Trump: “Defining Deviancy Down” With Lots of Takers

Time Magazine Memoralizes One Year of the Trump Presidency (left).  Kirstjen Nielsen, Secretary of Homeland Security  Appears Under Oath Before Senate Judiciary Committee and Has Amnesia on Trump's "Sh**hole" Characterization of African Countries.

Time Magazine Memorializes “Year One” of the Trump Presidency (left). Kirstjen Nielsen (right), Secretary of Homeland Security Appears Under Oath Before Senate Judiciary Committee on January 16, 2018 and Has Amnesia on Trump’s “Sh**hole” Characterization of African Countries.

By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: January 17, 2018

If you are raising children, caring for aging parents, working multiple jobs to pay the mortgage or simply spending your free time protesting the policies of the current administration, you may have missed the latest series of scandals swirling around the so-called leader of the free world.

Last week, the Wall Street Journal reported that Donald Trump’s longtime personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, “arranged a $130,000 payment” to a former porn star just weeks prior to the 2016 presidential election as part of a gag order meant to silence her from disclosing to the public an “alleged sexual encounter” with Trump while he was married to his current wife, Melania. The former porn star is Stephanie Clifford whose stage name is Stormy Daniels.

Jacob Weisberg, Editor-in-Chief of the Slate Group, appeared on MSNBC last evening and had this to say about the porn star story:

“..this whole presidency is an exercise in defining deviancy down. If this were any other presidency it would be career ending, it would be the biggest news in the world. With Donald Trump, it’s sort of not one of the worst ten things this week, that he paid hush-money to cover-up an almost year-long relationship with a former porn actress.”

Yesterday, another gag order was reported, this time coming from the White House. According to Adam Schiff, a member of the House Intelligence Committee that is investigating possible Russian collusion with the Trump transition team in the 2016 election, Steve Bannon, the fired Trump strategist, refused to answer questions yesterday before the Committee under a subpoena because the White House told him it would infringe on the President’s right to Executive Privilege. Bannon, however, used this defense in not only refusing to answer questions about his time at the White House but also during his time on the transition team prior to Trump’s inauguration — when the Executive in the White House was Barack Obama. Legal scholars have insisted that only one person can claim Executive Privilege at a time and that’s the person occupying the Oval Office. The New York Times reported yesterday that Bannon has also received a subpoena from Special Counsel Robert Mueller to testify before a grand jury.

Also yesterday, the nonprofit watchdog, Public Citizen, released a report titled “Presidency for Sale,” documenting 64 instances in which Trump’s “sprawling set of businesses has resulted in a unique set of conflicts that previously were unimaginable for the president of the United States.” Robert Weissman, Public Citizen’s president stated: “Business is booming at the Trump International Hotel in D.C., not because of the décor, but because corporations and foreign governments want to curry favor with the president.”

But perhaps the most deviant event so far this week is how far the President of the United States will go to get others to do his bidding – even when it involves lying under oath to Congress. Yesterday, Trump’s Secretary of Homeland Security, Kirstjen Nielsen, denied hearing Trump call African nations “sh**hole countries” during a meeting in the Oval Office last Thursday to discuss immigration reform. She made this denial while testifying under oath before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee. Under a normal Congress and normal administration, lying under oath to Congress would be a career-ender with the potential for perjury charges and yet Nielsen casually gave her tainted testimony multiple times and at one point arrogantly blurted out that she was done answering questions on this topic.

Given the small number of people in attendance at the Oval Office meeting (approximately 12), it would have been next to impossible for Nielsen not to have heard the shocking word from Trump. The language has been acknowledged by a Republican in attendance at the meeting, Senator Lindsey Graham, and Democrat Dick Durbin, also in attendance. Not only did Graham hear the language but he lectured the President on it during the meeting according to a formal statement he released. Nielsen characterized the Graham lecture to the President yesterday as Graham using “cuss” words in the meeting, rather than simply repeating the words that had come out of the President’s mouth in a rebuke of him.

To most rational thinkers, it would be next to impossible for Nielsen to have heard Graham lecture the President on the use of the word and the President to have used the word first and her have no memory of either happening just five days later. An exasperated Senator Cory Booker blasted Nielsen at yesterday’s hearing, stating “Your silence and amnesia is complicity.” (See video below of Senator Dick Durbin questioning Nielsen on the matter at yesterday’s hearing.)

