ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • Politics & Political Science

Jamie Dimon Of JPMorgan Chase Is Paying Penance For Speaking Out Years Ago Against The Obama Administration....

Updated on January 17, 2015

Jamie Dimon Of JPMorgan Chase Is Paying Penance For Speaking Out Years Ago Against The Obama Administration….

A couple days ago, it was reported that JPMorgan Chase decided to pay - or one could make a cogent case that it was defacto coercion on the part of the Obama Administration - over two billion dollars for being ignorant, willful or otherwise, about the Ponzi scheme perpetrated by one of its clients, Bernie Madoff. It must be noted that this latest United States government sanctioned extortion is in addition to the earlier billions JPMorgan Chase was coerced to pay before, which now totals close to $20 billion.

The irony - I am almost certain - is that Mr. Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase, and most of the board that make up JPMorgan Chase’s, probably voted for the secular messiah (President Obama) during the two previous Presidential elections… by the way, I hope that those who make up President Obama’s cult-of-personality do forgive me for not ‘capitalizing’ ‘secular messiah,’ … refusing to follow the same conventions of Grammar like I normally would do when I referenced the true Messiah, Jesus-The-Christ… incidentally, too, in light of my critique, I must convey that the Christian in me must tell you that JPMorgan Chase is among the banks where I have been employed in the past in a consulting banking compliance capacity.

Ok - it is true that Madoff was indeed Chase’s client and one could make the similar cogent ethical and legal case that with its seasoned financial expertise and pedigree that the noted bank should have known about Madoff’s Ponzi scheme, especially since it went on for decades - but the Security Exchange Commission (SEC) is also in the business to monitor, regulate, and police entities or individuals, like Mr. Madoff, a duty it woefully failed… yet, we did not hear of any mass firings at the Security Exchange Commission.

One would also think that specific personnel employed at Chase in that area of its business endeavors would have been charged criminally for such a monumental breach of what could be deemed Willful Blindness, among other charges… this legal disconnect is what seems conspicuously the case of punishing Jamie Dimond/JPMorgan Chase for daring to go up to Capitol Hill years ago - during President Obama’s first term - and lecture the President on his economic policies and the danger of enacting too much crippling banking regulations, which Mr. Dimond thought was economically counterproductive.

No doubt those who railed and are still railing against the One Percenters are happy for the astronomical fines doled out against Chase… but they must know that President Obama will not be in office forever, unless, somehow, they have the votes to amend the Constitution or that they too give credence to many on the Far-Right who believe that Marshall Law is nigh, which then would keep President Obama in office by way of fiat. If those scenarios do not come to fruition… then a Republican President Administration may punish those who voice a contrary opinion against its policies too? Look at the pattern of President Obama’s Administration in its punishment of those who speaks out against the President’s policies… and do you notice that President Obama always seems to have Plausible Deniability because it is always Democratic surrogates like those in the IRS targeting those who dare to criticize the secular gospel of President Obama?

I am not saying that the banks that made a mint from the banking/mortgage crisis should not be punished, but said punishment on its face so far for Chase seems disproportionate… in light of the fact that others who are culpable are not facing Criminal prosecution or similar amorphous civil fines. In the same vein, it is being reported by a Charlie Gasparino that Jamie Dimond and the JPMorgan Chase's Board were deadly afraid that the Obama Administration would propose that the Chase bank be broken up, and, apparently, the gist is that this fear still lingers and that part of Chase’s mea-culpa is to keep rolling over and paying the tens of billions in extortion - oops, fines.

I read years ago where the current defacto Russian dictator, Vladimir Putin, literally took away an oil company (Yukos) from one of his detractors (Mikhail Khordorkovsky)… is what is happening to Jamie Dimon/JPMorgan Chase any different? I suppose that Mr. Dimon should count his many secular-messiah blessings and genuflect to President Obama - after all… the former could have been placed in jail, perhaps, Gitmo, akin to what happened to Mr. Khordorkovsky mentioned above, notwithstanding the fact that Mr. Dimon voted for President Obama… did I mention twice!?

There are times when this average law student have to scratch my head and remind myself that President Obama graduated the top of his class at the elite Harvard Law School, and, moreover, that he once taught Constitutional Law at Columbia, another noted Ivy league Law school... but our President seems to have little respect for the laws we used - culled from our cherished Constitution - to secure our rights to free speech when said speech is against his policies. Can someone enlighten those of us if we could take refuge in the 'free speech' clauses in the Russian Constitution - if there is such an extra judicial refuge - especially since we do not have access to billions of dollars like Mr. Dimon/JPMorgan Chase.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No comments yet.