Phil Angelides has begun a press conference about the release of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission report. You can watch the release here. You can find the report here; you may have some problems getting in.
Angelides says that he hopes the American people read the report. He said the mission was to record history and not rewrite it (a nod to the dissenting opinion)?
…Angelides: there’s much anger in this country about what’s transpired. Many looked to this commission for answers. We kept these people in mind as we completed our work. There has been no shortage of debate over the bailout and too big to fail. But our mission was to figure out the origins. How did it come to pass that we were forced to choose between two stark and painful alternatives? Rescue the banks or let them crash?
Six major conclusions. Every commissioner here today (all the Democrats) agree.
1) This crisis was avoidable. There were many warning signs ignored or discounted.
2) Failures in regulation
3) Dramatic breakdowns in corporate governance including too many financial firms acting recklessly and taking on too much risk;
4) Excessive borrowing and risk by households and Wall Street
5) Government was ill-prepared for the crisis, inconsistent response added to panic.
6) Breaches of accountability became widespread.
Angelides: Predatory lending practices going back to the late 1990s. Risky trading activities grew exponentially, market for derivatives exploded, and short-term borrowing.
“Pervasive permissiveness.” Regulators and leaders did not take action. Evidence of failures across the board. Federal Reserve failed to ask. Even as housing market fell in 2006, Wall Street created $1.6 trillion in MBS. Moody’s rated 30 mortgage backed securities triple-A EVERY DAY.
None of what happened was an act of God.
John Thompson discusses failures in regulation. “The sentries were not at their post.” Widespread belief in self-correcting nature of the markets and belief that companies could police themselves. Supported by Alan Greenspan and subsequent Congresses. Laissez-faire approach. Unregulated derivatives and shadow banking system. Race to the bottom with forum shopping. Regulators had ample power to protect the system in many arenas and they failed to use it.
Examples: 1) Fed was only organization to set prudent lending standards. But it didn’t do it. 2) SEC could have required more capital at riskiest banks. 3) NYFed could have stopped Citi exposing itself to subprime securities. 4) Regulators and politicians could have stopped subprime securitization train.
Financial industry pushed for weaker and lighter regulation. But overseers failed to enforce regulations they did have. Public leaders charged with protecting financial system sought these positions of responsibility, had a need to act, and didn’t.
Moving to Brooksley Born: 30 years of deregulation and weakened oversight changed our financial system. Some believed firms would naturally shield themselves from risk-taking. But dramatic failures of corporate governance and risk management were critical causes of the crisis. Stunning instances of governance breakdowns and irresponsibility. Cites AIG, Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae, Lehman. Government’s hands-off philosophy and bad business decisions went hand in hand.
Large investment banks and bank holding companies took on enormous risk by supporting subprime lenders and selling trillions in mortgage-backed securities. Some financial firms expanded and that left them too big to fail. Some embraced mathematical models to increase risk. Risk management became risk justification. They rewarded the big bet, upside could be huge and the downside ignored. This drove the market in OTC derivatives after deregulation in 2000. Market spiraled out of control and out of sight. $673 trillion in notional amount by 2008. Derivatives contributed significantly to the crisis. Report lays out how credit derivatives fueled mortgage securitization and amplified losses from the housing bubble. Millions of derivatives of all types between systemically important firms were unseen and unknown. This added to market uncertainty and escalated the panic.
Byron Georgiou: Inadequate capital, risky investments, and excessive borrowing major feature. Banks had excessive leverage, and participants in “deeply flawed” securitization chain had no margin for error and not enough skin in the game. 40:1 leverage. Modest 3% market move against them could consume entire capital reserve. Short-term overnight borrowing had to be renewed every day. Fannie and Freddie’s leverage ratio combined to 75:1. Leverage often hidden in derivative positions and off balance sheet lending. True leverage was masked. Heavy debt exacerbated by assets they were acquiring with that debt. MBS riskier and riskier. Households took on more debt as well. National mortgage debt doubled from 2000-2007. Even as wages stagnant. Dangers of all this debt grew more ominous because no transparency. Shadow banking system did not have protections the country built in early 20th century to serve as bulwarks against run on banks. Shadow banking was bigger than traditional banking system. When housing bubble popped, everything came home to roost. “We had reaped what we had sown.”