Also apparently willing to lie for the President are two Republican Senators who attended the meeting: Sens. Tom Cotton of Arkansas and David Purdue of Georgia. In a joint statement initially released, the two said they had no memory of the President using the word. After the news of the President’s slur against African nations spread widely, the two Senators changed their story to say it didn’t happen. Trump Tweeted: “The language used by me at the DACA meeting was tough, but this was not the language used.”

Media news is saturated with the Trump scandal-du-jour, leaving little room for covering and investigating two critical areas in desperate need of reform, Wall Street and the Federal Reserve, before the crony duo crash the U.S. financial system again. If Americans continue to allow Trump to define deviancy down, we will be left with a shriveled democracy that may not find its way back to moral ground and an economy run by oligarchs. Don’t say it can’t happen here. It is happening.

Nomi Prins’ New Book: Central Banks Have Become the Markets

By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: January 16, 2018

Collusion by Nomi PrinsNomi Prins’ latest book, Collusion: How Central Bankers Rigged the World, ensures her place as one of this century’s most informed Wall Street historians. It’s the perfect segue from Prins’ earlier “It Takes a Pillage,” and her 2014 book All the Presidents’ Bankers. If you are serious about understanding the corrupting influences that have left the U.S. vulnerable to another epic financial crash, buy all three books and read them as one.

Prins is a veteran of Wall Street who has now written six books and dozens of articles to help Americans navigate the snake pit that has replaced the financial system of the United States. It all started with her first book in 2004, Other People’s Money: The Corporate Mugging of America, where she explained her motivation as follows:

“When I left Wall Street, at the height of a wave of scandals uncovering scores of massively destructive deceptions, my choice was based on a very personal sense of right and wrong…So, when people who didn’t know me very well asked me why I left the banking industry after a fifteen-year climb up the corporate ladder, I answered, ‘Goldman Sachs.’

“For it was not until I reached the inner sanctum of this autocratic and hypocritical organization – one too conceited to have its name or logo visible from the sidewalk of its 85 Broad Street headquarters [now relocated to 200 West Street] that I realized I had to get out…The fact that my decision coincided with corporate malfeasance of epic proportions made me realize that it was far more important to use my knowledge to be part of the solution than to continue being part of the problem.”

In Collusion, Prins walks us through the critically-important events occurring during the 2007-2009 financial crash, many of which would have been relegated to the dust bin of history if not for this book. Prins makes the case that the U.S. is headed toward another epic financial crash as a result of the unchecked powers of the U.S. central bank (the Federal Reserve) and its global counterparts who are creating dangerous new asset bubbles in an effort to paper over the last ones.

Prins convincingly shows that colluding central bankers have effectively become the markets through a never-ending flow of cheap money to the mega banks which have deployed that cheap money to buy back and inflate their own stock – with a green light from their own regulator and money pimp (our term, not hers) – the U.S. Federal Reserve.

Prins correctly points out that what these central banks are doing is providing artificial stimulus to markets – the opposite of what free markets are all about.

The 2007-2009 financial crash was equivalent to a financial World War and the Fed’s emergency money-pumping measures, justified by it as essential to saving the system until it repaired itself, have become instead an opioid-like addiction within U.S. and global markets according to Prins. After failing miserably as a regulator of the biggest Wall Street banks and allowing banks holding insured deposits to be housed under the same roof with casino-like investment banks, the Fed has now effectively become a cheap-money drug dealer to Wall Street and the markets.

One reference in the advance reading copy for Collusion (which will hopefully also make it into the final hardcopy which is set for release on May 1) is to the fact that the former Fed Chairman, Ben Bernanke (who had the audacity to title his memoir The Courage to Act) received an unprecedented 30 negative votes during his Senate re-confirmation hearing to serve a second term as Fed Chairman. That was in 2010 and Prins reminds us that it was Senator Bernie Sanders who led the charge to expose the elitist tendencies of the Fed and Bernanke.

Sanders, long before he ran in the Democratic primary for President, pushed the issue of a lack of transparency at the Fed. In a January 27, 2010 editorial in USA Today, Sanders wrote:

“The immediate cause of this economic disaster is the greed, recklessness and illegal behavior of the largest financial institutions in the country. One of the major functions of the Federal Reserve is to protect the safety and soundness of our financial institutions and to oversee their actions. It is clear to almost everyone that Chairman Bernanke was asleep at the switch while Wall Street became the largest gambling casino in the history of the world and hurtled into insolvency. His failure to adequately regulate financial institutions should not be rewarded with a reappointment.

