[0:00]
Our [Music] [Music] [Music] main story tonight concerns crime. Once main story tonight concerns crime. Once main story tonight concerns crime. Once again, voted number one by Reasons to again, voted number one by Reasons to again, voted number one by Reasons to Tiptoe magazine. Specifically, we're Tiptoe magazine. Specifically, we're Tiptoe magazine. Specifically, we're going to talk about corporate crime, going to talk about corporate crime, going to talk about corporate crime, something our current president is something our current president is something our current president is famously not that concerned about. Not famously not that concerned about. Not famously not that concerned about. Not only was he convicted on 34 counts of only was he convicted on 34 counts of only was he convicted on 34 counts of falsifying business records, but long falsifying business records, but long falsifying business records, but long before he was president, CNBC ran a before he was president, CNBC ran a before he was president, CNBC ran a segment about a law banning American segment about a law banning American segment about a law banning American companies from bribing foreign companies from bribing foreign companies from bribing foreign governments. or not. Let this governments. or not. Let this governments. or not. Let this anti-corruption activist pick up the anti-corruption activist pick up the anti-corruption activist pick up the story from there. 
[0:30]
story from there. story from there. >> I was asked to come on CNBC and give the >> I was asked to come on CNBC and give the >> I was asked to come on CNBC and give the anti-corruption anti-corruption anti-corruption argument. And I remember laughing at the argument. And I remember laughing at the argument. And I remember laughing at the time saying, "Well, if is there somebody time saying, "Well, if is there somebody time saying, "Well, if is there somebody that you found who's willing to give the that you found who's willing to give the that you found who's willing to give the pro-corruption argument?" pro-corruption argument?" pro-corruption argument?" >> Now, every other country goes into these >> Now, every other country goes into these >> Now, every other country goes into these places and they do what they have to do. places and they do what they have to do. places and they do what they have to do. Sad part, every other country in the Sad part, every other country in the Sad part, every other country in the world is doing it. We're not allowed to. world is doing it. We're not allowed to. world is doing it. We're not allowed to. So, it puts us at a huge disadvantage. So, it puts us at a huge disadvantage. So, it puts us at a huge disadvantage. >> Yeah, they clearly got the right guy >> Yeah, they clearly got the right guy >> Yeah, they clearly got the right guy there. there. there. I can only assume the producer at CNBC I can only assume the producer at CNBC I can only assume the producer at CNBC said to their assistant, "We need said to their assistant, "We need said to their assistant, "We need someone willing to give the 
[1:01]
someone willing to give the someone willing to give the pro-corruption argument. Who's the most pro-corruption argument. Who's the most pro-corruption argument. Who's the most unethical person you can think of?" To unethical person you can think of?" To unethical person you can think of?" To which they replied, "Easy, the which they replied, "Easy, the which they replied, "Easy, the Hamburglar." To which the producer said, Hamburglar." To which the producer said, Hamburglar." To which the producer said, "No, wait, what? No, like a real "No, wait, what? No, like a real "No, wait, what? No, like a real person." To which they said, "Wait, the person." To which they said, "Wait, the person." To which they said, "Wait, the hamburger is not real." To which the hamburger is not real." To which the hamburger is not real." To which the producer said, "Uh, no, he's a fictional producer said, "Uh, no, he's a fictional producer said, "Uh, no, he's a fictional character." To which the assistant character." To which the assistant character." To which the assistant replied, "Well, there goes that dream." replied, "Well, there goes that dream." replied, "Well, there goes that dream." To which the producer said, "What To which the producer said, "What To which the producer said, "What dream?" To which they said, "Of marrying dream?" To which they said, "Of marrying dream?" To which they said, "Of marrying the hamburger." To which the producer the hamburger." To which the producer the hamburger." To which the producer said, "I'm sorry, what?" To which the said, "I'm sorry, what?" To which the said, "I'm sorry, what?" To which the assistant said, "Let's not talk about assistant said, "Let's not talk about assistant said, "Let's not talk about it. How about we get Donald Trump? To it. How about we get Donald Trump? To it. How about we get Donald Trump? To which the producer said, "Oh, that is a which the producer said, "Oh, that is a which the producer said, "Oh, that is a good idea. Are you crying?" To which good idea. Are you crying?" To which good idea. Are you crying?" To which they said, "Yeah, sorry. This hamburger 
[1:31]
they said, "Yeah, sorry. This hamburger they said, "Yeah, sorry. This hamburger news is just hitting me pretty hard." To news is just hitting me pretty hard." To news is just hitting me pretty hard." To which the producer said, "Did you really which the producer said, "Did you really which the producer said, "Did you really have a crush on a cartoon beef thief?" have a crush on a cartoon beef thief?" have a crush on a cartoon beef thief?" To which they replied, "The heart wants To which they replied, "The heart wants To which they replied, "The heart wants what it wants before storming off to go what it wants before storming off to go what it wants before storming off to go cry in the bathroom." Anyway, the point cry in the bathroom." Anyway, the point cry in the bathroom." Anyway, the point is, of course, they got Donald Trump to is, of course, they got Donald Trump to is, of course, they got Donald Trump to defend corruption on live TV. And since defend corruption on live TV. And since defend corruption on live TV. And since taking office, his administration's taking office, his administration's taking office, his administration's halted or dropped more than 100 halted or dropped more than 100 halted or dropped more than 100 enforcement actions against corporate enforcement actions against corporate enforcement actions against corporate misconduct. And he even issued the first misconduct. And he even issued the first misconduct. And he even issued the first ever pardon of a corporation, pardoning ever pardon of a corporation, pardoning ever pardon of a corporation, pardoning this cryptocurrency exchange, which have this cryptocurrency exchange, which have this cryptocurrency exchange, which have been sentenced to a $100 million fine 
[2:02]
been sentenced to a $100 million fine been sentenced to a $100 million fine for violating an anti-moneylaundering for violating an anti-moneylaundering for violating an anti-moneylaundering law. It is frankly no wonder experts law. It is frankly no wonder experts law. It is frankly no wonder experts have called this moment the ripest have called this moment the ripest have called this moment the ripest environment for corruption by public environment for corruption by public environment for corruption by public officials and business executives in a officials and business executives in a officials and business executives in a generation. Though to be fair, it's not generation. Though to be fair, it's not generation. Though to be fair, it's not like the environment was exactly unripe like the environment was exactly unripe like the environment was exactly unripe before Trump took office. Republican and before Trump took office. Republican and before Trump took office. Republican and Democratic administrations have both Democratic administrations have both Democratic administrations have both taken a pretty lax approach to corporate taken a pretty lax approach to corporate taken a pretty lax approach to corporate crime for a while now. You might have crime for a while now. You might have crime for a while now. You might have noticed stories about corporate noticed stories about corporate noticed stories about corporate malfeasants rarely end with executives malfeasants rarely end with executives malfeasants rarely end with executives going to jail or the companies getting going to jail or the companies getting going to jail or the companies getting shut down. And tonight's story is going 
[2:33]
shut down. And tonight's story is going shut down. And tonight's story is going to focus on a key reason for that. to focus on a key reason for that. to focus on a key reason for that. Deferred prosecution agreements or DPAs. Deferred prosecution agreements or DPAs. Deferred prosecution agreements or DPAs. They're basically an outofc court They're basically an outofc court They're basically an outofc court settlement for companies to avoid being settlement for companies to avoid being settlement for companies to avoid being prosecuted. Essentially, the government prosecuted. Essentially, the government prosecuted. Essentially, the government will come to a company and say, "Hi, will come to a company and say, "Hi, will come to a company and say, "Hi, company government here. You did a crime company government here. You did a crime company government here. You did a crime and we have enough evidence to prosecute and we have enough evidence to prosecute and we have enough evidence to prosecute you." But instead of then doing that, you." But instead of then doing that, you." But instead of then doing that, they strike a deal where if the company they strike a deal where if the company they strike a deal where if the company behaves itself for a certain amount of behaves itself for a certain amount of behaves itself for a certain amount of time, the criminal charges eventually time, the criminal charges eventually time, the criminal charges eventually disappear. Sometimes they'll go with an disappear. Sometimes they'll go with an disappear. Sometimes they'll go with an even weaker option, a nonprosecution even weaker option, a nonprosecution even weaker option, a nonprosecution agreement or NPA, which doesn't even 
[3:03]
