

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Following the failure of the U.S. Congress and President Obama to navigate away from an otherwise avoidable sequester, the FBI is up in arms over the subsequent spending cuts they say will hamper, among other things, its ability to pursue financial crimes.
However, while the FBI says the reductions in funding will stall its ability to 'aggressively' pursue the financial sector, critics have found such claims laughable considering the lackluster efforts made thus far by the agency.
In a letter to lawmakers, The Federal Bureau of Investigations complained that the sequestration "will cause current financial crimes investigations to slow as workload is spread among a reduced workforce. In some instances, such delays could affect the timely interviews of witnesses and collection of evidence."
In response to the letter, Ryan Grim notes at the Huffington Post:
More than four years after the financial crisis, not a single Wall Street executive has been jailed for playing a role in the creation of the toxic financial products that fueled the real-estate bubble, which were in some cases designed simply to fail. That track record may make it difficult for the Department of Justice to earn the sympathy of the public as it warns that spending cuts will hamper its ability to investigate Wall Street fraud.
Former Rep. Brad Miller (D-N.C.) told the Huffington Post:
Are they worried that because of sequestration the FBI will interview critical witnesses three years after the statute of limitations has expired instead of just one year? Financial fraud investigations were already under a 'do not resuscitate' order and unresponsive to deep stimulation. It's hard for me to worry that DOJ will now be less 'aggressive.'
The letter continues:
The capacity to undertake new major investigations will be constrained. Left unchecked, fraud and malfeasance in the financial, securities, and related industries could hurt the integrity of U.S. markets. In addition, the public will perceive the FBI as less capable of aggressively and actively investigating financial fraud and public corruption, which would undercut the deterrence that comes from strong enforcement.
Read the full letter here.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), for one, has gone to great lengths to exhibit that the FBI's argument is a moot point.
In a recent Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee hearing, Warren grilled financial regulators, including the Securities and Exchange Commission, over the fact that not a single Wall Street actor has been brought to trial since the beginning of the crash. The same critique would go for the FBI.
Warren stated:
If [banks] can break the law and drag in billions in profits and then turn around and settle paying out of those profits, they don't have that much incentive to follow the law [...]
I am really concerned that too-big-to-fail has become too-big-for-trial. That just seems wrong to me.
_______________________
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Jacob Chamberlain is a former staff writer for Common Dreams. He is the author of Migrant Justice in the Age of Removal. His website is www.jacobpchamberlain.com.
Following the failure of the U.S. Congress and President Obama to navigate away from an otherwise avoidable sequester, the FBI is up in arms over the subsequent spending cuts they say will hamper, among other things, its ability to pursue financial crimes.
However, while the FBI says the reductions in funding will stall its ability to 'aggressively' pursue the financial sector, critics have found such claims laughable considering the lackluster efforts made thus far by the agency.
In a letter to lawmakers, The Federal Bureau of Investigations complained that the sequestration "will cause current financial crimes investigations to slow as workload is spread among a reduced workforce. In some instances, such delays could affect the timely interviews of witnesses and collection of evidence."
In response to the letter, Ryan Grim notes at the Huffington Post:
More than four years after the financial crisis, not a single Wall Street executive has been jailed for playing a role in the creation of the toxic financial products that fueled the real-estate bubble, which were in some cases designed simply to fail. That track record may make it difficult for the Department of Justice to earn the sympathy of the public as it warns that spending cuts will hamper its ability to investigate Wall Street fraud.
Former Rep. Brad Miller (D-N.C.) told the Huffington Post:
Are they worried that because of sequestration the FBI will interview critical witnesses three years after the statute of limitations has expired instead of just one year? Financial fraud investigations were already under a 'do not resuscitate' order and unresponsive to deep stimulation. It's hard for me to worry that DOJ will now be less 'aggressive.'
The letter continues:
The capacity to undertake new major investigations will be constrained. Left unchecked, fraud and malfeasance in the financial, securities, and related industries could hurt the integrity of U.S. markets. In addition, the public will perceive the FBI as less capable of aggressively and actively investigating financial fraud and public corruption, which would undercut the deterrence that comes from strong enforcement.
Read the full letter here.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), for one, has gone to great lengths to exhibit that the FBI's argument is a moot point.
In a recent Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee hearing, Warren grilled financial regulators, including the Securities and Exchange Commission, over the fact that not a single Wall Street actor has been brought to trial since the beginning of the crash. The same critique would go for the FBI.
Warren stated:
If [banks] can break the law and drag in billions in profits and then turn around and settle paying out of those profits, they don't have that much incentive to follow the law [...]
I am really concerned that too-big-to-fail has become too-big-for-trial. That just seems wrong to me.
_______________________
Jacob Chamberlain is a former staff writer for Common Dreams. He is the author of Migrant Justice in the Age of Removal. His website is www.jacobpchamberlain.com.
Following the failure of the U.S. Congress and President Obama to navigate away from an otherwise avoidable sequester, the FBI is up in arms over the subsequent spending cuts they say will hamper, among other things, its ability to pursue financial crimes.
However, while the FBI says the reductions in funding will stall its ability to 'aggressively' pursue the financial sector, critics have found such claims laughable considering the lackluster efforts made thus far by the agency.
In a letter to lawmakers, The Federal Bureau of Investigations complained that the sequestration "will cause current financial crimes investigations to slow as workload is spread among a reduced workforce. In some instances, such delays could affect the timely interviews of witnesses and collection of evidence."
In response to the letter, Ryan Grim notes at the Huffington Post:
More than four years after the financial crisis, not a single Wall Street executive has been jailed for playing a role in the creation of the toxic financial products that fueled the real-estate bubble, which were in some cases designed simply to fail. That track record may make it difficult for the Department of Justice to earn the sympathy of the public as it warns that spending cuts will hamper its ability to investigate Wall Street fraud.
Former Rep. Brad Miller (D-N.C.) told the Huffington Post:
Are they worried that because of sequestration the FBI will interview critical witnesses three years after the statute of limitations has expired instead of just one year? Financial fraud investigations were already under a 'do not resuscitate' order and unresponsive to deep stimulation. It's hard for me to worry that DOJ will now be less 'aggressive.'
The letter continues:
The capacity to undertake new major investigations will be constrained. Left unchecked, fraud and malfeasance in the financial, securities, and related industries could hurt the integrity of U.S. markets. In addition, the public will perceive the FBI as less capable of aggressively and actively investigating financial fraud and public corruption, which would undercut the deterrence that comes from strong enforcement.
Read the full letter here.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), for one, has gone to great lengths to exhibit that the FBI's argument is a moot point.
In a recent Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee hearing, Warren grilled financial regulators, including the Securities and Exchange Commission, over the fact that not a single Wall Street actor has been brought to trial since the beginning of the crash. The same critique would go for the FBI.
Warren stated:
If [banks] can break the law and drag in billions in profits and then turn around and settle paying out of those profits, they don't have that much incentive to follow the law [...]
I am really concerned that too-big-to-fail has become too-big-for-trial. That just seems wrong to me.
_______________________