosecute don't make me puke. The people will prevail and big government will fail. All is not lost if we make bankers pay the cost.

They're not too big to fail, everyone knows that. They are however, in Obama's pocket. Holder just admited to it.

This is less about reality, and more about perception I feel. Holder has the resources financially to prosecute anyone he sees fit to prosecute, as other posters have pointed out. Holder FEARS the effect of any potential prosecution, probably is under some serious pressure from private interests, and of course politicians who have links to various businesses under investigation, or suspicion.

Those people, those with ties to these businesses, and other figures in government, probably fear the effect on the stability of the USA of loosing its economic stability, a fate they believe is unavoidable if the prosecutions go ahead. However, the USA has, as do most economically developed nations, two economies of note (excluding black market and other criminal infrastructures). There is the economy which appears on the stock market, and there is the real economy, which operates on a much smaller level, in a more distributed manner, throughout the entire United States. I am of course refering to small businesses and family enterprises.

These businesses, although they can be seriously effected by the action of the power markets due to banks suddenly foreclosing on property loans and so on and so forth, are actually much more solid, because they corner markets in small towns, of which there are a great many in the States. Many of these businesses are very diverse, general stores and so on, selling all manner of grocery items, hardwares and the like. These have been under great strain from out of town shopping centres of course, and that is a concern.

However, in reality people will still need feeding, and when and if a collapse or a market backlash hits the US, there will be people within these small communities who will be able to provide for the needs of those communities. Where the bigger cities are involved, in such a time those cities will become little block provinces, with trade between them becoming more vibrant, as out of town supplies are cut off by prohibitive fuel costs. City to city trade will decrease somewhat, with only essential supplies moving in and out, like foodstuffs, fuel, and the like.

Holders fear is pathetic and shows a lack of confidence in the people on whose behalf he adminsters the law. This makes him weak. The banks know this, which means they will not change thier ways, since they are so profitable and since they know they will not be prosecuted. This is not mere hegemony, but a racket the likes of which the mighty Al Capone could only have concieved of in his most deluded, and drunken moments of excess. There is however, no Ness like figure on the horizon as we speak, to take the names and apply the boot to the rump of this particular monster, and until there is, expect the USA to be held to ransom.

This is economic terrorism at its most vile and effective. A vast superpower, held in a crushing grip, not by an army, nor by a conqueror, but by fear and money.

Holder should be deposed, dethroned, and replaced with someone who is prepared to apply the law vigorously and without remorse, relent, or regret, to any and all who violate it, no matter the vast power and wealth they wield over the land. I recognise this because similar things have happened here in the UK over the years. The lack of will in the legal establishment to take certain companies and banks to task for thier idiocy and criminality has cost my nation dear over the last few decades, and I would hate to see the vice of finance come down so heavily on our neighbors across the sea.

Stand fast with the Holy Ghost, as my mother often says. March upon your state capitals, make signs, make noise, demand the justice you all so rightly deserve. With a bang not a whimper friends.

Originally posted by OmegaLogos
reply to post by jdub297

 

Explanation: S&F!

@Mr Eric Holder ... You Sir are a :w: unconstitutionalist

:shk:

Personal Disclosure: YOU MAKE ME WANT TO PUKE MR HOLDER!

somehow i dont think he will be reading your post, i agree with you though

Can you imagine if Robert Kennedy said to the American people "...the mob is too big to prosecute, sooo yah."? Heck, its apparent that Janet Reno had more balls than Holder. Incompetence, pure incompetence.

reply to post by jdub297


I disagree with Eric Holder. No bank is too big to be prosecuted. All court cases SHOULD be based on facts and not how much money they have. So what if it hurts the economy, it's going to get worst before it gets better anyway. Might as well get it over with.

reply to post by XLR8R

With banks sitting on record profits and more cash trserves than ever before, there's plenty of money to cover any losses than come from prosecution or dissolution.

I fail to see how this will hurt the general public if a few bank officers and Board members get hit with muli-million dollar fines and restitution. The banks themselves have never been "too big to fail;" that was a cop-out and sorry excuse for giving taxpayers money and borrowed money to political cronies. (Where do you think Jack Lew, Tim Geithner and Lawrence Sommers came from?)

jw

What I found the most telling were the comments under the article on HuffPo. Normally, you get a ton of Big Brother Lovers on there slinging snot. Not this time. Many actually sounded like many on this thread.

That alone should make it evident this BS transcends ideology or taste in news outlets. The whole 'it hurts the little people if we prosecute' nonsense is comical, tragically so.

I guess it dovetails nicely with the last few administrations taking a dump on the 4th amendment and soon the 2nd amendment. If you are going to ignore the law of the land and least be honest and up front about it.

Ok so Eric Holder said:
"I am concerned that the size of some of these institutions becomes so large that it does become difficult for us to prosecute them when we are hit with indications that if you do prosecute, if you do bring a criminal charge, it will have a negative impact on the national economy, perhaps even the world economy,"And I think that is a function of the fact that some of these institutions have become too large."

Please hold your thumb over the name [Eric Holder] to block it out and read the the quote.

Is what is being said true?

Are there really banks so big that prosecuting or shutting them down could have a disproportionally large impact on the quality of life for more than 350 million people?

Is Eric Holder making an excuse or is he highlighting a real problem?