agreement or NPA, which doesn't even agreement or NPA, which doesn't even have to be filed in court. Either way, have to be filed in court. Either way, have to be filed in court. Either way, they're terms that tend to slide past they're terms that tend to slide past they're terms that tend to slide past you whenever you hear them on the news. you whenever you hear them on the news. you whenever you hear them on the news. >> The Justice Department announcing a >> The Justice Department announcing a >> The Justice Department announcing a deferred prosecution agreement with Teva deferred prosecution agreement with Teva deferred prosecution agreement with Teva Pharmaceuticals. Pharmaceuticals. Pharmaceuticals. >> First Energy entered into what's called >> First Energy entered into what's called >> First Energy entered into what's called a deferred prosecution agreement. a deferred prosecution agreement. a deferred prosecution agreement. >> McKenzie has also entered into a >> McKenzie has also entered into a >> McKenzie has also entered into a deferred prosecution agreement. Uber has deferred prosecution agreement. Uber has deferred prosecution agreement. Uber has entered into a nonprosecution agreement entered into a nonprosecution agreement entered into a nonprosecution agreement by the Swiss close to finalizing that by the Swiss close to finalizing that by the Swiss close to finalizing that deferred prosecution agreement. deferred prosecution agreement. deferred prosecution agreement. >> What's known as a deferred prosecution >> What's known as a deferred prosecution >> What's known as a deferred prosecution agreement? agreement? agreement? >> Deferred prosecution agreement. >> Deferred prosecution agreement. >> Deferred prosecution agreement. >> Deferred prosecution agreement. Every 
[3:34]
>> Deferred prosecution agreement. Every >> Deferred prosecution agreement. Every bank on Wall Street has a deferred bank on Wall Street has a deferred bank on Wall Street has a deferred prosecution or an NPA. Every bank has prosecution or an NPA. Every bank has prosecution or an NPA. Every bank has more than one, most likely. more than one, most likely. more than one, most likely. >> It's true. AIG has two NPAs and a DPA. >> It's true. AIG has two NPAs and a DPA. >> It's true. AIG has two NPAs and a DPA. Barclays has a DPA and an NPA. Credit Barclays has a DPA and an NPA. Credit Barclays has a DPA and an NPA. Credit Swiss has a DPA. JP Morgan has an NPA Swiss has a DPA. JP Morgan has an NPA Swiss has a DPA. JP Morgan has an NPA and a DPA. Lloyds has two DPAs. The and a DPA. Lloyds has two DPAs. The and a DPA. Lloyds has two DPAs. The Royal Bank of Scotland has a DPA. Royal Bank of Scotland has a DPA. Royal Bank of Scotland has a DPA. Wakovia has a DPA and an NPA. And UBS Wakovia has a DPA and an NPA. And UBS Wakovia has a DPA and an NPA. And UBS has a DPA and two NPAs. And just so you has a DPA and two NPAs. And just so you has a DPA and two NPAs. And just so you know, when I say a sentence like UBS has know, when I say a sentence like UBS has know, when I say a sentence like UBS has a DPA and two NPAs, I do hear myself. 
[4:05]
a DPA and two NPAs, I do hear myself. a DPA and two NPAs, I do hear myself. I'm fully aware that one day this show I'm fully aware that one day this show I'm fully aware that one day this show will just be me reading one long acronym will just be me reading one long acronym will just be me reading one long acronym for 40 minutes. We'll have achieved our for 40 minutes. We'll have achieved our for 40 minutes. We'll have achieved our perfect form and on that day I'll perfect form and on that day I'll perfect form and on that day I'll finally be allowed to die. But the point finally be allowed to die. But the point finally be allowed to die. But the point is, these agreements are absolutely is, these agreements are absolutely is, these agreements are absolutely everywhere. Honestly, the only things everywhere. Honestly, the only things everywhere. Honestly, the only things more ubiquitous than DPAs on Wall Street more ubiquitous than DPAs on Wall Street more ubiquitous than DPAs on Wall Street are fleece vests and undiagnosed are fleece vests and undiagnosed are fleece vests and undiagnosed sociopaths. sociopaths. sociopaths. Unfortunately, as you're about to see, Unfortunately, as you're about to see, Unfortunately, as you're about to see, DPAs don't really do much. In fact, DPAs don't really do much. In fact, DPAs don't really do much. In fact, sometimes companies that have done sometimes companies that have done sometimes companies that have done massive harm have used them to literally 
[4:36]
massive harm have used them to literally massive harm have used them to literally get away with murder. So, given that, get away with murder. So, given that, get away with murder. So, given that, tonight, let's talk about deferred tonight, let's talk about deferred tonight, let's talk about deferred prosecution agreements, where they came prosecution agreements, where they came prosecution agreements, where they came from, how ineffective they can be, and a from, how ineffective they can be, and a from, how ineffective they can be, and a few amazing examples of what they can few amazing examples of what they can few amazing examples of what they can look like in practice. Let's start with look like in practice. Let's start with look like in practice. Let's start with the fact that DPAs were never actually the fact that DPAs were never actually the fact that DPAs were never actually intended to be used on corporations. The intended to be used on corporations. The intended to be used on corporations. The concept grew out of a 1974 law that was concept grew out of a 1974 law that was concept grew out of a 1974 law that was meant to help firsttime and juvenile meant to help firsttime and juvenile meant to help firsttime and juvenile non-violent offenders avoid prosecution non-violent offenders avoid prosecution non-violent offenders avoid prosecution so they could focus on rehabilitation. so they could focus on rehabilitation. so they could focus on rehabilitation. But that is not how we use them today. But that is not how we use them today. But that is not how we use them today. And you can trace the explosion of And you can trace the explosion of And you can trace the explosion of corporate DPAs back to one of the most 
[5:07]
corporate DPAs back to one of the most corporate DPAs back to one of the most famous times a large company was famous times a large company was famous times a large company was prosecuted in this country, Arthur prosecuted in this country, Arthur prosecuted in this country, Arthur Anderson. It was the accounting firm for Anderson. It was the accounting firm for Anderson. It was the accounting firm for Enron whose name is now synonymous with Enron whose name is now synonymous with Enron whose name is now synonymous with accounting fraud. Very basically with accounting fraud. Very basically with accounting fraud. Very basically with the help of Anderson, Enron completely the help of Anderson, Enron completely the help of Anderson, Enron completely invented future earnings for itself. And invented future earnings for itself. And invented future earnings for itself. And when the government tried to when the government tried to when the government tried to investigate, Anderson undertook a investigate, Anderson undertook a investigate, Anderson undertook a massive document purge during which they massive document purge during which they massive document purge during which they deleted around 30,000 computer files and deleted around 30,000 computer files and deleted around 30,000 computer files and emails and at one point shredded more emails and at one point shredded more emails and at one point shredded more documents in 3 days than they usually documents in 3 days than they usually documents in 3 days than they usually destroyed in a year. something that destroyed in a year. something that destroyed in a year. something that became so famous it was even parodyied 
[5:39]
became so famous it was even parodyied became so famous it was even parodyied in a Heineken commercial where the in a Heineken commercial where the in a Heineken commercial where the documents became snowflakes and the documents became snowflakes and the documents became snowflakes and the tagline was to all those who weren't tagline was to all those who weren't tagline was to all those who weren't naughty this year happy holidays naughty this year happy holidays naughty this year happy holidays and just think how remarkable that is. A and just think how remarkable that is. A and just think how remarkable that is. A beer company thought to themselves, you beer company thought to themselves, you beer company thought to themselves, you know, we could just show off our crisp, know, we could just show off our crisp, know, we could just show off our crisp, refreshing product in this commercial, refreshing product in this commercial, refreshing product in this commercial, but instead let's give people what they but instead let's give people what they but instead let's give people what they really want this Christmas and say really want this Christmas and say really want this Christmas and say you to an accounting firm. you to an accounting firm. you to an accounting firm. But the thing is, But the thing is, But the thing is, the Justice Department actually got a the Justice Department actually got a the Justice Department actually got a lot of blowback for prosecuting Anderson 
[6:10]
lot of blowback for prosecuting Anderson lot of blowback for prosecuting Anderson because at the time it was a massive because at the time it was a massive because at the time it was a massive firm with 28,000 employees, many of whom firm with 28,000 employees, many of whom firm with 28,000 employees, many of whom felt like they'd done nothing wrong. felt like they'd done nothing wrong. felt like they'd done nothing wrong. >> I am Anderson. I am Anderson. >> I am Anderson. I am Anderson. >> I am Anderson. I am Anderson. >> After weeks of suffering in silence, >> After weeks of suffering in silence, >> After weeks of suffering in silence, Anderson workers have found their voice. Anderson workers have found their voice. Anderson workers have found their voice. >> Fight. Stand tall. Don't give up. By the >> Fight. Stand tall. Don't give up. By the >> Fight. Stand tall. Don't give up. By the grace of God, we're going to win cuz grace of God, we're going to win cuz grace of God, we're going to win cuz we're Anderson. we're Anderson. we're Anderson. Everybody you see out here is worried Everybody you see out here is worried Everybody you see out here is worried about their job right now. about their job right now. about their job right now. >> We're all being penalized for something >> We're all being penalized for something >> We're all being penalized for something that we didn't have anything to do with. 