“As part of the huge taxpayer bailout of Wall Street, the Fed provided trillions of dollars in virtually zero-interest loans to large financial institutions. Bernanke consistently has refused to provide the transparency needed so that the American people can learn which banks received those loans. Our democracy cannot tolerate this kind of secrecy. We need a new Fed chairman who believes in transparency.”

Sanders pursued the matter further and was able to attach an amendment to the Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation which forced the Fed to disclose that it had made an astounding $16 trillion cumulatively in almost zero-interest loans to the largest Wall Street banks and their foreign counterparts from 2007 through the middle of 2010. The banks which received the bulk of this largess were simultaneously charging struggling consumers over 20 percent interest on credit cards – courtesy of the Federal Reserve. (See video below.)

Sanders may have been a little too kind to Bernanke. Wall Street On Parade’s research suggests that Bernanke was not so much “asleep at the switch” as he was actively engaged in the plot to bail out Wall Street and keep it a secret from the American people. In 2014 we reported that the details of 84 secret meetings held by Bernanke in the lead up to the Wall Street collapse remained redacted on his appointment calendars more than five years after the crash.

Hopefully, Prins’ latest work will galvanize lawmakers to get serious about reforming both the dangerous Fed and restoring some semblance of free markets to the United States.

Federal Reserve Reform Upstaged by Trump’s Potty Mouth

By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: January 12, 2018

Economist Dean Baker Testifying Before the House Financial Services Committee, January 10, 2018

Economist Dean Baker Testifying Before the House Financial Services Committee, January 10, 2018

On Wednesday, the House Financial Services Committee held a hearing on a topic of critical importance to all Americans: restructuring the Federal Reserve into a modern day central bank instead of a captured regulator controlled by the very banks it purports to supervise. Dean Baker, the Senior Economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, presented an important assessment of reforms needed at the Fed but you will be hard pressed to find any mainstream media coverage of his testimony. Instead, President Trump’s characterization yesterday of Haiti and African nations as “sh**hole countries” is dominating the news.

How much critical work is falling by the wayside because mainstream media, dependent on ratings, elects to pursue only the most sensational stories – which they have no shortage of finding under President Trump.

Congress began its latest push to reform the Federal Reserve in 2014 after a bank examiner at the New York Fed, Carmen Segarra, filed a lawsuit stating that she was fired in retaliation for refusing to change her negative examination of Goldman Sachs. The gutsy Segarra secretly made tape recordings inside the Fed to show how the lapdog regulator viewed its supervisory mandate. Portions of the tape recordings were released by ProPublica and public radio’s This American Life.

A few weeks after the internal tapes were released in September 2014, additional news raised questions as to the competency of the New York Fed as a Wall Street regulator. The Federal Reserve’s Inspector General released a report indicating that  the New York Fed was advised of potential trouble in the Chief Investment Office at JPMorgan on multiple occasions but failed to conduct a comprehensive examination that might have alerted it at an early stage to the wild gambles JPMorgan Chase’s traders were making in exotic, high risk derivatives with depositors’ money in its FDIC-insured bank. Those wild bets eventually led to the London Whale scandal and $6.2 billion in losses of depositors’ funds.

On November 21, 2014, Senator Sherrod Brown, Chair of the Senate Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Protection, hauled the President of the New York Fed, William Dudley, before the Subcommittee to answer a blizzard of questions. Senator Brown said: “These recent reports should trouble any organization but they’re particularly catastrophic when the agency in question is responsible for four mega banks – four of the six largest banks in our country — four mega banks that alone account for $6 trillion in assets in some 11,000 subsidiaries.”

Senator Jeff Merkley grilled Dudley on how many names of the individuals who had engaged in the tax evasion scam deployed by Credit Suisse were turned over to authorities. Dudley said he didn’t know. Merkley asked how many Americans who created those secret tax evasion accounts with Credit Suisse were prosecuted. Dudley answered that he didn’t know. Merkley asked how many of the hundreds of Credit Suisse employees that set up these sham accounts were indicted. Dudley again said he didn’t know. Merkley said the answer to all of these questions was “none.”

