General Discussion

Better Believe It

(18,630 posts)

77. What a slimy and shameful personal attack you have made on this victimized worker at Wells Fargo!

Mon May 7, 2012, 11:25 PM

May 2012

Last edited Tue May 8, 2012, 12:02 PM - Edit history (1)

You should be ashamed of yourself.

It's not excusable.

And you call yourself a progressive?

That's it for me.

For the first time ever on DU I must place a poster on total ignore for taking the side of big business and Wall Street against working people.

There is a growing conflict in America between the 1% filthy rich and the rest of us and your posts clearly indicate you're on the wrong side in this conflict.

I don't want to read any more of your lame posts in defense of Wall Street and corporate American tycoons when they attack ordinary working people as in this case.

Therefore you're now on my ignore list.

Bye.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

102 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Wells Fargo fires employee for 1972 shoplifting conviction! The banksters can kiss my ass! [View all] Better Believe It May 2012 OP

Did she lie about her previous conviction when she began her employment with Wells Fargo?...nt SidDithers May 2012 #1

I guess lying is only encouraged if you're going straight for an executive position? villager May 2012 #5

Have you never been asked "Do you have any prior convictions" when applying for a job?...nt SidDithers May 2012 #10

Never. n/t RebelOne May 2012 #17

every job I have ever held ....nt littlewolf May 2012 #60

All apps I remember ask about prior convictions...can't recall if they're limited to felonies Honeycombe8 May 2012 #80

I think Sid's point is that DevonRex May 2012 #15

Actually, we don't have the slightest idea, do we? It's all conjecture on Sid's part. villager May 2012 #21

No. It's right. It has to do with FDIC. In order for the deposits to be insured DevonRex May 2012 #24

How is it conjecture? Major Nikon May 2012 #57

Well, don't bring facts into the outrage Sid...she was fired for lying, since the crime itself would msanthrope May 2012 #6

While her 40 year old conviction may have fallen under the de minimus exceptions ... 1StrongBlackMan May 2012 #16

Wow, so they legally had to fire her? DevonRex May 2012 #18

Yes. They did. nt msanthrope May 2012 #65

Why would that be a problem with Wells Fargo? Isn't lying part of how you rise to the top sabrina 1 May 2012 #30

To paraphrase the theme song from Baretta: Art_from_Ark May 2012 #55

The only thing I was ever asked was if I had been convicted of any felonies. hobbit709 May 2012 #62

She may have forgotten, and therefore did not in fact lie. joshcryer May 2012 #78

No. Cerridwen May 2012 #97

And GET THIS: ""We are bound by federal law that generally prohibits us from hiring or continuing... CurtEastPoint May 2012 #2

Federal laws don't apply to millionaire banking executives. Better Believe It May 2012 #4

Actually, they do apply equally. The irony here is that she didn't disclose a crime msanthrope May 2012 #14

What outrageous crime did she commit that would prohibit her from handling banking funds? Better Believe It May 2012 #44

I love this Politicalboi May 2012 #3

Stupid teen/early twenties type youth action gets you fired 40 years later? haele May 2012 #7

No--failing to disclose it does. Under FDIC rules, her conviction could have been waived msanthrope May 2012 #12

Please don't defend and try to justify the banksters mistreatment of working people. Better Believe It May 2012 #19

There is no defense for this, please stop trying to excuse it. sabrina 1 May 2012 #32

I am sorry for your friend's situation. guardian May 2012 #85

I just went through a Government security clearance process - there are appeals processes haele May 2012 #34

Title 12 USC § 1829 has no statute of limitations. Prior approval of the FDIC would be required... slackmaster May 2012 #28

I don't have a problem with FDIC regulations....she would have qualified for waiver, or msanthrope May 2012 #8

"Wells Fargo doesn't have much of choice here" Yes they did! Better Believe It May 2012 #22

You would prefer it if Wells Fargo lied to federal regulators about it? Only the FDIC.. slackmaster May 2012 #31

Yes. "The President has no authority ...." I know. Obama is powerless and has no influence .... Better Believe It May 2012 #45

Is it your position that every company should appeal to... SidDithers May 2012 #49

The law is very specific. There is no provision for exceptions to 12 USC § 1829 after the fact. slackmaster May 2012 #50

Damn you and your inconvenient facts!!... SidDithers May 2012 #53

Don't YOU realize that Wells Fargo claiming they must abide by the law, is simply laughable in the sabrina 1 May 2012 #67

How could the President have time to take up every single case? treestar May 2012 #66

I'm looking forward to Obama taking up a single case. This would be a good one. After all, he Better Believe It May 2012 #71

You're asking for a Peron or Castro like situation treestar May 2012 #73

Oh good lord. nt Codeine May 2012 #36

And there it is... SidDithers May 2012 #38

I'd rather the banks follow the laws. joshcryer May 2012 #79

When that happens let me know! Better Believe It May 2012 #82

I would have more sympathy for her if her excuse was "I'm sorry, that was so long ago I forgot!" slackmaster May 2012 #88

