Stop Lying to Me and I Will Stop Telling the Truth About You.

 Thank you, to those that helped me this morning.  I now have the smoking gun.


:) LMFAO 


Love You.

Extoriton Just a Way of "Doing Business" JPMorganChase

Extortion (also called blackmail*, shakedown, outwresting, and exaction) is a criminal offence of unlawfully obtaining money, property, or services from a person, entity, or institution, through coercion. Refraining from doing harm is sometimes euphemistically called protection. Extortion is commonly practiced by organized crime groups. The actual obtainment of money or property is not required to commit the offense. Making a threat of violence which refers to a requirement of a payment of money or property to halt future violence is sufficient to commit the offense. Exaction refers not only to extortion or the unlawful demanding and obtaining of something through force,^[1] but additionally, in its formal definition, means the infliction of something such as pain and suffering or making somebody endure something unpleasant.^[2]
Extortion is distinguished from robbery. In armed robbery, the offender takes goods from the victim with use of immediate force. In robbery goods are taken or an attempt is made to take the goods against the will of another—with or without force. A bank robbery or extortion of a bank can be committed by a letter handed by the criminal to the teller. In extortion, the victim is threatened to hand over goods, or else damage to their reputation or other harm or violence against them may occur. Under United States federal law extortion can be committed with or without the use of force and with or without the use of a weapon. A key difference is that extortion always involves a written or verbal threat whereas robbery can occur without any verbal or written threat.

• Blackmail, in contrast to extortion, is when the offender threatens to reveal information about a victim or his family members that is potentially embarrassing, socially damaging, or incriminating unless a demand for money, property, or services is met.

The term extortion is often used metaphorically to refer to usury or to price-gouging, though neither is legally considered extortion. It is also often used loosely to refer to everyday situations where one person feels indebted against their will, to another, in order to receive an essential service or avoid legal consequences.
Neither extortion nor blackmail require a threat of a criminal act, such as violence, merely a threat used to elicit actions, money, or property from the object of the extortion. Such threats include the filing of reports (true or not) of criminal behavior to the police, revelation of damaging facts (such as pictures of the object of the extortion in a compromising position), etc.

Jamie Dimon Pay Cut

JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon's Pay Slashed In Half Over London Whale Loss; Bank's Profits Spike

By CHRISTINA REXRODE 01/16/13 09:45 PM ET EST

Follow:

Video, Business News, JPMorgan Chase, JPmorgan Earnings, Jamie Dimon Pay, Bank Earnings, Jamie Dimon Bonus, Jamie-Dimon-Pay-Cut, Jpmorgan-Chase-Earnings, Business News

NEW YORK -- America's best-known banker is getting a big pay cut.
JPMorgan Chase said Wednesday that it will dock the pay of CEO Jamie Dimon by more than half, to $11.5 million from $23 million.
It's the latest fallout from an embarrassing trading loss at the bank last year, one that eventually ballooned to $6 billion. Its ripple effects have already been numerous, forcing Dimon to appear contritely before Congress and putting the bank squarely in the cross hairs of regulators and lawmakers.
The pay cut didn't come as a surprise on Wall Street. What set it apart was that it amounted to a reprimand from the bank against a CEO who remains popular and well regarded, despite the stain of a trading loss that Dimon once dismissed as a "tempest in a teapot."
And even as it cuts his pay, the board of directors praised Dimon for responding "forcefully" to the trading loss, presiding over an overhaul of the bank's risk management and booting out responsible executives. A report from a bank task force placed most of the blame on other executives and traders who have since left.
Compensation consultant James F. Reda was underwhelmed. He called Dimon's pay cut "ceremonial," a way for the bank to show that it is paying penance.
"He doesn't need the money," Reda said. "He was probably very proactive in accepting this to keep people off his back. To get punished, if you will, so he can then point to that and say, `Look, I was punished. Isn't that enough? Leave me alone. Let me run my business.'"
Dimon's job was never seriously in danger, even with the trading loss, and the pay cut hasn't changed that perception. Wall Street saw it less as an indictment of Dimon and more as a sign of the board's commitment to taking the trading loss seriously.
"It's bitter medicine, but he swallowed it and is moving on," said James Post, an expert on corporate governance who teaches at Boston University. "I think that still leaves him in a very strong leadership position in both the bank and the industry."