[6:41]
that we didn't have anything to do with. that we didn't have anything to do with. >> Yeah. Arthur Anderson's employees felt a >> Yeah. Arthur Anderson's employees felt a >> Yeah. Arthur Anderson's employees felt a range of emotions from resentment to range of emotions from resentment to range of emotions from resentment to anxiety to a level of unbridled anxiety to a level of unbridled anxiety to a level of unbridled exuberance. Best described as Price is exuberance. Best described as Price is exuberance. Best described as Price is Right contestant who just won a Honda Right contestant who just won a Honda Right contestant who just won a Honda Civic. And they were right to be Civic. And they were right to be Civic. And they were right to be concerned. Anderson being convicted of a concerned. Anderson being convicted of a concerned. Anderson being convicted of a felony meant they lost their accounting felony meant they lost their accounting felony meant they lost their accounting license which for an accounting firm is license which for an accounting firm is license which for an accounting firm is generally not great for business. The generally not great for business. The generally not great for business. The company eventually folded. Thousands of company eventually folded. Thousands of company eventually folded. Thousands of people lost their jobs and many like people lost their jobs and many like people lost their jobs and many like this Anderson partner placed the blame this Anderson partner placed the blame this Anderson partner placed the blame squarely on the government. squarely on the government. squarely on the government. >> In the history of the world of business, 
[7:12]
>> In the history of the world of business, >> In the history of the world of business, this will come out in my judgment as the this will come out in my judgment as the this will come out in my judgment as the largest act of corporate murder ever. largest act of corporate murder ever. largest act of corporate murder ever. >> Okay, that is a wild overstatement >> Okay, that is a wild overstatement >> Okay, that is a wild overstatement though because what happened to Anderson though because what happened to Anderson though because what happened to Anderson is a lot more complicated than that. The is a lot more complicated than that. The is a lot more complicated than that. The company had started shedding clients company had started shedding clients company had started shedding clients long before their conviction and the SEC long before their conviction and the SEC long before their conviction and the SEC was already investigating them. So the was already investigating them. So the was already investigating them. So the truth is Anderson was likely heading out truth is Anderson was likely heading out truth is Anderson was likely heading out of business anyway, saying this of business anyway, saying this of business anyway, saying this prosecution is what doomed Anderson is prosecution is what doomed Anderson is prosecution is what doomed Anderson is like saying that the ground is what like saying that the ground is what like saying that the ground is what doomed the Hindenburg. Sure, it might doomed the Hindenburg. Sure, it might doomed the Hindenburg. Sure, it might have been the final issue it 
[7:42]
have been the final issue it have been the final issue it encountered, but things weren't exactly encountered, but things weren't exactly encountered, but things weren't exactly smooth sailing before then. smooth sailing before then. smooth sailing before then. But after Anderson, prosecutors became But after Anderson, prosecutors became But after Anderson, prosecutors became very reluctant to risk putting a company very reluctant to risk putting a company very reluctant to risk putting a company out of business. And that is when DPAs out of business. And that is when DPAs out of business. And that is when DPAs became popular. In the decade prior to became popular. In the decade prior to became popular. In the decade prior to Anderson's collapse, DPAs and NPAs had Anderson's collapse, DPAs and NPAs had Anderson's collapse, DPAs and NPAs had been used just 18 times. But in the 14 been used just 18 times. But in the 14 been used just 18 times. But in the 14 years following, the DOJ entered into years following, the DOJ entered into years following, the DOJ entered into 419 419 419 such settlements. And the argument for such settlements. And the argument for such settlements. And the argument for DPAs is that they prevent innocent DPAs is that they prevent innocent DPAs is that they prevent innocent employees from getting hurt, dissuade 
[8:13]
employees from getting hurt, dissuade employees from getting hurt, dissuade future wrongdoing, and still allow the future wrongdoing, and still allow the future wrongdoing, and still allow the DOJ to go after individuals. But there DOJ to go after individuals. But there DOJ to go after individuals. But there are problems with literally all that. are problems with literally all that. are problems with literally all that. For starters, nearly half of those For starters, nearly half of those For starters, nearly half of those getting deferred and non-prosecution getting deferred and non-prosecution getting deferred and non-prosecution agreements paid no fine at all. And when agreements paid no fine at all. And when agreements paid no fine at all. And when it comes to individuals, in twothirds of it comes to individuals, in twothirds of it comes to individuals, in twothirds of cases, no employees were prosecuted. And cases, no employees were prosecuted. And cases, no employees were prosecuted. And to show you just how glaringly apparent to show you just how glaringly apparent to show you just how glaringly apparent this system shortcomings can be, we're this system shortcomings can be, we're this system shortcomings can be, we're going to focus on three companies. GM, going to focus on three companies. GM, going to focus on three companies. GM, HSBC, and Boeing. We actually talked HSBC, and Boeing. We actually talked HSBC, and Boeing. We actually talked about GM all the way back in our first about GM all the way back in our first about GM all the way back in our first season. But just in case I wasted my 
[8:45]
season. But just in case I wasted my season. But just in case I wasted my precious, let's call it youth shouting precious, let's call it youth shouting precious, let's call it youth shouting at you about things you don't remember, at you about things you don't remember, at you about things you don't remember, here is a quick refresher on what the here is a quick refresher on what the here is a quick refresher on what the company did wrong. Last year, GM began company did wrong. Last year, GM began company did wrong. Last year, GM began recalling 2 and a half million cars with recalling 2 and a half million cars with recalling 2 and a half million cars with ignition switches that could suddenly ignition switches that could suddenly ignition switches that could suddenly shut off the engine, cutting off the shut off the engine, cutting off the shut off the engine, cutting off the power to the airbags and disabling the power to the airbags and disabling the power to the airbags and disabling the power steering and power brakes, causing power steering and power brakes, causing power steering and power brakes, causing crashes. GM has since determined that crashes. GM has since determined that crashes. GM has since determined that the switches caused accidents that led the switches caused accidents that led the switches caused accidents that led to 124 deaths and 273 injuries. Yeah, it to 124 deaths and 273 injuries. Yeah, it to 124 deaths and 273 injuries. Yeah, it was a wild story. GM sold cars with 
[9:17]
was a wild story. GM sold cars with was a wild story. GM sold cars with faulty switches that could shut off the faulty switches that could shut off the faulty switches that could shut off the engine, steering, brakes, and airbags engine, steering, brakes, and airbags engine, steering, brakes, and airbags despite the fact that they are, and this despite the fact that they are, and this despite the fact that they are, and this is true, some of the key differences is true, some of the key differences is true, some of the key differences between something being an automobile or between something being an automobile or between something being an automobile or a metal coffin moving at 70 mph. And a metal coffin moving at 70 mph. And a metal coffin moving at 70 mph. And there was evidence the company knew there was evidence the company knew there was evidence the company knew about the problem. In 2008, they showed about the problem. In 2008, they showed about the problem. In 2008, they showed their employees a PowerPoint encouraging their employees a PowerPoint encouraging their employees a PowerPoint encouraging them to avoid words like problem, them to avoid words like problem, them to avoid words like problem, safety, and defect when writing about safety, and defect when writing about safety, and defect when writing about GM's cars and added as a fun joke that GM's cars and added as a fun joke that GM's cars and added as a fun joke that they should also probably stay away from they should also probably stay away from they should also probably stay away from terms like kavorinesesque, tomblike, 
