Federal guidelines require prosecutors to weigh the broader economic consequences of charging corporations. What about the consequences of NOT charging them?
The U.S. Department of Justice appears to have neither conducted nor received any analyses that would show whether criminal charges against large financial institutions would harm the economy.
The inside-the-beltway world of Washington, DC rarely deals with truly foundational economic issues. When they do, it is only because they are being forced to.
Occupy Our Homes, the Home Defenders League, and others are joining fed-up homeowners who are ready to demand action from the DOJ against criminal bankers.
There is a new report out this morning once again reminding us of the greatest disappointment progressives have in the Obama administration: the lack of toughness in regards to Wall Street. <a href="http://www.campaignforfairsettlement.org/obama_legacy_threatened" target="_hplink">The report</a>, issued by the Campaign for a Fair Settlement (full disclosure: this is a coalition I have helped in various ways since their founding), is probably the most harshly critical analysis yet by a coalition aligned with traditional progressive Democratic groups. The report opens with this damning list of hard to dispute facts, and then just goes on from there.
Thank you, Attorney General Holder, for finally being so blunt and definitive about DOJ’s unwillingness to prosecute the biggest banks,
Warren took bank regulators to task on Thursday about the fact that British bank HSBC is still doing business in the U.S., with no criminal charges filed against it, despite confessing to what one regulator called "egregious" money laundering violations.
I am really excited that the long overdue battle over immigration reform and a path to citizenship has finally begun in earnest. While I am heartsick at the reason, it is good news that common sense gun safety laws are once again being discussed in