New York State Department of Financial Services Lawsky's 'go it alone' ( obviously he didn't play ball and now will be criticized for doing his job ) attack on Standard Chartered angers US REgulators ( Fed and Treasury who probably were content to sit on their hands and merely pretend to do something against these Banksters

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/occuping-wall-street-dying-work

( Why think the French Revolution cannot occur again ? History doesn't repeat itself but it does rhyme. And one day soon we will read or hear about the first ( but not last ) bankster shot by some very , very  " mad as hell and not going to take it anymore " citizen. and that scares the hell out of the banksters....)

From Occupying Wall Street To "Dying For Work"?

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 08/08/2012 20:43 -0400

• Clear Channel
 
• France
 
• Gambling
 
• Housing Bubble
 
• John Paulson
 
• Las Vegas

Imagine you are driving to work this morning in Las Vegas (yes, you are one of the select few locals who has a job that does notinvolve relying on the strip's ever declining gambling revenues or flipping a house to John Paulson in the second, and far shorter, coming of the regional housing bubble, with poppage imminent), and you observe what appears to be a man who hung himself below a billboard saying "Dying for Work."

Confused, you continue, only to drive by another billboard with what seem to be a man hanging off, this one saying "Hope you're happy Wall St."

Slowly it all clicks: the man is not real, and this is not a suicide done in protest by some depressed unemployed person, instead it is merely a mannequin, part of some grotesque attempt at a statement. Would this be considered shocking, and will the thousands of commuters who saw this feel any worse or better toward Wall Street and its denizens - America's bankers - having seen this, or will they merely continue with their lives?

What if the dummy was a real person? And is this merely a foreshadowing of things to come in a country in which class warfare has not been as violent in decades if not centuries, and in which the divide between the haves and the have nots has never been as wide?

And what happens when the next such "stunt" involves a realperson - perhaps someone depressed enough to copycat what they saw on the 5 o'clock news? More importantly, what happens if a depressed jobless person takes their life but first takes out some of those he thinks are responsible for his plight - say Wall Streeters?

What happens then?

We don't know, but sadly we, as well as everyone else, may find out very soon.

What we do know is what happened today. From the AP:

Even by Las Vegas standards, it was a shocking billboard: A mannequin dangling on a hangman's noose below a black sign with the ominous words "Dying for Work."

Nevada Highway Patrol Trooper Jeremie Elliott says the 911 calls started coming in as the sun came up early Wednesday, with drivers worried the stiff, black-suited dummy swaying at the end of a rope along Interstate 15 near Bonanza Road was a real person.

"It's a publicity stunt, obviously done in bad taste," said Elliott, adding that officials were focused on getting it down quickly to avoid distracting drivers during the morning commute.

The graphic display along the interstate was one of at least two unauthorized signs spotted Wednesday morning in the Las Vegas area. Another found on Highland Avenue and Desert Inn Road was white with black lettering that read, "Hope You're Happy Wall St.," and a similar mannequin hanging off the edge.

A woman who answered the phone at Lamar Advertising Co., which owns one of the billboards, labeled the act vandalism and said the display was being removed. She did not provide her name.

Clear Channel Outdoor, which owns another sign that was affected, said they pulled the display immediately and plan to work with law enforcement to punish whoever is responsible.

"We condemn the destructive behavior against one of our billboards because it is illegal and punishes our advertisers," Clear Channel Outdoor spokesman Jim Cullinan said in a statement. "This is not an innocent protest, but it is illegal and dangerous behavior that Clear Channel Outdoor and the industry will not accept."

Not everyone is filled with remorse over this act:

While nobody has publicly claimed responsibility for the signs, the Occupy Las Vegas group, which is affiliated with the larger Occupy Wall Street movement, posted photos of the displays on its website. Its caption says the Nevada governor's budget has slashed social programs and aid to suicidal adults.

Sebring Frehner, an Occupy supporter who posted the photos, told The Associated Press he didn't know who put the hangmen up, but applauded the message behind it.

"People saying it's in bad taste are living sheltered lives and don't pay attention to what affects the working class," he said.

Fair enough. But how does one escalate in order to truly capture the attention of those "living sheltered lives." Will the next fake person be all too real?

Or will America's "working class", having been taken over the edge in its class hatred, decide to pay Wall Street a visit, and bring some mobile guillotines with it for good measure?

And is this really America any more, or is it France circa 1789?

And who will take the place of Louis XVI?

and.....




http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=209843

NY Throws A Wrench Into Crony Banksterism

Hoh hoh hoh....

(Reuters) - The Treasury Department and Federal Reserve were blindsided and angered by New York's banking regulator's decision to launch an explosive attack on Standard Chartered Plc over $250 billion in alleged money laundering transactions tied to Iran, sources familiar with the situation said.
By going it alone through the order he issued on Monday, Benjamin Lawsky, head of the recently created New York State Department of Financial Services, also complicates talks between the Treasury and London-based Standard Chartered to settle claims over the transactions, several of the sources said.

Complicates?
What's complicated here?  The facts appear to show that the bank didn't give a damn about what the United States law said or what regulators thought.  That's what the email context appears to demonstrate.
Treasury and the US Government in general have a long history of looking the other way and simply imposing tiny fines and hand-slaps for conduct that would land any other entity in front of a court on felony charges.  Just try doing business with blacklisted Iranian firms yourself and see how fast you get locked up!
The law either applies to everyone or it is a joke.  We have myriad examples over the last few years of "handslap" sorts of fines imposed for conduct that were you or I to engage in it would earn us a long and very unpleasant date with Bubba in a nice gray cell.

A spokesperson for the Federal Reserve said it had been working closely with various prosecutorial offices on matters involving Iran and other sanctioned entities, but could not comment on ongoing investigations.
White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said the government takes alleged violations of sanctions "extremely seriously" and the Treasury remains in close contact with federal and state authorities on the matter. The Treasury declined to add to that comment.

Oh 

 Obama's administration, like Bush's before him, have done exactly nothing about all the various and blatantly apparent violations of the law by financial institutions.  There are only two sanctions that work when it comes to corporations -- you either jail the people involved (literally) or you revoke or suspend corporate charters.  Any sort of monetary penalty is ineffective because it is just passed through to customers; this is particularly true when the firm involved is considered "essential" in some way -- such as a bank or pharmaceutical company.

Proof that these "fines" do not deter behavior comes in the fact that despite consent decrees and agreements not to offend again virtually all of these firms are in fact recidivists; worse is that most are three-time losers which for ordinary people exposes them to "three strikes" laws that imprison them for life.
New York is right and the US Government and Fed are both not only wrong, they're willing co-conspirators.

yeah , the Fed and Treasury are pissed off because it will be harder to sweep what Standard Chartered did under the rug ......

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/9460830/Lawskys-go-it-alone-attack-on-Standard-Chartered-angers-US-regulators.html

By Telegraph Staff

7:29AM BST 08 Aug 2012

13 Comments

The explosive allegations by Benjamin Lawsky, head of the recently created New York State Department of Financial Services, complicate talks between the Treasury and the 160-year-old British bank to settle claims over the transactions, Reuters reported, citing sources.

Some federal officials were given virtually no notice of the New York move.

Mr Lawsky's report, full of colourful language alleging "fraud" and a "staggering cover up", threatens to rewrite the rules on how foreign banks settle such cases. In the past they have been almost choreographed with public shaming kept to a minimum.

Several senior British politicians have accused the New York regulator of pursuing an anti-City agenda to weak London's standing as a financial centre. Boris Johnson, the Mayor of London, warned that the "proper desire to root out wrongdoing" should not become an excuse for "protectionism" and a "self-interested attack".

Standard Chartered shares plunged 16pc on Tuesday as analysts said it could lose 40pc of its earnings if US regulators are successful in securing money-laundering charges against the bank. Shares in the bank rose more than 2pc at one stage in Hong Kong on Wednesday, before falling back to trade down 0.5pc.

A spokesman for the Federal Reserve told Reuters it had been working closely with various prosecutorial offices on matters involving Iran and other sanctioned entities, but could not comment on ongoing investigations.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said the government takes alleged violations of sanctions "extremely seriously" and the Treasury remains in close contact with federal and state authorities on the matter. The official silence from Treasury is seen as conspicuous by some commentators and analysts.

Standard Chartered issued a firm rebuttal, saying it “strongly rejects the position and portrayal” of the allegations, but it failed to prevent the shares tumbling more than 25pc at one stage. The bank admitted it was “in discussions” with a range of US regulators on “historic compliance” with money-laundering regulations but that the investigations had not finished.

Peter Sands, chief executive of Standard Chartered, cut short his holiday and returned to London to try to limit the fallout. It is not yet clear if Sands will personally travel to New York to answer allegations at a hearing set for August 15.

On Tuesday night, Mr Sands told The Daily Telegraph: “We were surprised to receive the order [from New York State Department of Financial Services], given that discussions with the agencies were ongoing. Resolution of such matters normally proceeds through a co-ordinated approach by such agencies.” He added: “We are working out our next steps and liaising with the other agencies in the US and, of course, the FSA.”

Sir John Peace, the bank's chairman, flew from Florida where he was on holiday to talk to Standard Chartered's lawyers in New York.

Analysts and investors described the share-price rout as “shocking” as anger was directed both at the bank’s management and Mr Lawsky for his handling of the announcement.

One top institutional investor said: “This is just a tiny regulator grabbing the headlines. But these days, politics can be very dangerous.” He added: “People are terrified in this situation because the scale of the fine, the losses, the loss of licence is so unknown and could even lead to the chief executive having to go, or whatever else. There is a lot of fear.”

Mr Lawsky has accused the bank, which employs nearly 90,000 people worldwide, of breaking money-laundering rules and processing $250bn of transactions on behalf of Iranian clients. The regulator has given the bank until next week to “demonstrate why [the bank’s] license to operate in the state of New York should not be revoked”.

Analysts estimated that losing the ability to clear transactions through the US could wipe as much as 40pc off the group’s earnings. Others forecast that the bank could face a $1.5bn fine plus losses of around $1bn from its Iranian business and a further $3bn of losses if senior managers were forced to quit.

It emerged that Richard Meddings, Standard Chartered’s finance director, was the “Group Executive Director” accused of showing “obvious contempt for US banking regulations”. The US regulator’s order alleges that Mr Meddings’ response to warnings about the bank’s Iranian operations was: “You f------- Americans. Who are you to tell us, the rest of the world, that we’re not going to deal with Iranians.”

The order is the latest in a run of allegations made by US regulators against British banks. Last month, regulators accused HSBC of facilitating money laundering on behalf of clients from high-risk 

countries including Mexico and Russia. In June, Barclays was fined $450m by regulators in America and Britain for attempting to rig Libor rates used to set the prices of trillions of dollars worth of financial securities.

and we see the Brits are closing ranks around their banksters - why focus on what they did after all .....

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/davidhughes/100175343/three-british-banks-have-been-targeted-by-us-regulators-in-a-month-isnt-that-a-bit-fishy/

By David Hughes Politics Last updated: August 7th, 2012

137 Comments Comment on this article

Standard Chartered: today's target?

It sounds like something from a John Grisham novel – obscure but ambitious state official tries to pin a terrorist money laundering wrap on a mighty global bank. Will he emerge triumphant?

Benjamin Lawsky is the superintendent of New York States’s Department of Financial Services. He used to be chief of staff to New York state governor Andrew Cuomo, so he knows his way around politics. He has taken on Standard Chartered, accusing the bank of laundering $250 billion (nice round number that) on behalf of the ayatollahs of Tehran.

Lawsky branded the British bank a “rogue institution” and insisted that it explain “these apparent violations of law" (interesting that he doesn't seem sure whether they were violations or not) between 2001 to 2010. The bank has hit back hard, insisting that Lawsky not only based these charges on its own voluntary disclosures to the US authorities but also that he has got the law wrong.

We can safely leave that one to the lawyers but what is intriguing about this business is – as our Citybriefing has pointed out – Superintendent Lawsky’s job description includes “keeping New York on the cutting edge as the financial capital of the world.” Could there be an agenda at play here? Could Lawsky be not just battling for truth and justice – that goes without saying – but also for Wall Street?

After all, a bit of a pattern seems to be developing. Three major British banks – Barclays, HSBC and now Standard Chartered – have fallen foul of US regulators in the space of a month. Coincidence?

at the end of the day , it's interesting to just note whom the banksters have under their thumb and will sing their songs for them.....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/damianreece/9460312/Standard-Chartered-accusations-put-Lawsky-under-scrutiny-too.html

Standard Chartered accusations put Lawsky under scrutiny, too

If Benjamin Lawsky’s allegations are right and it’s true that Standard Chartered “indisputably helped sustain a global threat to peace and stability” through $250bn of “secret transactions” with banned Iranian clients then presumably that’s the end of the UK bank.

By Damian Reece

9:28PM BST 07 Aug 2012

11 Comments

If Lawsky’s allegations are not true, or only 0.1pc true as Standard Chartered suggests, then surely that’s the end of Benjamin Lawsky.

Powerful financial regulators, even local US state ones, are part of a regulatory system, especially when it comes to oversight of systemically important international entities such as banks. Responsible ones work within that framework in a co-ordinated manner. Rogue banks are bad enough but rogue regulators are no better.

The fact Lawsky and his New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS) has chosen to break ranks is odd and won’t help the cause of joined up, international regulation. It makes you wonder what calculation Lawsky has made. What, if anything, does he know or suspect the other regulators talking to Standard Chartered have concluded? What’s to be gained by beating other regulators to the line? I wasn’t aware regulation was a glory game. But in the politically charged world of US regulation it can be.

Lawsky was appointed by the Democrat New York governor Andrew Cuomo to head this new regulator, set up last year to make sense of the state’s previous regulatory regime. Lawsky, who had previously worked for Cuomo as his chief of staff, admitted at the time to wanting to make a splash and that splash has turned out to be the previously whiter than white Standard Chartered. It’s a high stakes game. If Lawsky’s wrong, he must be held to account – just as Standard Chartered will be if it’s found to be Iran’s banker.

Neither should we forget it’s US election year. President Barack Obama’s policy against Iran is trade sanctions. His Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, wants to bomb them. This case will last more than the three months until polling day and while it’s still live, President Obama can point to how Democratic states in the Union are clamping down on those suspected of sanction busting and helping every middle American’s favourite bogey man – Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

and look at this , because the State Regulator acted , the DOJ is now forced to start a real investigation.....

Standard Chartered: US justice department investigates Iran allegations

Authorities looking into allegations that Standard Chartered illegally moved $250bn of Iranian money, sources say

• Share51
• Email

• Dominic Rushe in New York and Jill Treanor in London
• guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 8 August 2012 02.45 EDT
• Jump to comments (99)

Standard Chartered First Bank in Seoul. Photograph: Jo Yong-Hak/Reuters

The US justice department is looking into allegations that Standard Chartered illegally moved $250bn of Iranian money around the global financial system, according to a source close to the investigation.

More than £8bn ($12.5bn) has wiped off the stock market value of the banking group since Monday, when a New York regulator issued a damning report alleging the bank had flouted US laws in its dealings with Iran. The bank's shares lost another 16% of their value Tuesday.

A source with direct knowledge of the investigation said the report was now being considered by the justice department, which could pursue a criminal case against the bank and its executives. The justice department works in conjunction with the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), which monitors and enforces US trade sanctions against countries including Iran.

In its report the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYSDFS) said it had evidence of similar breaches by the bank in Libya, Myanmar (also known as Burma) and Sudan, all countries under US sanctions. Both the justice department and NYSDFS declined to comment on the next stage of the investigation.

The bank has denied wrongdoing and said the regulator had not provided "a full and accurate picture of the facts". The bank said "99.9%" of the disputed Iranian transactions had complied with US law.

In May Standard Chartered announced it was ending its business in Iran after decades of international pressure.

John Coffee, a law professor at Columbia University in New York, said even a single illegal transaction would be enough to spark a justice department investigation. "There are 20-year sentences for money laundering in the US," he said.

The move is another blow for the UK's financial services industry, which has been rounded on in Washington following Barclays' alleged fixing of Libor interest rates, JP Morgan's huge London losses and a devastating US government report that concluded HSBC had acted as banker to criminals and terrorists around the world.

The report is also damaging to the bank's top management, who only last week boasted the bank was too "boring" to be afflicted by the scandals sweeping the UK financial services industry. Peter Sands, Standard Chartered's chief executive, was recently tipped as a potential governor of the Bank of England and finance chief Richard Meddings had been linked to the top job at Barclays vacated by Bob Diamond, forced out following the Libor scandal.

Peter Henning, professor of law at Wayne State University, said: "Standard Chartered's head is on the chopping block." He said Iran was an oil-rich country that no international bank would chose to ignore. "But the US and Iran have been at each others throats for 40 years. You have to make a choice," he said.

Henning said the dramatic share sell-off may yet prove overblown. "In the end this may not be HSBC but the question remains about how many heads will roll and how high up. Diamond has set the benchmark pretty high," he said.

James Cox, law professor at Duke University, said: "Frankly it looks like the bank turned more than a blind eye in its quest for profits. Once again we see a bank putting personal gain ahead of public interest."

In the UK the Financial Services Authority is keeping a close watch on the situation, as it always does when share prices move so violently.

Sands and Meddings have been forced to cut short their holidays and return to London to deal with the crisis. Meddings and Sands both joined Standard Chartered in 2002 – the alleged violations ran between 2001 and 2007. An emergency board meeting is expected to be called shortly.

Only a week ago the bank reported its 10th successive year of record profits.
While it is not a household name in the UK, its blue and green logo is familiar site on high streets across Asia and Africa and the bank sponsors Liverpool football club. It employs 90,000 people, some 2,700 of whom are in the UK head office.

The timing of the allegations by NYSDFS – which claimed that the bank's actions had left the US "vulnerable to terrorists, weapon dealers, drug kings and corrupt regimes" – has stunned the bank, which insists it is going to defend itself against the claims.

Even as it admitted that it had moved "under $14m" for Iranian clients – albeit considerably less than the $250bn outlined in the regulatory order – the bank was unrepentant as it made it clear it would refute the allegations at an appearance before the regulator on 15 August.

While it had breached so-called U-turns, which were transactions that US authorities allowed to take place as long as the money did not end up in Iranian banks, it said "well over 99.9% of the transactions relating to Iran complied with the U-turn regulations".

The US regulator's 30-page report reproduces emails and conversations between Standard Chartered staff, including a remark from a London-based director when warned by a US colleague of potential problems in dealing with Iran. "You fucking Americans. Who are you to tell us, the rest of the world, that we're not going to deal with Iranians," the director said.

The director is not named but the exchange is said to have taken place when the bank's chief executive for America warned, among others, the head group executive director for risk. At the time, October 2006, this title was held by Meddings, who was promoted to finance director the following month. The director for the US at the time was Ray Ferguson, currently running the Singapore business. The bank would not comment on individuals.