Merkley explained that the Credit Suisse guilty plea to criminal charges came about not because of any advance information provided by the New York Fed or any investigation undertaken by the New York Fed, but as a result of the work of Senator Carl Levin’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. Appearing stern-faced and exasperated, Senator Merkley said: “You’re the regulator; why did it take the U.S. Senate committee to find out those facts.” Dudley responded: “I don’t know the answer to that.”

At Wednesday’s hearing, Baker appeared alongside three other panelists: Dr. Norbert Michel, Director of the Center for Data Analysis at the Heritage Foundation; Alex Pollock, Distinguished Senior Fellow at the R Street Institute; and Dr. George Selgin, Senior Fellow and Director at the Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives at the Cato Institute – a “nonprofit” which was secretly owned in part by the Koch brothers for decades.

Baker provided the most comprehensive assessment of the raging conflicts of interest at the Fed. His written testimony explained the following:

“The Federal Reserve System has an unusual status as being a mix of public and private entities. The governors are of course explicitly part of the public sector, as presidential appointees subject to congressional approval. However, the twelve regional banks are private, being owned by the member banks in the district, who have substantial control over the district bank’s conduct.

“This structure was put in place more than a century ago to fit the politics and the economy of the time. It is inconceivable that anyone constructing a central bank today would use the same framework…

“While there were reasons that a mixed public-private central bank and regulatory system may have made sense at the start of the last century, this is no longer the case today. The United States is the only major economy with this sort of mixed approach. The Bank of England, the Bank of Canada, the Bank of Japan, and the European Central Bank are all purely public entities. It is recognized that the conduct of monetary policy, along with the lender of last resort and regulatory functions of the central bank, are necessarily responsibilities of the government.”

Baker noted that the Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation of 2010 tinkered around the edges of reforming the Fed by taking away the votes of Class A Directors on the Boards of the regional Fed banks to vote for their President. “Nonetheless,” wrote Baker, “they still are likely to control the process since the Class B directors, who have half the votes, are appointed by the Class A directors.”

Wall Street’s biggest banks own and control the shares at the New York Fed – the primary supervisor of their sprawling bank holding companies. This “regulator” wore blinders in the leadup to the epic Wall Street collapse in 2008. It was reckless and irresponsible for Congress to give the Fed increased supervisory powers in the Dodd-Frank reform legislation.

Exclusive Past Reporting on the Fed from Wall Street On Parade:

Is the New York Fed Too Deeply Conflicted to Regulate Wall Street?

As Citigroup Spun Toward Insolvency in ’07- ’08, Its Regulator Was Dining and Schmoozing With Citi Execs

The New York Fed Has Contracted JPMorgan to Hold Over $1.7 Trillion of its QE Bonds Despite Two Felony Counts and Serial Charges of Crimes

As Criminal Probes of JPMorgan Expand, Documents Surface Showing JPMorgan Paid $190,000 Annually to Spouse of the Bank’s Top Regulator

New Documents Show How Power Moved to Wall Street, Via the New York Fed 

Intelligence Gathering Plays Key Role at New York Fed’s Trading Desk 

New York Fed’s Strange New Role: Big Bank Equity Analyst

Wall Street Bank with Three Felonies Sends Employee to Head SEC Trading Division

By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: January 11, 2018

Brett Redfearn

Brett Redfearn

The arrogance of the captured Wall Street regulators in Washington grows exponentially with each passing day.

The only Wall Street bank which has admitted to three criminal felony charges – all coming within the past three years – has been allowed to send one of its trading executives to head a key post at Wall Street’s top cop – the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Failing up continues to be the business model in the nation’s capitol.

The Trump administration, in its continuing Swamp-filling mandate from the billionaires behind the dark curtain, has elevated Brett Redfearn as Director of the Division of Trading and Markets at the SEC. Redfearn has worked at JPMorgan Securities from November 2004 to October 2017 when he was named to the new SEC post.

In 2014 the U.S. Justice Department slapped JPMorgan with two criminal felony counts related to its banking relationship with Ponzi schemer Bernie Madoff. JPMorgan admitted to the charges and received a deferred prosecution agreement.

