WTF, New Scientist? WTF? » « At least Canavero isn’t comparing himself to Galileo yet

My hero

Elizabeth Warren is completely on point in grilling the Wells Fargo CEO, John Stumpf, who profited from fraud and still has his job, as do all of his cronies. This is a beautiful examination.

Unfortunately, whoever uploaded this video claims she DESTROYS him. No, she doesn’t. He has gone home to his mansion, will continue to rake in the cash from his corrupt bank, and will probably get together with his obscenely wealthy pals at the country club to cuss out ‘Pocahantas’, because that’s the way the system works.

If there were justice, he wouldn’t be destroyed. He’d be going to jail, his money would be seized, and Wells Fargo would be broken up.

WTF, New Scientist? WTF? » « At least Canavero isn’t comparing himself to Galileo yet

Comments

  3. brett says

    You’d have to have a charge to convict him on. Putting in place an incentive system that a bunch of his employees cheated on is not a crime, just stupidity.

  4. keithb says

    It depends on what he knew and when he knew it. If he knew about the fraud and did nothing about it, he could be guilty of being an accessory or conspiracy. Even if he wink wink, nudge, nudge knew.

  5. blf says

    Wells Fargo Scandal May Be Sign of a Poisonous Culture:

    […]
    Carrie Tolstedt, the divisional senior vice president for community banking, was the person responsible for Wells’s 6,000 branches where the infractions took place. When she retired, quietly, in July, the bank knew that her operation had been under scrutiny for sales tactics for more than a year. Ms Tolstedt spent 27 years at Wells Fargo, and was no doubt steeped in the bank’s culture. In the last three years, she was paid a total of $27 million. She remains employed at the bank until the end of the year. When she leaves, she will probably be able to take with her nearly $125 million in stock and options, her reward for longevity and seniority. But where’s the accountability?

    That is basically the question that Jim Cramer put to John G. Stumpf, Wells Fargo’s chairman and chief executive, in an interview on CNBC on Tuesday. He asked Mr Stumpf why Wells Fargo did not “claw back” Ms Tolstedt’s compensation and accrued stock. It is the right question and the bank should do exactly that, because this is the precise situation where such clawback provisions are relevant. But Mr Stumpf deflected. “Jim, to the extent that’s a consideration, there’s a board process,” Mr Stumpf said.
    […]

    There is more to the problem than just a stupid incentive scheme. As the article concludes:

    The best thing you [(Mr Stumpf)] can do your company, your shareholders and your country is to resign. [sic] You have presided over a poisonous culture where, incredibly, 5,300 employees thought it was perfectly fine to cheat their own customers to get themselves a bigger bonus. That is simply unacceptable behavior, as you will no doubt hear in spades on Tuesday when you testify before Congress about the scandal.

    It is not only “simply unacceptable”, but as the article notes, it is “entirely illegal, unethical and unacceptable.”

    Disclaimer: Wells Fargo has, for multiple decades, been on my “never knowingly do business with” list, due to the highly dubious handing of a simple transaction; possibly not illegal, but certainly both unethical and very untrustworthy.

  6. brett says

    It may have been cheaper and faster simply to let her collect her compensation as long as she left quietly and quickly, as opposed to the whole matter going to court whereupon they simply end up settling quietly anyways over the compensation. That type of thing is not unknown.

  7. magistramarla says

    Our mortgage was sold to WF after it had been sold twice since our original loan was made. WF offered us a lower APR, but we were required to open a checking account with them and the payment had to be automatically drawn from that account each month. I promptly set up an automatic deposit into that account each month from our regular bank. (A military-only bank which takes good care of its members).
    A few years ago, that military bank notified me that the automatic deposit was rejected by WF. I called and was told that the account had been closed due to non-use. What? It has been used for the monthly payment for 10 years!
    The person on the phone promised to look into it, and I made sure that the mortgage payment was made by the military bank directly and on time. For the next three months, the same thing happened. I set up the automatic payment from the military bank until we could get the mortgage re-financed through them.
    I couldn’t help but wonder how many people (especially the elderly) might have not noticed that this was happening until it was too late and might have lost their homes to foreclosure by WF. I was lucky because the military bank always sends me e-mail notices when anything unusual happens with our account and I tend to be pro-active about logging on to check up on those notifications. I shudder to think what might have happened.

  9. What a Maroon, living up to the 'nym says

    This sort of performance is precisely why Elizabeth Warren should not be Clinton’s VP. She’s much more valuable in the Senate, or perhaps as AG in a Clinton administration.

  11. birgerjohansson says

    “his money would be seized”

    In lieu of assets, I would settle for his liver, consumed along with a good Chianti.

  13. msm16 says

    I just want to second the comment that she would be WASTED as a VP. We need more liberal bulldogs in the Senate.

  14. robro says

    rietpluim — You can’t eat stone, unless you can make soup from a stone.

    As to his culpability, there may be no legal recourse but you might think the board of directors would encourage him to seek other pursuits.

  15. What a Maroon, living up to the 'nym says

    robro,

    Break it into pieces–they make excellent grit for the gizzard.

  16. unclefrogy says

    that sounds like you want to feed him to the chickens. OK that would work I guess. He still would not get it though after all it was only accounts and account holders not like it was real people with real lives or anything.
    uncle frogy

  17. magistramarla says

    I saw a headline today that said that employees were fired for pointing out instances of fraud.
    Why am I not surprised?

  18. blf says

    I saw a headline today that said that employees were fired for pointing out instances of fraud.

    Yes, the WSJ(which, being owned by Murduck, has lost considerable credibility) and some others are now reporting this. Unfortunately, I have not yet seen a report, not behind a paywell and from a site I consider reliable / credible…