Bob Graham: Actions taken by government in response to developing crisis inadequate. Inconsistent responses added to the panic. Federal Reserve, Treasury and Fed Bank of New York caught off-guard. Other agencies also behind the curve. Did not have a clear grasp of the financial system they were charged with overseeing. Lack of transparency in key markets a big issue. Policymakers thought risk was diversified and not concentrated. Policymakers worked on an ad hoc basis. They did not have a handle on the risk or the interconnections. Didn’t realize that a bursting of the housing bubble could destroy the financial system. In June 2007 when Bear Stearns MBS imploded, they were thought to be relatively unique. NY Fed looking into 900,000 derivative contracts in Lehman just a month before they collapsed. Inconsistent approach stoked uncertainty.
Heather Murren: Americans expect businesses to pursue profits and to conduct themselves well. But this crisis was fueled by a systemic breakdown in accountability and ethics. Breaches stretched from the living room to the boardroom. Borrowers defaulted so rapidly after taking a loan, it suggested they never had the capacity to break them off. Mortgage brokers reaped greater fees by putting borrowers into higher-cost loans. Losses due to fraud from loans from 2005-2007 climbed to $100 billion. Simplistic to pin this on human failings such as greed. Crisis of this magnitude cannot be the work of a few bad actors. Does not mean everyone at fault. We place special responsibility with the public leaders charged with protecting system and chief executives. We embraced a system that gave rise to a serious crisis. We must take stock of what happened so we can plot a new course. Must make different choices.
That’s the full presentation, I’ll keep listening for questions, but that’s basically it.
…This is a key question. Did you refer anything for criminal prosecution? Angelides says they were asked to refer to authorities any individual who violated the laws of the United States. Where they found violations, they did refer. “We will not comment on any specific referrals.”
Pages 377-378 of the book is a part on Goldman Sachs, where they received an additional, undisclosed $3.4 billion from AIG, they retained $2.9 billion. And this went into their own specific account.
…Just listening to this, you have to ask if it’s a whitewash or not. It’s hard to say, because this is a large report and I haven’t read all 576 pages. But the word “criminal” doesn’t really appear in this discussion, as a reporter is saying right now. And there’s at least a nod to how everybody is responsible, with as much a focus on the regulators as the CEOs.
Brooksley Born again says they made criminal referrals but will not discuss them publicly.
…They hope their report will be a guidepost for policymakers. There are hundreds of rules that have to be promulgated, and hopefully they can use the report in that rulemaking.
…This is a good point from Byron Georgiou. It would be remiss to suggest that everything in this report has been solved by Dodd-Frank. The financial system looks the same in 2011 that it did in 2007. In fact, the too big to fail firms got even bigger.
…The Times of London again asks about criminal referrals. Angelides: “We’re not a prosecutorial body.” We sent potential violations to the proper authorities, under our obligations, and that is all we will say on this matter.





37 Comments


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Was the word “criminal” ever uttered?
My question also…along with accountability and prosecutions.
How long does it take for this information to see the light of day? Or will it ever?
oh Shoto
i hope BofA implodes,they scammed me badly
Of course I do not know….but so many people were effected by this stuff. Surely some of it will go forward.
Georgiou: “Households took on more debt as well. National mortgage debt doubled from 2000-2007. Even as wages stagnant.”
I don’t suppose anyone made the obvious connection between these two items–that if you aren’t being paid a living wage, and your expenses continue to rise (i.e., stratospheric health insurance premiums), it’s inevitable that you’re going to need to borrow to pay for basic requirements.
Shorter Brooksley and Phil: Sure we made criminal referrals but if you knew what they were then it might put pressure on Holder to actually pursue them.
Davos diva Dimon demands deference and differentiation.