On January 7, 2014, FBI Assistant Director-in-Charge George Venizelos had this to say about the criminal charges: “J.P. Morgan failed to carry out its legal obligations while Bernard Madoff built his massive house of cards. Today, J.P. Morgan finds itself criminally charged as a consequence. But it took until after the arrest of Madoff, one of the worst crooks this office has ever seen, for J.P. Morgan to alert authorities to what the world already knew. In order to avoid these types of disasters in the future – we all need to be invested in making our markets safer and more equitable. The FBI can’t do it alone. Traders, compliance officers, analysts, bankers, and executives are the gatekeepers of the financial industry. We need their help protecting our markets.”

When the Madoff criminal charges went down, Redfearn held the position of Head of Market Structure Strategy for the Americas at JPMorgan. He was in that position for five years and nine months according to his LinkedIn profile, meaning that he could have or should have heard the rumors all over The Street that Madoff was running a Ponzi scheme while his own bank was handling the primary business account for Madoff for decades without seeing any of the tens of billions of dollars leaving the account going to pay for the options trades that Madoff was supposed to be doing for his clients. According to prosecutors, Madoff never actually made any trades for his clients but simply issued fake client statements showing the trades. (See our full report: JPMorgan and Madoff Were Facilitating Nesting Dolls-Style Frauds Within Frauds.)

One year after the Madoff-related felony counts were filed against JPMorgan, it admitted to yet another criminal felony count filed by the U.S. Justice Department for its involvement in the rigging of foreign currency trading. In addition to the Justice Department’s charges, the U.K.’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) detailed a wide scale breakdown of management failures and risk controls and stated that JPMorgan’s front office was actually “involved in the misconduct.” The FCA wrote:

“Pursuant to its three lines of defence model, JPMorgan’s front office had primary responsibility for identifying, assessing and managing the risks associated with its G10 spot FX [foreign exchange] trading business. The front office failed adequately to discharge these responsibilities with regard to the risks described in this Notice. The right values and culture were not sufficiently embedded in JPMorgan’s G10 spot FX trading business, which resulted in it acting in JPMorgan’s own interests as described in this Notice, without proper regard for the interests of its clients, other market participants or the wider UK financial system. The lack of proper controls by JPMorgan over the activities of its G10 spot FX traders meant that misconduct went undetected for a number of years. Certain of those responsible for managing front office matters were aware of and/or at times involved in the misconduct.”

Another trading fiasco that raises serious questions about the SEC’s selection of a trading executive from JPMorgan to serve in a Federal watchdog capacity is the 2012 “London Whale” scandal. JPMorgan was using hundreds of billions of dollars of deposits from its insured depository bank, Chase, to allow traders in its London office to trade in exotic, high risk derivatives. As a result of the crazy bets, JPMorgan Chase lost at least $6.2 billion, paid over $1 billion in fines, and was pummeled in a 306-page report from the U.S. Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. Senator Carl Levin, Chair of the Subcommittee at the time, said JPMorgan “piled on risk, hid losses, disregarded risk limits, manipulated risk models, dodged oversight, and misinformed the public.”

Americans will not likely draw comfort that a long-term executive from a Wall Street bank with this kind of history is policing trading on Wall Street.

Can a Serially Troubled Wall Street Bank Grow By Shrinking?

By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: January 10, 2018

Citigroup's Magic Hat TrickOn Monday, Institutional Investor’s Jonathan Kandell wrote a fascinating profile of Citigroup. He tried in every conceivable way to be kind to the company but the facts just kept getting in his way.

Interestingly, the official name of the behemoth bank holding company, Citigroup, appears just once in the article. Its homey, cuddly moniker, “Citi,” appears 84 times. As the bank’s public relations legions attempt to erase the stain of Citigroup’s performance during the 2008 financial crisis and its Frankenbank birth in 1998 in violation of the Glass-Steagall Act and Bank Holding Act of 1956, changing the bank’s name is likely in the cards.

When Sandy Weill and John Reed proposed to merge the disparate parts of Weill’s Travelers Group, which owned an insurance firm (Travelers), investment bank (Salomon Brothers) and retail brokerage (Smith Barney) with Reed’s Citicorp, parent of the FDIC insured Citibank in 1998 to form Citigroup, it forced the hand of Congress to repeal the consumer-protection legislation known as the Glass-Steagall Act the following year. That 1933 legislation barred Wall Street’s brokerage and investment banks from combining with FDIC insured banks to prevent a replay of the 1929 Wall Street crash and Great Depression.