[9:48]
terms like kavorinesesque, tomblike, terms like kavorinesesque, tomblike, maniacal, or rolling sarcophagus. maniacal, or rolling sarcophagus. maniacal, or rolling sarcophagus. And I kind of hope that that just And I kind of hope that that just And I kind of hope that that just inspired GM employees to use other inspired GM employees to use other inspired GM employees to use other options instead, like the Widow Maker, options instead, like the Widow Maker, options instead, like the Widow Maker, Chitty Chitty Smashbang, Final Chitty Chitty Smashbang, Final Chitty Chitty Smashbang, Final Destination, The Car, and the Lean Mean Destination, The Car, and the Lean Mean Destination, The Car, and the Lean Mean James Dean machine. GM reached a DPA James Dean machine. GM reached a DPA James Dean machine. GM reached a DPA with the government in 2015, which meant with the government in 2015, which meant with the government in 2015, which meant they didn't have to plead guilty, just they didn't have to plead guilty, just they didn't have to plead guilty, just agreed to a statement of facts about agreed to a statement of facts about agreed to a statement of facts about their misconduct. For instance, they their misconduct. For instance, they their misconduct. For instance, they admitted that by early 2012, they not admitted that by early 2012, they not admitted that by early 2012, they not only knew about the problem, they were 
[10:19]
only knew about the problem, they were only knew about the problem, they were aware of several fatal incidents that aware of several fatal incidents that aware of several fatal incidents that may have been caused by the defective may have been caused by the defective may have been caused by the defective switch. And while the law required GM to switch. And while the law required GM to switch. And while the law required GM to report such knowledge to the government report such knowledge to the government report such knowledge to the government within 5 days, it took them within 5 days, it took them within 5 days, it took them approximately 20 months, which fun fact approximately 20 months, which fun fact approximately 20 months, which fun fact is around the length of an elephant's is around the length of an elephant's is around the length of an elephant's gestational period. And if writing an gestational period. And if writing an gestational period. And if writing an email takes longer than making a email takes longer than making a email takes longer than making a elephant from scratch, there is clearly elephant from scratch, there is clearly elephant from scratch, there is clearly something else going on. Now, as part of something else going on. Now, as part of something else going on. Now, as part of GM's DPA, they did have to pay a $900 GM's DPA, they did have to pay a $900 GM's DPA, they did have to pay a $900 million fine. And Mary Bar, their then million fine. And Mary Bar, their then million fine. And Mary Bar, their then and current CEO, went to great lengths 
[10:51]
and current CEO, went to great lengths and current CEO, went to great lengths to argue that the deal was not letting to argue that the deal was not letting to argue that the deal was not letting them off easy. them off easy. them off easy. >> This is a tough agreement. It further >> This is a tough agreement. It further >> This is a tough agreement. It further highlights the mistakes that were made highlights the mistakes that were made highlights the mistakes that were made by certain people in GM and it imposes by certain people in GM and it imposes by certain people in GM and it imposes significant penalties and obligations. significant penalties and obligations. significant penalties and obligations. Okay, but I don't know how significant a Okay, but I don't know how significant a Okay, but I don't know how significant a $900 million fine was to a company whose $900 million fine was to a company whose $900 million fine was to a company whose profits were just under $10 billion that profits were just under $10 billion that profits were just under $10 billion that year. I'm not saying it's nothing, but year. I'm not saying it's nothing, but year. I'm not saying it's nothing, but 9% of one year's profits just doesn't 9% of one year's profits just doesn't 9% of one year's profits just doesn't seem enough for essentially marketing 
[11:21]
seem enough for essentially marketing seem enough for essentially marketing the automotive equivalent of the Titan the automotive equivalent of the Titan the automotive equivalent of the Titan submersible. submersible. submersible. Also, while she said mistakes were made Also, while she said mistakes were made Also, while she said mistakes were made by certain people at GM, notably, no by certain people at GM, notably, no by certain people at GM, notably, no individuals ended up facing charges for individuals ended up facing charges for individuals ended up facing charges for any part of this. And that's something any part of this. And that's something any part of this. And that's something extra glawing for people like Candace extra glawing for people like Candace extra glawing for people like Candace Anderson. She lost control of her car in Anderson. She lost control of her car in Anderson. She lost control of her car in a crash that killed her boyfriend. And a crash that killed her boyfriend. And a crash that killed her boyfriend. And when GM conducted an internal review of when GM conducted an internal review of when GM conducted an internal review of the accident in 2007, they ruled that the accident in 2007, they ruled that the accident in 2007, they ruled that their car was to blame. Unfortunately, their car was to blame. Unfortunately, their car was to blame. Unfortunately, they never told anyone that. Instead, they never told anyone that. Instead, they never told anyone that. Instead, allowing Candace to plead guilty to 
[11:53]
allowing Candace to plead guilty to allowing Candace to plead guilty to negligent homicide 5 months later. negligent homicide 5 months later. negligent homicide 5 months later. Thankfully, her conviction has since Thankfully, her conviction has since Thankfully, her conviction has since been overturned, but the way that she been overturned, but the way that she been overturned, but the way that she sees it, that's not nearly enough. sees it, that's not nearly enough. sees it, that's not nearly enough. There's someone within General Motors There's someone within General Motors There's someone within General Motors that should be held responsible. that should be held responsible. that should be held responsible. >> Are you saying that you think >> Are you saying that you think >> Are you saying that you think individuals at General Motors should individuals at General Motors should individuals at General Motors should stand trial? stand trial? stand trial? >> Yeah, I do. They didn't have a problem >> Yeah, I do. They didn't have a problem >> Yeah, I do. They didn't have a problem sitting by while I was charged. sitting by while I was charged. sitting by while I was charged. >> Yeah, I get that. If someone does >> Yeah, I get that. If someone does >> Yeah, I get that. If someone does something terrible to you, it is 
[12:24]
something terrible to you, it is something terrible to you, it is understandable to want them to get a understandable to want them to get a understandable to want them to get a taste of their own medicine. It's one of taste of their own medicine. It's one of taste of their own medicine. It's one of the many reasons why I personally love the many reasons why I personally love the many reasons why I personally love to see someone on a pigeon. Yeah, to see someone on a pigeon. Yeah, to see someone on a pigeon. Yeah, not so much fun when we do it to you, is not so much fun when we do it to you, is not so much fun when we do it to you, is it pigeons? it pigeons? it pigeons? And look, thankfully GM hasn't killed And look, thankfully GM hasn't killed And look, thankfully GM hasn't killed any more people with its cars since then any more people with its cars since then any more people with its cars since then as of taping. But other companies with as of taping. But other companies with as of taping. But other companies with DPAs have shown a much greater DPAs have shown a much greater DPAs have shown a much greater propensity for recidivism. And that propensity for recidivism. And that propensity for recidivism. And that brings us to our second example, HSBC. A brings us to our second example, HSBC. A brings us to our second example, HSBC. A few years back, it got in trouble for few years back, it got in trouble for few years back, it got in trouble for allowing Mexican cartels to launder at 
[12:54]
