Please take 5 minutes to read an incredible Post

[Scuba]

30. Are you suggesting that no crimes were committed?

https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/11/14-4

Federal Judge Slams DoJ for Not Prosecuting Wall Street Execs
The "'too big to jail excuse' is mindboggling in what it says about the department's disregard of fundamental legal principles," said Rakoff

A federal judge with a history of slamming the regulatory system issued scathing remarks against the Department of Justice on Tuesday for allowing Wall Street executives to escape criminal prosecutions. Speaking at an event hosted by the New York City Bar Association on Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff of Manhattan said the DoJ's "unconvincing" excuses for not prosecuting individuals were "technically and morally suspect."

"[Not] a single high level executive has been successfully prosecuted in connection with the recent financial crisis, and given the fact that most of the relevant criminal provisions are governed by a five-year statute of limitations, it appears very likely that none will be," Rakoff said.

While the DoJ has not said that all the top executives are innocent in the lead-up to the financial crisis, it "has offered one or another excuse for not criminally prosecuting them—excuses that, on inspection, appear unconvincing,” the Financial Times reports Judge Rakoff as saying.

"Just going after the company," which could lead to deferred prosecutions and nominal fines, is "both technically and morally suspect. It is technically suspect because, under the law, you should not indict or threaten to indict a company unless you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that some managerial agent of the company committed the alleged crime; and if you can prove that, why not indict the manager?"

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bank-of-america-found-liable-for-mortgage-fraud/

Bank of America found liable for mortgage fraud

Bank of America (BAC), accused of lying about the quality of mortgages it passed along to financial firms Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, was found liable for fraud on Wednesday in a civil case the government said captured the frenzied pursuit of profits at all costs just before the economy collapsed in 2008.

If they were found guilty in the civil case, why is there no criminal case?

Why is it illegal to launder drug money, and HSBC gets fined $2B for doing so, but there are no criminal prosecutions?

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/americas/united-states/140121/hsbc-paying-2-billion-drug-money-laundering-cartel

HSBC is paying $2 billion, or 5 weeks' worth of its profit, to avoid criminal charges in drug cartel laundering case

Under the terms of the deal, the Justice Department agreed to suspend criminal charges against HSBC and its US subsidiary for five years if the bank agreed to pay the penalty.