Holder is worse than Obama….slap happy fool
mebbe cause they already stole all the money in the country
John Pierpont Morgan (April 17, 1837 – March 31, 1913) was an American financier, banker and art collector who dominated corporate finance and industrial consolidation during his time. In 1892 Morgan arranged the merger of Edison General Electric and Thomson-Houston Electric Company to form General Electric. After financing the creation of the Federal Steel Company he merged in 1901 the Carnegie Steel Company and several other steel and iron businesses, including Consolidates Steel and Wire Company owned by William Edenborn, to form the United States Steel Corporation.
Morgan died in Rome, Italy, in 1913 at the age of 75, leaving his fortune and business to his son, John Pierpont “Jack” Morgan, Jr., and bequeathing his mansion and large book collections to The Morgan Library & Museum in New York.
At the height of Morgan’s career during the early 1900s, he and his partners had financial investments in many large corporations and was accused by critics of controlling the nation’s high finance
Since we now know he made criminal referrals to the proper authorities, and we now know the proper authorities know about the criminal referrals, it will be interesting to see if they do anything about it.
Eric the toilet where your problems are flushed away.
Look over there anti war protesters, having his priorities in order.
Devil weed over here.
Does the pansy ass go after the Torture/ Murder /Treason crowd or is he into snuff films and filming too ?
nice
US must accept blame for financial crisis: panel
26 minutes ago · WASHINGTON (AFP) – The United States as a nation must accept blame for causing the financial crisis that engulfed the global economy and cost millions of jobs, a US government-appointed panel reported Thursday
USA USA USA!!!
Don’t hold your breath.
he has gone after nobody of import in 2 years…slap happy Holder
working on it…
AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
Citizen David Dayen:
This isas good as we could have expected, now is the time for petitions and phone calls to the White House and the DoJ to support criminal investigations and prosecutions. This should get as much grass roots pressure as Private Manning.
KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITION IT’S ALL ABOUT THE WARS STUPID!!
Since I don’t think this whole issue-mess is even close to being addressed, it’s my view that the GOP refusal to come to this public release of the report will come back to haunt them.
It’s true that I don’t see things in purely objective terms, but the GOP’s absence strikes me as a way for them to curry favor with banksters by making it **appear** that this is ‘just a politicized report’. But note who those GOPers were — they’re pretty deeply implicated themselves.
And the Dems are **all** pointing out that the regulators DID have the power to limit leverage, but didn’t. That’s one of the softest spots in the belly of this beast.
So if I thought this were the Final Report, I’d be despairing.
But I don’t.
I think it affected too many people, at too many levels.
Citizen Cathy:
It’s up to us to make a ruckus for ‘em so they can’t ignore the referrals.
The key chart – which I hope they have in the report – shows problem loans by year – and the Bush “liar loans” period stands out – until 2001 the problem seem manageable – and indeed Fannie and Freddie by their own rules could not have a loan where the income of the borrower could not be verified – likewise the value of the property.
But investment banks under Greenspan took over the mortgage loan market via packaging and selling the loans made by “originators” / “servicers” into the accounts of “investors” – who then laid off the credit worthiness risk via derivatives from those whose credit risk was not as perfect as claimed. No one accepted that the other side of the derivative might not really be there.
It was Greenspans refusal to regulate, along with a GOP controlled Congress that prevent the new needed regulations, that was the problem.
Adding more names to the guilt party is just a way to not blame Greenspan and the GOP. Hey – did you know Clinton caused the meltdown (but I have no facts to back that up other than legislation that the GOP controlled Congress did not pass was not passed while he was President).
And Morgan stole/was given his bank when George Peabody retired – Peabody’s 1835 George Peabody and Company brought in Morgan a few years later and formed Peabody, Morgan and Co., which was on Peabody’s retirement renamed in 1864 to J. S. Morgan & Co. Peabody formed the bank to meet increasing demand for securities issued by the American railroads, hiring Junius Spencer Morgan (father of J. P. Morgan) as a partner 3 years later. Indeed Peabody Bank was in effect split up and the UK merchant bank Morgan Grenfell (now part of Deutsche Bank), international universal bank JPMorgan Chase, and investment bank Morgan Stanley can all trace their roots to Peabody’s bank.