allowing Mexican cartels to launder at allowing Mexican cartels to launder at least $881 million in drug trafficking least $881 million in drug trafficking least $881 million in drug trafficking proceeds and facilitating approximately proceeds and facilitating approximately proceeds and facilitating approximately $660 million in transactions involving $660 million in transactions involving $660 million in transactions involving sanctioned regimes like Burma, Iran, sanctioned regimes like Burma, Iran, sanctioned regimes like Burma, Iran, Cuba, and Libya. Here is how bad it was. Cuba, and Libya. Here is how bad it was. Cuba, and Libya. Here is how bad it was. At one point, Mexican law enforcement At one point, Mexican law enforcement At one point, Mexican law enforcement recorded a cartel leader on a wiretap recorded a cartel leader on a wiretap recorded a cartel leader on a wiretap saying HSBC was the place to launder saying HSBC was the place to launder saying HSBC was the place to launder money. And the Sinaloa cartel deposited money. And the Sinaloa cartel deposited money. And the Sinaloa cartel deposited so much money in their bank that the so much money in their bank that the so much money in their bank that the cartel designed special cash boxes to cartel designed special cash boxes to cartel designed special cash boxes to fit HSBC's teller windows, which is fit HSBC's teller windows, which is fit HSBC's teller windows, which is surprisingly considerate in a way. After 
[13:25]
surprisingly considerate in a way. After surprisingly considerate in a way. After all, who hasn't been stuck in a teller all, who hasn't been stuck in a teller all, who hasn't been stuck in a teller line behind some guy trying to stuff a line behind some guy trying to stuff a line behind some guy trying to stuff a blood soaked duffel full of cash through blood soaked duffel full of cash through blood soaked duffel full of cash through the window? Finally, a cartel that the window? Finally, a cartel that the window? Finally, a cartel that thinks about other people's time. thinks about other people's time. thinks about other people's time. Now, in response, HSBC put together a Now, in response, HSBC put together a Now, in response, HSBC put together a new compliance department, but it wasn't new compliance department, but it wasn't new compliance department, but it wasn't exactly inspiring, as this man will tell exactly inspiring, as this man will tell exactly inspiring, as this man will tell you. His name is Everett Stern, and he you. His name is Everett Stern, and he you. His name is Everett Stern, and he once had a dream. Tell everyone about once had a dream. Tell everyone about once had a dream. Tell everyone about your dream, Everett. your dream, Everett. your dream, Everett. >> Sure. I mean, um I mean, my my my dream >> Sure. I mean, um I mean, my my my dream >> Sure. I mean, um I mean, my my my dream was to join um uh uh the um CIA. was to join um uh uh the um CIA. was to join um uh uh the um CIA. >> Okay, thanks, Everett. That's sounds 
[13:57]
>> Okay, thanks, Everett. That's sounds >> Okay, thanks, Everett. That's sounds like a really nice dream. Unfortunately, like a really nice dream. Unfortunately, like a really nice dream. Unfortunately, ever got rejected by the CIA, but he did ever got rejected by the CIA, but he did ever got rejected by the CIA, but he did get hired as a compliance officer at get hired as a compliance officer at get hired as a compliance officer at HSBC, which he was excited about until HSBC, which he was excited about until HSBC, which he was excited about until he got there. he got there. he got there. >> I remember like my first day on the job. >> I remember like my first day on the job. >> I remember like my first day on the job. It was It was a shopping center. I It It was It was a shopping center. I It It was It was a shopping center. I It wasn't like a bank building. I was wasn't like a bank building. I was wasn't like a bank building. I was expecting to show up at this bank expecting to show up at this bank expecting to show up at this bank building and I'm I'm in this suit. There building and I'm I'm in this suit. There building and I'm I'm in this suit. There were all these people like in jeans and were all these people like in jeans and were all these people like in jeans and t-shirts and I didn't understand what's t-shirts and I didn't understand what's t-shirts and I didn't understand what's going on. And when I walked in, there going on. And when I walked in, there going on. And when I walked in, there were all these empty cubicles and the 
[14:27]
were all these empty cubicles and the were all these empty cubicles and the walls were half painted and there were walls were half painted and there were walls were half painted and there were maybe 15 compliance officers in the maybe 15 compliance officers in the maybe 15 compliance officers in the whole department. Uh, at the time I whole department. Uh, at the time I whole department. Uh, at the time I thought I was like this they hired me thought I was like this they hired me thought I was like this they hired me because I was like this smart guy and I, because I was like this smart guy and I, because I was like this smart guy and I, you know, I had it all going and you know, I had it all going and you know, I had it all going and everything and no, they hired me because everything and no, they hired me because everything and no, they hired me because I was an idiot and I didn't know what I I was an idiot and I didn't know what I I was an idiot and I didn't know what I was doing. was doing. was doing. >> Yeah. As far as ever could see, HSBC was >> Yeah. As far as ever could see, HSBC was >> Yeah. As far as ever could see, HSBC was intentionally looking to hire idiots. intentionally looking to hire idiots. intentionally looking to hire idiots. And the only time that that is an And the only time that that is an And the only time that that is an acceptable hiring strategy is if you're acceptable hiring strategy is if you're acceptable hiring strategy is if you're casting a baby food commercial. We need casting a baby food commercial. We need casting a baby food commercial. We need to hire, you know, one of those tiny 
[14:57]
to hire, you know, one of those tiny to hire, you know, one of those tiny idiots who doesn't know what they're idiots who doesn't know what they're idiots who doesn't know what they're doing. Oh, a baby. Sorry, a baby. That's doing. Oh, a baby. Sorry, a baby. That's doing. Oh, a baby. Sorry, a baby. That's the word. We need to hire a baby. And the word. We need to hire a baby. And the word. We need to hire a baby. And while HSBC was going through the motions while HSBC was going through the motions while HSBC was going through the motions of compliance publicly, internally, they of compliance publicly, internally, they of compliance publicly, internally, they were going to egregious lengths to avoid were going to egregious lengths to avoid were going to egregious lengths to avoid it altogether. For example, the Treasury it altogether. For example, the Treasury it altogether. For example, the Treasury keeps a list of sanctioned organizations keeps a list of sanctioned organizations keeps a list of sanctioned organizations that banks aren't allowed to do business that banks aren't allowed to do business that banks aren't allowed to do business with. On that list is a company called with. On that list is a company called with. On that list is a company called Tajko, which has had ties to Hezbollah. Tajko, which has had ties to Hezbollah. Tajko, which has had ties to Hezbollah. HSBC system should have automatically HSBC system should have automatically HSBC system should have automatically flagged any transactions involving flagged any transactions involving flagged any transactions involving Tajko. And yet, even a self-described Tajko. And yet, even a self-described Tajko. And yet, even a self-described idiot who didn't know what he was doing 
[15:28]
idiot who didn't know what he was doing idiot who didn't know what he was doing could quickly see that the bank was could quickly see that the bank was could quickly see that the bank was processing thousands of dollars for processing thousands of dollars for processing thousands of dollars for them. And I'll let him describe how he them. And I'll let him describe how he them. And I'll let him describe how he discovered it and what he did next. discovered it and what he did next. discovered it and what he did next. >> I noticed they were putting little dots >> I noticed they were putting little dots >> I noticed they were putting little dots and dashes in the actual names in the and dashes in the actual names in the and dashes in the actual names in the wire filter. So for instance, if you had wire filter. So for instance, if you had wire filter. So for instance, if you had Tajiko that was sending money from Tajiko that was sending money from Tajiko that was sending money from Hezbollah to some other organization, Hezbollah to some other organization, Hezbollah to some other organization, instead of T AJCO instead of T AJCO instead of T AJCO in the that that's the normal name for in the that that's the normal name for in the that that's the normal name for it in the HSBC wire filter, it would be it in the HSBC wire filter, it would be it in the HSBC wire filter, it would be T AJ.co 
