Exclusive: U.S. seeks new approach in financial crisis criminal probes

[denverbill]

Source: Reuters

Federal prosecutors are considering a new strategy for criminally charging Wall Street bankers who packaged and sold bad mortgage loans at the height of the housing bubble, according to a federal official familiar with the investigation.

The official said federal authorities are finding new evidence they say indicates intent to commit fraud in some of the civil lawsuits that plaintiffs' lawyers have filed against large banks over the packaging and sale of mortgage bonds backed by subprime home loans. And they are exploring whether they can build criminal cases against bankers by using a 1984 law intended to punish individuals for scamming commercial banks.

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/17/us-financialcrisis-fraud-probes-idUSBRE96G13620130717?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews

---

I sure hope this gets some legs. The criminals have gotten away scot-free so far with all their loot.

[jtuck004]

1. Wonder if that will put any of the 5 or 6 million foreclosure victims back in the homes

these thieving bastards helped them lose?

[wordpix]

5. not condoning the criminal bankers in any way BUT some of those victims should never have

signed on the dotted line due to their income vs. the large mortgages they signed onto.

My story: during the height of the housing bubble I was considering a move due to a new job I then had. At the time I was renting near the job and returning to my condo, which I owned, on weekends b/c it was too far to commute. I went around with a RE agent and was looking in the new city at 2 br. condos with no storage for $375K-400K, and I was not in love with the neighborhoods I saw, either. Altogether, it seemed a huge amt. for essentially a small space, and I would have had to take on a big mortgage b/c my condo wasn't worth anywhere near that amount.

When I expressed my reservations, the realtor told me she could hook me up with a mortgage broker so I could get one of the $400K condos. I responded that, "I'll still be paying off a big mortgage for the next 30 yrs, no matter what the deal is." I eventually dropped the idea of buying into the more expensive city.

Today those same condos in that same city are going for $150K-275K for 2 br's, instead of $375K-400K.

Moral: Whatever you're buying, you need to use your horse sense and go with what's affordable. I thank my lucky stars I made a good analysis and didn't fall for the "it will rise in value by next year" crap. A lot of people who took on expensive mortgages during or right before 2008 didn't do their homework/analysis. Yes, maybe they were goaded into these mortgages, and banks just passed on the risk to unsuspecting investors without weighing them---the banks should be held accountable for this. Still, it's up to the individual to realistically look at his income and the stability of that income vs. the cost of a housing purchase before he or she signs on the dotted line.

[jtuck004]

9. Actually the banks, in a criminal conspiracy, KNEW they were floating trillions in bad debt

onto unsuspecting Americans and others. There is no amount of homework that people could have done, no amount of "wise" planning
that could have let them see the deals that were hidden by the Financial Services Modernization Act that Pres. Clinton brought into being, and later said he regretted.

Homeowners are no more responsible than people who need food stamps are for being in poverty while at the mercy of corporations who are trashing their economy.

The banks did it on purpose, for the fees, caring not a whit about who was going to get hurt, solely for profit, because they knew it wasn't going to be them. They wrote commercial paper on non-existent assets, using unsecured loans in the hundreds of billions as "security" on other loans, and used that fluff to justify more loans, etc. It's detailed in numerous books, perhaps the best one being by Professor Black, who prosecuted Savings and Loans for similar behaviour in the 80's.

Their penalty was to pocket hundreds of billions of dollars in profit from the taxpayers while home-owners got screwed. Even today WE are paying them $40 to $85 billion a month, while they reap fantastic profits from the taxpayer. All this while the government refused to staff the FBI with the people that could have investigated, just like they did the last time, and put people in jail. We would likely be in a far better position today, but our elected officials decided to protect the banks at the expense of millions of working people.

That's why, when Occupy marches by, they laugh, spit on them, and throw McDonalds applications down on the marchers. Because they know they are getting away with the crime of the century.

Does that mean there aren't a handful of people who may have made unwise decisions? No. But they are such a small part of the whole picture it would be like dropping a nickel down a storm drain and blaming it for making your state go bankrupt.

Don't fall for that crap. We were stalked and assaulted by these bastards, and the misery and tragedy that has resulted is the product of their work.

[valerief]

2. I'm sure in 75 years the bad guys will all be duly prosecuted.

But never before then.

[KoKo]

6. So True..75 years...Sounds about RIGHT!

[DeSwiss]

3. ''New evidence, huh?''

- I guess it took this long for them to find this ''new evidence'' because all the good lawyers work on Wall Street.......

K&R

[KoKo]

7. I try to EMBRACE Eric Holder as a Force for Peace and Justice...but...

he sort of leaves me cold ...everytime I see him on Media.

I guess he means well...but, it falls WAY SHORT...every time he speaks.

Maybe it's just me.

[DeSwiss]

8. It. Is. Not. Just. You. :-| n/t

[BornLooser]

4. Hello...Hello? Just call The Honorable Senator and Her diligent staff from Massachusets...of course

That will only save time and tax dollars, makes too much sense to you fakirs, yes?!

[One_Life_To_Give]

10. You can lead a horse to water

But you can't make em indict.