The Citigroup merger also forced the gutting of the provision in the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 that prohibited insurance companies from merging with insured depository banks. Removing those necessary banking walls proved lethal to the U.S. taxpayer, the U.S. economy, the U.S. housing market and the U.S. stock market. Just nine years after the repeal of Glass-Steagall, Citigroup was on taxpayer life support, receiving the largest bailout in U.S. history. The U.S. Treasury infused $45 billion in capital into Citigroup; the Federal government guaranteed over $300 billion of Citigroup’s assets; the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) guaranteed $5.75 billion of its senior unsecured debt and $26 billion of its commercial paper and interbank deposits; the Federal Reserve secretly funneled $2.5 trillion in almost zero-interest loans to units of Citigroup between 2007 and 2010.

And that was what happened at just one Frankenbank. Bear Stearns collapsed and was absorbed by JPMorgan Chase with Federal support. Wachovia was in a state of collapse and was taken over by Wells Fargo. The century old Merrill Lynch teetered into the arms of Bank of America while Lehman Brothers filed bankruptcy. AIG, the giant insurer, was quietly backing tens of billions of dollars of credit default swaps at the Wall Street banks in 2008 and needed a $185 billion taxpayer bailout. We could go on.

There are two things notable about the Institutional Investor article. First, the title “Can Citi Return to Its Pre-Crisis Glory?” begs the question: did Citigroup ever have “glory” days or was it all a big fantasy propped up by accounting gimmickry and a trillion dollars of off balance sheet “assets”.   A company doesn’t lose 90 percent of its stock market value in a year if it’s built on a solid foundation.

The Citigroup merger made Weill a billionaire and Reed a multi millionaire while costing the taxpayer a bundle and helping to bring down the whole of Wall Street.

The second notable aspect of the article is that management’s plan to restore the luster to Citigroup appears to be based on massive shrinkage of the company’s footprint or to put it simply: it’s going to grow by shrinking. According to Institutional Investor’s Kandell, here’s what Citigroup has done:

Citigroup’s head count has dropped from a peak of 357,000 before the crash to 213,000 today;

Citigroup “has reduced the number of countries in which it does retail banking from 50 to 19”;

Within the past four years, Citigroup has closed 30 percent of its retail bank branches and “reduced its real estate footprint by a quarter.”

Kandell also profiles Citigroup’s CEO, Michael Corbat, who took the helm in 2012. At Wall Street On Parade, we have been keeping track of the charges brought against Citigroup under the leadership of Corbat. Below is just a sampling:

December 4, 2013: Citigroup admits to participating in the Yen Libor financial derivatives cartel to the European Commission and accepts a fine of $95 million.

July 14, 2014: The U.S. Department of Justice announces a $7 billion settlement with Citigroup for selling toxic mortgages to investors. Attorney General Eric Holder called the bank’s conduct “egregious,” adding, “As a result of their assurances that toxic financial products were sound, Citigroup was able to expand its market share and increase profits.”

November 2014: Citigroup pays more than $1 billion to settle civil allegations with regulators that it manipulated foreign currency markets. Other global banks settled at the same time.

May 20, 2015: Citicorp, a unit of Citigroup becomes an admitted felon by pleading guilty to a felony charge in the matter of rigging foreign currency trading, paying a fine of $925 million to the Justice Department and $342 million to the Federal Reserve for a total of $1.267 billion. The prior November it paid U.S. and U.K. regulators an additional $1.02 billion.

July 12, 2016: The Securities and Exchange Commission fined Citigroup Global Markets Inc. $7 million for failure to provide accurate trading records over a period of 15 years. According to the SEC: “CGMI failed to produce records for 26,810 securities transactions comprising over 291 million shares of stock and options in response to 2,382 EBS requests made by Commission staff, between May 1999 and April 2014, due to an error in the computer code for CGMI’s EBS response software. Despite discovering the error in late April 2014, CGMI did not report the issue to Commission staff or take steps to produce the omitted data until nine months later on January 27, 2015. CGMI’s failure to discover the coding error and to produce the missing data for many years potentially impacted numerous Commission investigations.”

January 4, 2018: Citibank is fined $70 million by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency for failing to abide by its 2012 cease and desist order involving money laundering.