JPMorgan, and Dimon, are essential players in U.S. banking. JPMorgan emerged from the financial crisis as one of the strongest banks in the country, a winner in a meltdown that forced other banks to their knees. Its blockbuster fourth-quarter earnings, which were released Wednesday, will almost certainly cement it as the most profitable U.S. bank of 2012.
Such accomplishments have made Dimon one of the best known, and most outspoken, bank leaders of his generation, even in a time of heightened scrutiny and public anger against the industry.
While some of his peers have tried to stay under the radar, he has spoken out against many new regulations – including some, the bank's critics say, that could have prevented the trading loss.
Dimon has publicly chafed at criticism of banking's big pay packages, including President Barack Obama's famous "fat-cat bankers" comment. "Acting like everyone who's been successful is bad and because you are rich, you are bad – I don't understand it, I don't get it," he told an investment conference.
On calls with reporters and analysts Wednesday, he was his usual swashbuckling self, intensely proud of the bank he runs and sometimes impatient with critical questions.
He said the portfolio where the troubled bets were made is "very close to being a non-issue" as far as trading losses are concerned. Asked for thoughts on his pay cut, Dimon said he respected the board's decision. Pressed for his "gut feeling," he replied, "Nope, you're not gonna get it."
When analyst Guy Moszkowski asked about the "exotic investment strategies" of the Chief Investment Office, where the loss occurred, he shot back, "It has got not a damned thing to do with exotic investment strategies – zero, nada, nothing. OK?"
For 2012, Dimon will get $1.5 million in salary and $10 million in restricted stock awards. It likely means that he'll no longer be the highest-paid CEO among the country's six mega-banks.
Even with the pay cut, and even by the lofty standards of big-time CEOs, the 56-year-old Dimon will still be well paid. The median pay for CEOs of S&P 500 companies for 2011 was $9.6 million, according to the latest data from executive compensation firm Equilar.
Though Dimon made clear that he is eager to put the so-called London whale loss behind him, there could be more reminders in store.
The bank has said it received requests for information related to government inquiries and investigations by Congress, the Department of Justice, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the U.K. Financial Services Authority, the state of Massachusetts and others.
On Monday, the Federal Reserve and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, both bank regulators, slapped sanctions on JPMorgan for the trading loss and ordered it to tighten up its risk management procedures. The bank neither admitted nor denied wrongdoing, but said it was working to correct any issues identified by the regulators.
The bank released two reports Wednesday on the loss, one from bank executives and the other from the board of directors. These said that traders and executives in the Chief Investment Office didn't understand the risks they were taking, didn't adequately question risky decisions and didn't properly report ballooning losses.
The board of directors said executives didn't keep them adequately informed about potential problems and used unapproved models for calculating risk.
Despite the fallout from the trading loss, JPMorgan turned in a strong fourth quarter. Earnings shot up 55 percent over the same period a year ago to $5.3 billion after paying preferred dividends, up from $3.4 billion.
Per share, those earnings amounted to $1.40, blowing away the $1.16 expected by analysts polled by financial data provider FactSet. The bank's stock rose 47 cents to $46.82, up 1 percent.
Revenue also beat Wall Street's forecasts, rising 10 percent to $24.4 billion, after stripping out an accounting charge. Mortgage originations jumped 33 percent.
Dimon said the housing market "has turned," echoing a statement he made in October after the third-quarter earnings report.
___
AP Business Writer Steve Rothwell contributed to this repor

Jamie Dimon London Whale a Tale of a Moby Dick

Will the London Whale Devour Jamie Dimon?

JP Morgan last week released a scathing 129 page report which details its widespread “failures” and missteps which led to a massive $6 billion loss at the mouth of the now infamous trader known as the “London Whale”.
In the bible, the whale swallows Jonah, only to spit him out three days later. In this instance, the London Whale has already swallowed a good chunk of CEO Jamie Dimon’s pay.
What’s next? If charges of fraud against traders and managers surface at JP Morgan, will the whale swallow Dimon?
Remember, Dimon early in the crisis dubbed the matter nothing but a “tempest in a teapot.” The CEO’s disdain has backfired.
Now, he must be singing a different tune. Last week, the board of JP Morgan decided to cut his pay in half to a mere $11.5 million.
Other than a dent in JP Morgan’s earnings and in Dimon’s pay, what does the London Whale incident really mean?
Any really good Wall Street or Washington scandal always needs a few scapegoats, and JP Morgan found them right away. The Whale was forced to step aside and the CFO and Chief Risk Officer were thrown overboard as well.
If you read the report, you might wonder if the FBI and Congressional Committees investigating the case will charge JP Morgan executives with criminal securities fraud for blatantly trying to hide the massive losses from investors.
You also might question whether the board of directors or audit committee had any comprehension of the extraordinary risks being taken by the bank’s traders who are incentivized to bet the farm to boost annual bonus pools.
Indeed, the report is worth reading as a sea tale rivaling the ancient story of Jonah.
“The report describes traders making overly optimistic estimates of their losses, but stops short of claiming outright fraud,” according to an article last Thursday in The New York Times by Ben Protess and Peter Eavis. “But the FBI, suspecting that some employees intentionally hid the losses last year, is using taped phone conversations to build criminal cases against London-based traders involved in the debacle, according to the officials briefed on the matter.”
Can one conclude from this investigation that a bank the size of JP Morgan is simply “too big to manage”? Let’s ask Jamie Dimon in 12 months. He’ll either still be stuck in the Whale’s belly, or well out of it.
Disclosure: Zamansky & Associates are securities attorneys representing investors in federal and state litigation and arbitration against financial institutions, including in litigation concerning the JPMorgan “London Whale” episode.

JPMorgan Threatens Home Owner

I don't like threats, but I enjoy the recording...ThankYou JPMorgan Chase for proving once again
that you will stop at nothing, and that the laws, State or Federal do not apply to you.


tisk tisk 


Can't wait to see you


-Michelle

Home Owner Ignored By JPMorgan Chase for 21 months

:) 


Now things are getting interesting.

Chase Home Owner Ignored for almost 2 years

I want to say soooooo much.

Merry Christmas Chase, and a Happy New Year!! :)


I Love You.


-Michelle

P.S. Can't wait to see you soon :)