Convictions. Plural... SidDithers May 2012 #89

I was not aware of that. If she admitted that it was an intentional avoidance to disclose... joshcryer May 2012 #101

If a bank is FDIC insured, they can't employ her by law. Robb May 2012 #9

Well, they can employ her--if she discloses it. Her crime would have either msanthrope May 2012 #13

No, she was fired for lying on her application. nt Codeine May 2012 #11

So what? Better Believe It May 2012 #23

What took them so long?? RockaFowler May 2012 #26

Banks are routinely doing deep background checks on current employees slackmaster May 2012 #29

Thanks for this RockaFowler May 2012 #33

How deep are the background checks they're doing on their CEOs? sabrina 1 May 2012 #41

Much deeper than the checks done on employees who don't handle cash slackmaster May 2012 #42

Well, they apparently didn't get their money's worth. The crooked CEOs are still collecting millions sabrina 1 May 2012 #69

The law can't do anything about it until they are convicted of crimes slackmaster May 2012 #93

I agree. The banksters are having a really tough time now. My thoughts and prayers are with them. Better Believe It May 2012 #46

Times are tough for liars, too slackmaster May 2012 #54

Unless you're rich and a CEO bankster. Better Believe It May 2012 #72

Both, actually. slackmaster May 2012 #27

It is a lesson to all Americans! Rex May 2012 #20

A bank can be fined up to $1 million per day for hiring someone with a theft conviction... slackmaster May 2012 #25

"Wells Fargo is a big fuzzy bunny." As demonstrated by this firing! Better Believe It May 2012 #47

The law is very clear. Wells Fargo had no choice but to terminate her. slackmaster May 2012 #51

You're right. ""Wells Fargo is a big fuzzy bunny" compared to other banks. Better Believe It May 2012 #58

There is no provision in 12 USC § 1829 for a bank to seek approval after the fact. slackmaster May 2012 #61

I admire your patience and perseverance... SidDithers May 2012 #63

Yeah, I'm going to make myself a nice salad for dinner. I have fresh avocados and grapefruit. slackmaster May 2012 #64

Do you have any more effective arguments in defense of patriotic Wall Street do-gooder bankers? Better Believe It May 2012 #74

You're arguing against one of our most important consumer protection laws. slackmaster May 2012 #76

I'm sorry, but if this woman was not Hispanic this would have not been an issue....n/t Jello Biafra May 2012 #35

If Wells Fargo's issue with her was based on her Hispanic heritage, why did they hire her? slackmaster May 2012 #37

They have to hire her that is the law..... Jello Biafra May 2012 #39

Wells Fargo doesn't legally have the option of giving her a pass. Now that they are aware... slackmaster May 2012 #40

And how many times have big banks ever been fined for not firing a low level employee .... Better Believe It May 2012 #48

Please provide a credible source to back up your factoid. slackmaster May 2012 #52

Can you provide any evidence that any bank has ever been fined a million bucks or less for that? Better Believe It May 2012 #56

I did check. It seems the law has often been enforced against non-profits and other small players. slackmaster May 2012 #59

Why would you still be dealing with Wells Fargo? They stole my friends home, illegally. sabrina 1 May 2012 #68

A few reasons, but first I must say I'm sorry about your friend's home. slackmaster May 2012 #70

Thank you. They did not treat my friend well, despite her being a good customer for a long time. sabrina 1 May 2012 #75

My HELOC was originated at Wells Fargo. Refinincing it at another institution would not be possible, slackmaster May 2012 #86

What a slimy and shameful personal attack you have made on this victimized worker at Wells Fargo! Better Believe It May 2012 #77

Who didn't see that coming?... SidDithers May 2012 #81

LOL. I wish we had kept a running count. FSogol May 2012 #99

If the "progressive" ideology means letting unrepentant thieves and liars work for banks, slackmaster May 2012 #84

that will teach her! Liberal_in_LA May 2012 #43

IMO Mr Dixon May 2012 #83

Corporations in general stopped treating people as valued assets about 30 years ago slackmaster May 2012 #87

Really Mr Dixon May 2012 #92

I haven't "sided" with banks or corporations here. I have pointed out repeatedly what the law says. slackmaster May 2012 #94

SMH Mr Dixon May 2012 #96

If you don't like the LAW guardian May 2012 #100

Good gawd. Now there is one for the record. lonestarnot May 2012 #90

"the rich are just better people than you" Better Believe It May 2012 #91

Keep trying...nt SidDithers May 2012 #95

Most of this thread is discussing something that didn't happen. Cerridwen May 2012 #98

Thanks for the additional information and link. Better Believe It May 2012 #102