[15:58]
T AJ.co T AJ.co or T AJ-CO. or T AJ-CO. or T AJ-CO. And that's how they criminally And that's how they criminally And that's how they criminally manipulated the wire filter to allow manipulated the wire filter to allow manipulated the wire filter to allow moneyaundering for terrorists and drug moneyaundering for terrorists and drug moneyaundering for terrorists and drug cartels. This is why 3 weeks in I cartels. This is why 3 weeks in I cartels. This is why 3 weeks in I started passing information to the CIA. started passing information to the CIA. started passing information to the CIA. yeah you did, Em. yeah you yeah you did, Em. yeah you yeah you did, Em. yeah you did. That is great news for him and did. That is great news for him and did. That is great news for him and frankly terrible news for whoever frankly terrible news for whoever frankly terrible news for whoever thought it was a good idea to hire an thought it was a good idea to hire an thought it was a good idea to hire an aspiring CIA officer to oversee your 
[16:28]
aspiring CIA officer to oversee your aspiring CIA officer to oversee your extremely lazy attempts to launder money extremely lazy attempts to launder money extremely lazy attempts to launder money for criminals. And once the government for criminals. And once the government for criminals. And once the government started poking around within HSBC, they started poking around within HSBC, they started poking around within HSBC, they quickly found some pretty compelling quickly found some pretty compelling quickly found some pretty compelling evidence. Internal documents show HSBC evidence. Internal documents show HSBC evidence. Internal documents show HSBC executives knew exactly what they were executives knew exactly what they were executives knew exactly what they were doing. "We are allowing organized doing. "We are allowing organized doing. "We are allowing organized criminals to launder their money," wrote criminals to launder their money," wrote criminals to launder their money," wrote one executive. one executive. one executive. >> "Wow, it is hard to imagine how the >> "Wow, it is hard to imagine how the >> "Wow, it is hard to imagine how the evidence could get more damning than evidence could get more damning than evidence could get more damning than that, unless maybe the email signature that, unless maybe the email signature that, unless maybe the email signature included the phrase sent from my crime included the phrase sent from my crime included the phrase sent from my crime phone followed by the sh emoji." And 
[17:00]
phone followed by the sh emoji." And phone followed by the sh emoji." And yet, incredibly, the government brought yet, incredibly, the government brought yet, incredibly, the government brought no charges against individuals. The bank no charges against individuals. The bank no charges against individuals. The bank itself just got a DPA and the terms of itself just got a DPA and the terms of itself just got a DPA and the terms of it seems more than a little weak. For it seems more than a little weak. For it seems more than a little weak. For example, it agreed to pay a fine of example, it agreed to pay a fine of example, it agreed to pay a fine of almost $2 billion, which might sound almost $2 billion, which might sound almost $2 billion, which might sound like a lot until you remember they made like a lot until you remember they made like a lot until you remember they made over 13 billion in profits that year over 13 billion in profits that year over 13 billion in profits that year alone. And look, maybe the DOJ really alone. And look, maybe the DOJ really alone. And look, maybe the DOJ really thought that a hefty but entirely thought that a hefty but entirely thought that a hefty but entirely manageable fine would make HSBC change manageable fine would make HSBC change manageable fine would make HSBC change their ways. And the bank did agree to their ways. And the bank did agree to their ways. And the bank did agree to monitoring and apparently even issued monitoring and apparently even issued monitoring and apparently even issued their US-based staff certificates with 
[17:31]
their US-based staff certificates with their US-based staff certificates with little parrots on them reading, "I am a little parrots on them reading, "I am a little parrots on them reading, "I am a changed bird." But were they? Because changed bird." But were they? Because changed bird." But were they? Because even that monitoring program illustrates even that monitoring program illustrates even that monitoring program illustrates something immensely frustrating here something immensely frustrating here something immensely frustrating here because DPAs aren't criminal because DPAs aren't criminal because DPAs aren't criminal proceedings. Monitoring reports on proceedings. Monitoring reports on proceedings. Monitoring reports on whether or not companies are complying whether or not companies are complying whether or not companies are complying aren't required to be public records. aren't required to be public records. aren't required to be public records. So, we don't really know what HSBC did So, we don't really know what HSBC did So, we don't really know what HSBC did to clean up its act. But the glimpses we to clean up its act. But the glimpses we to clean up its act. But the glimpses we got during that period aren't great. As got during that period aren't great. As got during that period aren't great. As in the bank's own annual report, they in the bank's own annual report, they in the bank's own annual report, they openly admitted that their monitor openly admitted that their monitor openly admitted that their monitor expressed significant concerns about the 
[18:03]
expressed significant concerns about the expressed significant concerns about the pace of their progress and instances of pace of their progress and instances of pace of their progress and instances of potential financial crime. But despite potential financial crime. But despite potential financial crime. But despite that, their DPA expired as planned at that, their DPA expired as planned at that, their DPA expired as planned at the end of 2017 and the government the end of 2017 and the government the end of 2017 and the government dropped all charges against them. So dropped all charges against them. So dropped all charges against them. So they were in the clear until the very they were in the clear until the very they were in the clear until the very next month when this happened. HSBC is next month when this happened. HSBC is next month when this happened. HSBC is said to have agreed to pay $100 million said to have agreed to pay $100 million said to have agreed to pay $100 million to resolve a US Justice Department to resolve a US Justice Department to resolve a US Justice Department investigation into the rigging of investigation into the rigging of investigation into the rigging of currency rates. A source tells Bloomberg currency rates. A source tells Bloomberg currency rates. A source tells Bloomberg the deal includes a deferred prosecution the deal includes a deferred prosecution the deal includes a deferred prosecution agreement and a promise to help with the 
[18:34]
agreement and a promise to help with the agreement and a promise to help with the criminal case against former traders. criminal case against former traders. criminal case against former traders. >> Yeah, they were caught again and they >> Yeah, they were caught again and they >> Yeah, they were caught again and they got another DPA. That is ridiculous. At got another DPA. That is ridiculous. At got another DPA. That is ridiculous. At this point, it's not even a deferred this point, it's not even a deferred this point, it's not even a deferred prosecution agreement. It's more like prosecution agreement. It's more like prosecution agreement. It's more like prosecutorial edging. I've said it prosecutorial edging. I've said it prosecutorial edging. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Let the before and I'll say it again. Let the before and I'll say it again. Let the government come. government come. government come. And that is the thing here. DPAs and And that is the thing here. DPAs and And that is the thing here. DPAs and their associated fines have now become a their associated fines have now become a their associated fines have now become a routine cost of doing business, which is routine cost of doing business, which is routine cost of doing business, which is a real problem because the stakes can be a real problem because the stakes can be a real problem because the stakes can be incredibly high. Which brings us to our 
[19:04]
incredibly high. Which brings us to our incredibly high. Which brings us to our final company, Boeing. Last year, we did final company, Boeing. Last year, we did final company, Boeing. Last year, we did a whole segment about its fall from a whole segment about its fall from a whole segment about its fall from grace and discuss their infamous 737 Max grace and discuss their infamous 737 Max grace and discuss their infamous 737 Max planes, which have been involved in two planes, which have been involved in two planes, which have been involved in two devastating crashes that killed 346 devastating crashes that killed 346 devastating crashes that killed 346 people. I won't recap the whole thing, people. I won't recap the whole thing, people. I won't recap the whole thing, but suffice to say, there were flaws but suffice to say, there were flaws but suffice to say, there were flaws with the aircraft's design, and they with the aircraft's design, and they with the aircraft's design, and they weren't exactly a secret within the weren't exactly a secret within the weren't exactly a secret within the company. company. company. >> The 737 Max became Boeing's bestselling >> The 737 Max became Boeing's bestselling >> The 737 Max became Boeing's bestselling jet ever. But in 2017, just as the jet ever. But in 2017, just as the jet ever. But in 2017, just as the planes were taken to the skies planes were taken to the skies planes were taken to the skies worldwide, a Boeing employee sent this 
[19:34]
worldwide, a Boeing employee sent this worldwide, a Boeing employee sent this message to a colleague. This airplane is message to a colleague. This airplane is message to a colleague. This airplane is designed by clowns, who in turn are designed by clowns, who in turn are designed by clowns, who in turn are supervised by monkeys. Other employees supervised by monkeys. Other employees supervised by monkeys. Other employees calling the design piss poor and calling the design piss poor and calling the design piss poor and comparing the fixes to patching a leaky comparing the fixes to patching a leaky comparing the fixes to patching a leaky boat. In October 2018, Lionaire flight boat. In October 2018, Lionaire flight boat. In October 2018, Lionaire flight 610 737 Max crashed, killing 189 people 610 737 Max crashed, killing 189 people 610 737 Max crashed, killing 189 people on board. In May of that year, as Boeing on board. In May of that year, as Boeing on board. In May of that year, as Boeing was pursuing FAA approval for the Max was pursuing FAA approval for the Max was pursuing FAA approval for the Max flight simulator, one test pilot wrote, flight simulator, one test pilot wrote, flight simulator, one test pilot wrote, "I'll be shocked if the FAA approves 
[20:04]
"I'll be shocked if the FAA approves "I'll be shocked if the FAA approves this turd." Yeah, it seems like the only this turd." Yeah, it seems like the only this turd." Yeah, it seems like the only real disagreement within Boeing was on real disagreement within Boeing was on real disagreement within Boeing was on what hilarious language to use when what hilarious language to use when what hilarious language to use when describing their catastrophic products. describing their catastrophic products. describing their catastrophic products. Okay, so we got piss poor, leaky boat, Okay, so we got piss poor, leaky boat, Okay, so we got piss poor, leaky boat, turd. You know what? Can someone get GM turd. You know what? Can someone get GM turd. You know what? Can someone get GM on the phone and see if we can borrow on the phone and see if we can borrow on the phone and see if we can borrow Kavorianesque from them? I kind of like Kavorianesque from them? I kind of like Kavorianesque from them? I kind of like the sound of that. Following those the sound of that. Following those the sound of that. Following those crashes, Boeing entered into a DPA in crashes, Boeing entered into a DPA in crashes, Boeing entered into a DPA in 2021, admitting to misrepresentations to 2021, admitting to misrepresentations to 2021, admitting to misrepresentations to regulators about a key software feature regulators about a key software feature regulators about a key software feature tied to the crashes. should also agree tied to the crashes. should also agree tied to the crashes. should also agree to pay a fine and show 3 years of good 
[20:35]
to pay a fine and show 3 years of good to pay a fine and show 3 years of good behavior in exchange for avoiding behavior in exchange for avoiding behavior in exchange for avoiding prosecution. It's agreement that many prosecution. It's agreement that many prosecution. It's agreement that many felt was toothless, especially given felt was toothless, especially given felt was toothless, especially given that one judge involved with the case that one judge involved with the case that one judge involved with the case later called what Boeing had done the later called what Boeing had done the later called what Boeing had done the deadliest corporate crime in US history. deadliest corporate crime in US history. deadliest corporate crime in US history. And following that DPA, things didn't And following that DPA, things didn't And following that DPA, things didn't seem to improve much at Boeing. Because seem to improve much at Boeing. Because seem to improve much at Boeing. Because by the start of 2024, just 2 days before by the start of 2024, just 2 days before by the start of 2024, just 2 days before their three-year probationary period was their three-year probationary period was their three-year probationary period was set to end, this happened. What was set to end, this happened. What was set to end, this happened. What was supposed to be a short trip from supposed to be a short trip from supposed to be a short trip from Portland to Ontario, California for Portland to Ontario, California for Portland to Ontario, California for Garrett Cunningham turned out to be one 
[21:05]
Garrett Cunningham turned out to be one Garrett Cunningham turned out to be one of the most frightening experiences of of the most frightening experiences of of the most frightening experiences of his life. his life. his life. >> A gush of of air. I look to my left and >> A gush of of air. I look to my left and >> A gush of of air. I look to my left and part of the plane is gone. part of the plane is gone. part of the plane is gone. >> Yeah, not ideal. It It is never good >> Yeah, not ideal. It It is never good >> Yeah, not ideal. It It is never good when you feel a sudden gush of air on a when you feel a sudden gush of air on a when you feel a sudden gush of air on a flight. Even if the plane hasn't just flight. Even if the plane hasn't just flight. Even if the plane hasn't just cracked open, odds are it's going to be cracked open, odds are it's going to be cracked open, odds are it's going to be the toddler in the seat behind you the toddler in the seat behind you the toddler in the seat behind you breathing directly on your face or your breathing directly on your face or your breathing directly on your face or your seatmate cracking the lid on a tub of seatmate cracking the lid on a tub of seatmate cracking the lid on a tub of tuna salad they brought with them. There tuna salad they brought with them. There tuna salad they brought with them. There is no surprise whoosh of air that brings is no surprise whoosh of air that brings is no surprise whoosh of air that brings good tidings in a metal sky can. But in good tidings in a metal sky can. But in good tidings in a metal sky can. But in this case, yeah, a door plug blew off a 
[21:37]
this case, yeah, a door plug blew off a this case, yeah, a door plug blew off a 737 Max mid-flight. An incident that was 737 Max mid-flight. An incident that was 737 Max mid-flight. An incident that was a clear indication, according to the a clear indication, according to the a clear indication, according to the DOJ, Boeing had violated its initial DOJ, Boeing had violated its initial DOJ, Boeing had violated its initial DPA. But instead of then prosecuting DPA. But instead of then prosecuting DPA. But instead of then prosecuting them, the DOJ offered them a plea deal them, the DOJ offered them a plea deal them, the DOJ offered them a plea deal which just required them to pay another which just required them to pay another which just required them to pay another fine, boost their spending on safety and fine, boost their spending on safety and fine, boost their spending on safety and compliance programs, and report to an compliance programs, and report to an compliance programs, and report to an independent monitor overseeing their independent monitor overseeing their independent monitor overseeing their compliance. And this understandably compliance. And this understandably compliance. And this understandably angered some of the family members of angered some of the family members of angered some of the family members of crash victims. Here is the mother of one crash victims. Here is the mother of one crash victims. Here is the mother of one of them summing it all up. of them summing it all up. of them summing it all up. >> It seems that beginning of January, just 
[22:08]
>> It seems that beginning of January, just >> It seems that beginning of January, just two days before the expiration of the two days before the expiration of the two days before the expiration of the DPA, oops, I did it again. This is boy DPA, oops, I did it again. This is boy DPA, oops, I did it again. This is boy in song. Oops, I did it again. in song. Oops, I did it again. in song. Oops, I did it again. >> Yeah, that woman's outrage is completely >> Yeah, that woman's outrage is completely >> Yeah, that woman's outrage is completely justified. And it's honestly smart to justified. And it's honestly smart to justified. And it's honestly smart to site the musical cannon of Britney site the musical cannon of Britney site the musical cannon of Britney Spears given that Boeing essentially Spears given that Boeing essentially Spears given that Boeing essentially just pleaded not that innocent. just pleaded not that innocent. just pleaded not that innocent. [Applause] [Applause] [Applause] Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> But it gets worse because this year the >> But it gets worse because this year the >> But it gets worse because this year the Trump administration downgraded Boeing's 
[22:38]
Trump administration downgraded Boeing's Trump administration downgraded Boeing's punishment to a nonprosecution punishment to a nonprosecution punishment to a nonprosecution agreement, removing even the agreement, removing even the agreement, removing even the hypothetical chance of prosecuting them hypothetical chance of prosecuting them hypothetical chance of prosecuting them over this in the future, which is just over this in the future, which is just over this in the future, which is just completely infuriating. Unless, I guess, completely infuriating. Unless, I guess, completely infuriating. Unless, I guess, you're this guy on CNBC who chose to you're this guy on CNBC who chose to you're this guy on CNBC who chose to announce the news like this. announce the news like this. announce the news like this. >> The DOJ says it expects to file the >> The DOJ says it expects to file the >> The DOJ says it expects to file the written agreement with Boeing by the end written agreement with Boeing by the end written agreement with Boeing by the end of the week. Should be viewed as good of the week. Should be viewed as good of the week. Should be viewed as good news. I wouldn't be surprised to see the news. I wouldn't be surprised to see the news. I wouldn't be surprised to see the stock move higher. Yeah, great news stock move higher. Yeah, great news stock move higher. Yeah, great news everyone. The stock should move higher. everyone. The stock should move higher. everyone. The stock should move higher. So, I guess that's at least one thing So, I guess that's at least one thing So, I guess that's at least one thing that Boeing can keep in the air. that Boeing can keep in the air. that Boeing can keep in the air. But, but even if that is good news for 
[23:10]
But, but even if that is good news for But, but even if that is good news for stockholders, it's clearly not great for stockholders, it's clearly not great for stockholders, it's clearly not great for anyone else. Because while it means that anyone else. Because while it means that anyone else. Because while it means that Boeing does have to pay out an Boeing does have to pay out an Boeing does have to pay out an additional $444 million into a crash additional $444 million into a crash additional $444 million into a crash victim's fund, they also avoid being victim's fund, they also avoid being victim's fund, they also avoid being branded a convicted felon and will no branded a convicted felon and will no branded a convicted felon and will no longer face oversight by an independent longer face oversight by an independent longer face oversight by an independent monitor, but instead will hire a monitor, but instead will hire a monitor, but instead will hire a compliance consultant. As one consumer compliance consultant. As one consumer compliance consultant. As one consumer rights advocate puts it, this deal isn't rights advocate puts it, this deal isn't rights advocate puts it, this deal isn't even a slap on the wrist. It's barely a even a slap on the wrist. It's barely a even a slap on the wrist. It's barely a feather on the wrist. Look, clearly when feather on the wrist. Look, clearly when feather on the wrist. Look, clearly when it comes to corporate accountability, we it comes to corporate accountability, we it comes to corporate accountability, we have a problem here. Because a company have a problem here. Because a company have a problem here. Because a company engages in flagrant misbehavior, even 
[23:41]
engages in flagrant misbehavior, even engages in flagrant misbehavior, even putting evidence of it in writing, putting evidence of it in writing, putting evidence of it in writing, people get hurt. They're caught people get hurt. They're caught people get hurt. They're caught red-handed. The government finds them red-handed. The government finds them red-handed. The government finds them and says, "You better not do that and says, "You better not do that and says, "You better not do that again." Then they do, and the whole again." Then they do, and the whole again." Then they do, and the whole cycle restarts. This is not sustainable. cycle restarts. This is not sustainable. cycle restarts. This is not sustainable. And unfortunately, I wouldn't expect any And unfortunately, I wouldn't expect any And unfortunately, I wouldn't expect any of that to change for at least say three of that to change for at least say three of that to change for at least say three and a half years. But but it is worth and a half years. But but it is worth and a half years. But but it is worth asking for a hypothetical future when we asking for a hypothetical future when we asking for a hypothetical future when we have a government that isn't run by a have a government that isn't run by a have a government that isn't run by a procorruption felon. What could we be procorruption felon. What could we be procorruption felon. What could we be doing better to hold corporations doing better to hold corporations doing better to hold corporations accountable? Well, we could make DPAs accountable? Well, we could make DPAs accountable? Well, we could make DPAs more of a deterrent by making the fines 
[24:12]
more of a deterrent by making the fines more of a deterrent by making the fines much more serious and prosecuting much more serious and prosecuting much more serious and prosecuting executives a lot more often. We could executives a lot more often. We could executives a lot more often. We could also bring both DPAs and NPAs into the also bring both DPAs and NPAs into the also bring both DPAs and NPAs into the official legal system so that their official legal system so that their official legal system so that their monitoring would be more transparent and monitoring would be more transparent and monitoring would be more transparent and companies would build up records of companies would build up records of companies would build up records of misconduct instead of constantly getting misconduct instead of constantly getting misconduct instead of constantly getting to wipe their slate clean. But the hard to wipe their slate clean. But the hard to wipe their slate clean. But the hard truth here is if we want more truth here is if we want more truth here is if we want more accountability, the government is going accountability, the government is going accountability, the government is going to have to show more willingness to to have to show more willingness to to have to show more willingness to prosecute repeat offenders, even if it prosecute repeat offenders, even if it prosecute repeat offenders, even if it affects a large company's ability to do affects a large company's ability to do affects a large company's ability to do business, which really doesn't seem too business, which really doesn't seem too business, which really doesn't seem too much to us because you've seen tonight 
[24:44]
much to us because you've seen tonight much to us because you've seen tonight just how much damage companies can do just how much damage companies can do just how much damage companies can do when they operate unchecked. And right when they operate unchecked. And right when they operate unchecked. And right now we have a system where essentially now we have a system where essentially now we have a system where essentially corporations can with very limited corporations can with very limited corporations can with very limited resistance sell cars with a surprise off resistance sell cars with a surprise off resistance sell cars with a surprise off button operate as a haven for blood button operate as a haven for blood button operate as a haven for blood money and build planes that unbuild money and build planes that unbuild money and build planes that unbuild themselves in the sky. And I'd argue themselves in the sky. And I'd argue themselves in the sky. And I'd argue that to not make significant changes to that to not make significant changes to that to not make significant changes to a system like that would be, if I may a system like that would be, if I may a system like that would be, if I may quote GM's most cursed PowerPoint of all quote GM's most cursed PowerPoint of all quote GM's most cursed PowerPoint of all time, maniacal.