For investors who lost money in Bernie Madoff's infamous Ponzi scheme and are waiting for payback from a firm enlisted by the Department of Justice, the check's (still) in the mail.
Notably, none of the bankers who recognized that JPMorgan was profiting from handling Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme will face charges. Welcome to justice, Wall Street style.
On the heels of an anticipated $13 billion fine to make its responsibility go away in the mortgage meltdown, the storied bank reportedly is in talks for a “deferred prosecution agreement” over its handling of some of Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi money. Short version: Pay a fine, and the bank avoids criminal charges. So in addition to being "too big to fail," now we have "too big to be guilty."
Hint: If you read between the lines of the Obama team's latest hit on Mitt Romney, you'll find it's less than one, and greater than any negative number.
R. Allen Stanford is perhaps not as well known as Bernie Madoff, but the two men have one thing in common -- both received long sentences for their roles in separately orchestrating two of the largest Ponzi schemes ever.
What’s worse: to be persecuted and indicted for trying to expose an act of wrongdoing? Or -- like so many in the corporate and financial world -- to be ignored for doing so?
It appears that some higher-ups at JPMorgan Chase were on to fraudster Bernie Madoff nearly two years before the catastrophic implosion of his Ponzi scheme, but said execs didn't take this knowledge as reason enough to stop doing business with him.
Disgraced former Wall Street baron Bernard Madoff might have made millions swindling others for profit during his heyday, but he doesn't seem to have made much of a literary cottage industry for writers presumably looking to cash in on his downfall. Not even the "I-was-Bernie's-mistress" angle is tempting book buyers at this point.
The economic downturn has been rough on countless industries, and arts organizations in New York City that rely on endowment money to survive have been hit hard -- not just, as City Journal's James Panero points out, by the immediate effects of the meltdown felt round the world, but also by the "indirect effects" of how some of their funds have been managed.