At least Peabody got his name on a town (South Danvers, Mass changing its name to Peabody).
These uber rich were just given a two year tax waiver by Obama and the US CONGRESS, they were behind this scam. These criminals are running the USG. The pension funders, hedge funds, TBTF Bank, the regulatory dudes all presided over the biggest robbery of all time. The scope of the rip off would take a full library to document. The ENRON plan off cooking the books was refined for this well orchestrated theft. Shifting assests on the balance sheets is the premier method. Leveraging bets 30 to 1 without equity to cover, you can’t gamble like that in Vegas. The biggest casino of all time is alive and well as shadow banking. The crime families will not prosecute themselves. The Chicago political is in the WHITE HOUSE and are running daily US business and the wars. It is business as usual.
If only some real jail time and enormous fines were paid some sense that the criminality might end can be had.
Without accountability it’s just look ahead and not back again… and the SOBs get away with it will the little guys rot in jail or the middle class moves into their cars as housing.
until the dynamic that allowed this to occur is confronted and fixed, all added regulations will produce is a slightly longer “regulation failures” section in the next “where it all went wrong” report.
Where’s the part where they recommend moving back to a pre-Reagan financial system?
Put the firewalls back up between commerce, investment and insurance!
David,
Thank you for the post.
“The Times of London asks again about criminal referrals…”
Imho, this is not going away too soon. The U.S. media might be asleep at the wheel, and willing to cover up wrongdoing but so many countries were impacted and their news agencies are looking for answers so we may get our answers through the back door but any way we get answers is fine with me.
While I favor “Put the firewalls back up between commerce, investment and insurance!”, the prior Glass–Steagall Act – The Banking Act of 1933 – prior to its modification in 1999 did not prevent activities by investment banks because activities of investment banks were under the Federal Reserve, and not covered by Glass-Steagall. And it was the investment banks that took over the mortgage market via securitizing loan originator / servicer new loans, and then selling derivatives on those pools of loans.
It was all on the Federal Reserve and the do not regulate Ayn Rand beliefs of chairman Greenspan and the GOP.
Haven’t you heard?
Obama and Holder look forward, not backward.
Only the Little People are capable of criminal intent.
Rich people can do anything they want to anyone they want anytime they want because they are the glorious chosen ones to whom we must genuflect and thank for their grace in permitting us to live and serve them.
Yeah, the firewalls don’t force the investment banks to behave.
It’s more of a question of who’s money is being put at risk and who can justify getting a federal bail out.
At the end of the day, if you tell a banker he can make a quick 2 Billion but he stands a good chance of spending time in jail… his first question will be: If I end up going to jail, do I still get to keep the money?
Yeah, Obama said that. But he’s changed that policy again. “Don’t look back” proved to be insufficient. Now it’s:
Don’t look back, don’t look forward, just… no looking.
The new catch phrase to replace “Too Big To Fail” is going to be “Too Big to Jail.” No jail time, no individual fines for the people who crashed America. They will be just fine, thank you.
The Clintons picked up how much in “soeaking fees” from the financial institutions they agreed to deregulate through the efforts of Rubin and Summers?
Clinton got minuscule amounts from financial institutions relative to income from books and speakings fees from other sources – but nice try for a smear, even though with Hillary not running in 2012 the smear is not needed by team Obama.
But you point on financial bribes as speaking fees is valid – Henry Kissinger was famous for his $250,000 10 minute breakfast speeches to banks in the 80′s, and Reagan got 7 figure “speaking fees” when he left office – sadly the media has not kept us informed on Bush Administration speaking fees beyond noting they are around %100,000 per appearance for “names”.
Sorry for what you mischaracterize as a “smear”. The Clintons’ “speaking fees” prior to 2008 appeared to have been tied directly to the expectation that the Clintons would be back in the White House in 2008. Why else would anyone, even Goldman Sachs, pay for the farce. As far as your assertion that the Clintons made more from books than speaking fees from financial instituitons or related entities, not correct.
page 76 of FCIC PDF.
So yes Clinton had his hand in this mess also.
Somehow those socialists in Canada avoided it!
http://www.fcic.gov/report