Poor Wells Fargo.

$97.8 million over its use of software to violate sanctions.

$67.8 million (fined to Wells Fargo & Co.) for "inadequate oversight of sanctions compliance risks at its subsidiary, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A."

A further $30 million to settle its potential civil liability for apparent violations of US sanctions on Iran, Syria and Sudan.


If only they had a rigorous compliance team. JFL.

You can read the Settlement Agreement here:

https://home.treasury.gov/system/fil...settlement.pdf

There is no escape, folks. Not for IFIs, or individual persons.

Friday afternoon at the office, and enforcement actions give me a HUGE hardon, srs. Nohomo.

JFL at them srs.

Imagine leaving compliance to software programs.

Ayyyy!

There should not have been sanctions on Iran and Syria. That was complete neocon/neolib/zionist bullsh*t.

Am not here to win popularity contests - that's why I post something objective and factual, rather than to play off the hammer and sickle 'banks are failing brehs' trope. Ayyyy, indeed!You don't think that Iran's nuclear program in 2011-2012 constituted a threat to international peace and security?

It was a mild threat. But honestly, do you really think Iran couldn't provide enough stateside security to prevent nuclear weapons breaches? Do you think they'd also condone nuclear terrorism given the ramifications it would have toward their own existence as a state? Pakistan is at least as unstable and batchit as Iran and also has nuclear weapons. It's really not the end of the world.

I mentioned Iran in 2011-2012 specifically. There was every justification to put sanctions against them - and remember, Wincel: there's nobody here, or pretty much on this planet, who can speak to me on sanctions.

If you're arguing: (i) proliferation never happened; (ii) others got the bomb and never used it, etc., just recall that (ii) isn't necessarily a future predicter. And India caused the nuclear race with Pakistan too. There's an argument that Israel's acting with impunity in the Middle East inspired Iran, but that's more scapegoating than anything else.

Is it possible Iran getting a nuke might have a stabilizing effect on the region? It could stop Israel from any aggression toward them, and Iran being more secure in its position, might let up a bit. Is it scapegoating? We saw what happened. Can you blame Iran? Look at the surrounding countries and the changes that took place in the last 2 decades. I'd be worried. Wouldn't you?

You're misremembering history - much of the Arab world back in 2011-2012 were displeased with Iran as well, so this wasn't really simply "Iran vs Israel" (only Americans tend to see it this way, for obvious reasons).

Historically, as well, much of the Arab world disliked Iran for its (appropriate) claims to education, culture, art, architecture, heritage etc. Whereas the rest...oil money -> debauchery. Emphasis on 'historically'.

Any country you say might have benefitted from obtaining the nuke doesn't need one - you yourself are implying that proliferation/use doesn't happen, so why get one anyway? KJU will never use one, it's as simple as that, all he's trying to do is retain a stranglehold on the people of the DPRK. But it doesn't mean that the international community should be silent when an ICBM lands in Japan's EEZ.

When things come tumbling down, people are going to be pissed about what the banks have been getting away with.

But then we'll continue fighting about trannies and race lol.

It has been going on for a while. Deutsche Bank's $1 billion OFAC fine only went so far, despite "thousands" of transactions that violated Iran sanctions.

Those are the ones being caught. Think of all the trafficked persons, child sex slaves, and the like - and what some banks do to ensure they get a cut of all that too?

That's what you call connected. Own a ship loaded with 20 tons of coke and it barely hits the press, never mind any noise about criminal charges.

Heck, they might have been carrying it for the CIA. "That's not our coke, we were just holding it for a friend."

It is what it is. We just have to accept and move on.


We need big business to keep this country running. Yet libtards think that we can all live off of happiness, friendship, and equality. LOL I would love to see that put dinner on your table.


Lol libtards always complaining about everything

Just to flag:

1) those 'muh CIA' days are over. To trace international organized crime a competent authority can let a shipment proceed, especially to track the end recipient which is often obscured, but that's not 'complicit' behavior;
2) Women are heavily involved in the recruitment of child sex slaves, including girls, and are also key terrorist recruiters - source, UNODC. So the 'men traffic' thing deserves its share of 'gender equality too, addressing this latter point to libs.No, we don't have to accept it. And that's the point of this thread. Fines, criminal prosecutions, chasing down elements behind international organized crime are a true vocation. And one which the USA leads in this toxic world,by far.