JP Morgan - A Nightmare on LOL Street

As little as Taibi understands about the financial markets, I agree with him on this one.

You're right. He won't show any true deference because he already owns most of them.

OK, you really don't understand what that expression means.

Umm... I think it's you that's mixed up on this one?

Do you think it means "asking for alms/a hand out" or something? Because that's not what it means...

He's not asking for anything, whether alms, a hand out or a favor. He's been asked to testify at a committee hearing, that's all.

Ok, he came dick in hand and was very sorry for his lack of oversight, blah, blah. Nothing will change.

Jamie's so generous he's willing to come down to DC and help craft Wall St. regulations. What a mensch!

So concerned were the senators that increased regulations might burden Wall Street that in an exchange with Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS), Dimon even offered to get neighborly with the people charged with policing his firm’s actions, to keep them well informed about financial regulatory issues.

“Me and lots of other folks, we’ll do whatever you want, we’ll even get apartments down here,” Dimon offered.
http://www.hark.com/clips/kphcwdgxsz-sergeant-hartman-********-my-sister

[JohnR shakes head and walks away.]

Nothing will change because nothing happened.

Right. Wall St. always plays by the lax rules. So I don't get the Congressional circle jerk to begin with.

It's an election year.

A bank with $1 trillion in assets suffering a $2 billion decline on one of its assets doesn't actually mean anything. That's the point.

I did hear him say a version of "Listen, motherf*ckers - we got this sh*t. Maybe we'll claw back some bonuses, fire a few bigshots. But don't get all worked up over nothin. Taxpayers aren't on the hook."

But he was also apologetic which was weird for someone so sure his firm did nothing nefarious.

http://gawker.com/5918618/jon-stewart-examines-the-silliness-of-jamie-dimons-senate-testimony

What he said.

You know what they say about French girls

Because Jamie's brand is "I'm different than the other bank CEOs. I conduct real risk management, I won't burn you with surprises like those schmucks will do, so unlike them you can take me at my word."

Works great politically. He's trying to salvage that brand so that he can continue to get Washington pols to write policy the way that he likes policy to be written.

Y'know that may be true-- but his Risk Management people are way above all the others I deal with, too.

Much better than those in my company, and they are not slouches themselves. As far as I can tell he's keeping his end of the bargain, so good on him.

The event was big enough to be embarassing , but it was not any real danger to anything... and he is expressing appropriate embarassment. I find it refreshing in a way.

The whole exercise was a waste then other than getting Jamie some unneeded face time in front of his Congressional ass kissers.

This.

In what other industry would a company that was profitable in a quarter in which one of its investment lost money on an investment be pilloried like this? The point of this should be that even when Jamie Dimon's bank screws up, their risk management is good enough that the risk is easily contained and causes no real damage.

Well, one could argue that the general distrust of Wall Street is warranted. Pilloried is a bit strong when most at the hearing kissed his ass like a conquering war hero.

And finally a big-name conviction (kind of) related to the 2008 financial implosion:

During the trial that began on May 20, the government again highlighted a Sept. 23, 2008, phone call it said was made from Gupta to Rajaratnam. The call came only minutes after Gupta had learned during a confidential conference call about how Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway planned to invest $5 billion in Goldman — a blockbuster deal that wouldn't be announced until the stock market closed at 4 p.m.

"That news was going to be very good news for Goldman Sachs," prosecutor Richard Tarlowe said in closing arguments. "The average ordinary investor had no way of knowing that. ... Until the announcement, it was confidential."

Records showed that moments after the phone call ended at 3:55 p.m., Rajaratnam purchased $40 million in Goldman stock — an 11th hour trade that ended up making him nearly $1 million.

http://news.yahoo.com/former-goldman-sachs-director-convicted-nyc-154831861--finance.html

If you're talking about Penn Square Bank, it didn't stay local

We're not talking about the hearing.

A completely unrelated insider trading conviction. Most of the attempts to try people for the credit crisis have repeatedly shown the same thing - losing money isn't a crime. 9

oop: That's why I said it was kind of related to the 2008 debacle. One Goldman bigshot gets caught. As with any crime, one gets caught while many more are actually doing it.