You know it came out a few years ago that HSBC had helped launder millions upon millions
of dollars for major drug cartels, and they knowingly did it.
It wasn't like, "Oops, we slipped up."
And at the end of the day they were charged a big fine, but no one went to jail.
And now there are these civil suits popping up against HSBC, UBS about their terror and
drug money laundering.
Can you tell us a little about that?
Yeah, in 2015 UBS AG paid millions of dollars to defend and settle what was characterized
as a clear violation of US terrorism sanctions.
They thought it was a good idea to process hundreds of transactions worth of millions
of dollars for entities that were placed on terrorism blacklists.
They'd been warned about the terrorism blacklisting, they knew clearly who these people were, they
chose to ignore those warnings and take huge, major mega, mega profits because they knew
that they could do what HSBC did, which is, go ahead and steal as much as you can, violate
the law as much as you can.
Ignore the law, go ahead and empower terrorism as much as you want because at the end of
all that you have a Department of Justice in The United States that's going to let you
pay a fine and go home.
And that's what Loretta Lynch did, that's what Eric Holder did, and because of that
we're continuing to see more activity.
The case you're talking about was a 2016 as HSBC sued for laundering money for cartel
terrorists, who murdered Americans, by the way.
The case was initiated in a Texas federal court, maintained that the London-based HSBC
Bank provided continuous ... and here's what's important ... it was continuous, and it was
a systematic support for laundering cartel terrorist money.
Yeah, but you listen to our government, whether it's this administration or the last one,
or the one before that, they claim they want to go after these terror groups, and go after
these drug cartels.
Is it all just lip service?
Why aren't they going after these banks that are helping these terror groups operate?
Well, let me give you an example here, Lee.
In the HSBC the document that they had to sign admitted that they had broken the law,
they admitted that by breaking that law that they had cost American lives.
They admitted that they were aware of the terrorism ban on not laundering money, on
not aiding terrorists, they admitted everything.
And Loretta Lynch, and Eric Holder refused to put them in jail.
Why is that?
Because Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch comes from that part of the lawyer world that defends
these corporations.
Eric Holder, before he became Attorney General appointed by Obama, he actually worked for
Covington Burling.
The people he defended, white collar criminals, were people like HSBC.
And so, yeah, HSBC was fined $2 Billion for engaging in terrorism that cost Americans
lives.
And you know, the American Justice Department acted like, "Wow, this is a huge victory."
You should see the press conference where they're trying to dance around and make it
look like a huge victory, and the questions are being asked for them by reporters, "Wait,
we don't get this.
They've admitted breaking the law, huge felonies that would put most people in prison for 100
years, and nobody went to prison.
Interesting story."
Yeah, there's a serious revolving door spinning furiously for positions such as Eric Holder
had, and then he heads back to corporate America and gets a pat on the back.
Is there any sign that these banks are letting up or changing their ways?
Does a billion or $2 billion fine make them stop these actions?
No, they won't change their ways.
I said this all the way back in 2008 when Obama let everybody go.
You remember he ran for office and he said, "I'm really going to punish some people.
These bankers are in big trouble."
Do you remember this talk when he was running?
Yeah.
Wall Street was going to be held accountable?
Okay.
So, nobody went to prison, the person he brought in was Eric Holder from Covington Burling
who, ... by the way, you might not know this.
Eric Holder left Covington Burling to give all of his white collar criminals a pass,
and now you know where he is?
He's back at Covington Burling after he's no longer Attorney General.
So the answer is absolutely, positively no.
They will not stop until Uncle Freddie goes to prison, and somewhere in MBA school up
at Harvard or Yale they talk about the fact that "Uncle Fred did this and he went to prison
for 20 years, so maybe we shouldn't do it."
But as long as all you're doing is making them pay a big fine it doesn't mean anything
to these people.
It's the cost of doing business.
If they make $100 billion and they have to pay $2 billion there's no problem there.
It's a really good deal for them.
So, no, they're not going to stop it.
And I don't see Sessions doing anything different.
You know, he's not doing anything to these folks that created an opioid crisis that has
170 people dying every day from opioid overdoses.
Nobody's gone to prison.
He has enough facts to put them in prison right now but he won't do it.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét