[guimarin]

That dimon is still being targeted astounds me. This is an example of why even those in power should not be the nail that sticks out. In case you're wondering why dimon, why JP Morgan it all traces back to this [1] event.

1. in 2008/2009, can't find it on Google bc why have a date search anymore. Jamie Dimon was called before the finance committee to explain the financial meltdown. He allegedly stormed out after representatives asked him truly epically stupid questions, and told one of his aides, "Don't ever put me in front of those fucking morons again". There is no reason other than visibility and a personal grudge that this is targeted at JPMorgan v. the other banks.

[bonemachine]

There is no reason other than visibility and a personal grudge that this is targeted at JPMorgan v. the other banks.

This is, at best, very tenuous speculation.

The charges against JPM were quite specific, related to violations of the Bank Secrecy Act during 2007-2008. And the physical record -- in the form of subpoenaed evidence in support of JPM's culpability in these charges -- were apparently obvious and damning enough that JPM agreed to the penalties to forego criminal prosecution.

Whether Mr. Dimon got huffy after a committee meeting in 2009 has nothing to do with it.

[spinlock]

Congress shouldn't have that much influence over the SEC. I always assumed it was because Dimon is the only CEO able to admit he's not infallable. I also think JPM is ahead of the curve on action against them. Again, they'll admit mistakes and take the fines. The rest of the street is denying everything but I believe they'll eventually be targetted as well.

[guimarin]

I think you're framing the situation incorrectly. Wall Street is at a state of regulatory capture. Sorry I'm not an SEC apologist, but from what I've seen they walk a fine line between incompetence and brilliance. Everyone on Wall Street makes 'mistakes', and that's because individuals make decisions but there are more rules/laws/best practices than an individual can know. When everyone is operating under prosecutorial discretion, the law disappears, and it's cheaper to cut in, see regulatory capture, your oversight than it is to attempt compliance. Though the litigation industry on wall street might have a bone to pick here. The problem for Dimon is that capture is industry wide, not by an individual or company, as in the case of GE or the big three.

Lets take a real example. Bad things happened in 2008. Congress has to come in and 'clean up'. But Congress is a second order proxy for Wall Street, so clean up means they have to figure out a way to look good to their 'voters' while not putting any of their 'donors' in jail. This is harder than it seems. They tried for a few years to do nothing, because it was 'confusing' and 'complex', people weren't buying it. There was seriously bad mojo for congress, that could possibly threaten a reset on regulation for the entire financial industry. So they needed to find a scapegoat. A few congressmen were pissed at having their hands tied, and Dimon is probably the most visibly brilliant guy on wall street, and he had pissed people off, so he was chosen to be thinned from the heard.

What surprises me is that they haven't stopped. this is probably due to dimon's success, if he had been a little less competent in the intervening years, my bet is he would be less under the gun now. Still this is a valuable lesson to all of us paying attention.

[bonemachine]

Congress shouldn't have that much influence over the SEC.

Hate to break this to you, but Congress created the SEC.

You also might want to look into Articles 1 and 8 of the Constitution, BTW.