Although its namesake John Pierpoint Morgan owned less than 20% of J.P. Morgan & Co. he certainly understood the business model passed on to him by the company's true ownerMayer Amschel Rothschild.
That same model, steeped in fraud and soaked in blood money, is still at work today. Mayor Rothschild for whom John Pierpoint Morgan fronted in America, made his nut by embezzlement of the wealthiest monarch and all of Germany at the time, Prince William of Hesse-Kassel.
The early fortunes of the Rothschild family were made through a conjunction of financial intelligence and the wealth of Prince William. In 1785 the Landgrave of Hesse-Kassel died, leaving his immense wealth (largely gained through the loan of Hessian mercenaries,not least to Great Britain during the American Revolution) to the young Prince William. During the Napoleonic wars the Prince saw necessary to have his fortune hidden from Napoleon by using his long standing Jewish friend's home in Frankfurt. This money then saw its way through to Nathan Mayer, (N.M.) in London, where it helped fund the British movements through Portugal and Spain. The interest made from this venture was reaped by the budding Jewish bankers, who used it to swiftly develop their fortune and prestige in Europe and Britain. It was not long before their riches outweighed that of their benefactor, the Prince William of Hesse-Kassel.Actually Rothschild stole the money from the Prince and lent it out to all sides of waring factions. It was only after getting caught that Rothschild repaid the money he was lent, but he managed to keep the gains. See how that works, it's theft until your caught, then it becomes just an interest free loan. Where can you get one of those.
So well did Morgan absorb the concept that 222 years latter the same principal is still at work. In case you think that this is a case of that was then and this is now, think again.
The CFTC order imposes a $300,000 civil monetary penalty on JPMF. The order also requires JPMF to implement enhanced procedures to assure adherence to rules governing segregation of customer funds.
In 2007, JPMF maintained accounts for customer funds (segregated accounts) and kept its own funds in separate accounts. During this time, JPMF processed transactions related to the delivery of Treasury notes that resulted in JPMF’s segregated accounts being insufficiently funded by approximately $750 million. That is, JPMF drew upon customer segregated funds beyond its actual interest, which resulted in customer funds being commingled with JPMF’s funds.That is, JPMF drew upon customer segregated funds beyond its actual interest, which resulted in customer funds being commingled with JPMF’s funds.
That is embezzlement; where are the indictments?
Well don't look for the indictments anytime soon.
On June 1, Morgan failed to correctly tally the amount of Treasuries that should have been transferred to its customer accounts. On June 4, it caught the error -- three hours later than regulations required -- but did not report it to the CFTC until June 6, also contrary to the rules.So JP Morgan takes a $300,000 fine on the free use of $750 million for six days, what did they do with the money?
No one is saying fraud was involved, but rather it appears a bookkeeping error on a busy day led to the problem.No one can say fraud was or was not involved until they answer that question. Why is no one including the CFTC asking it. Given the current environment the question certainly seems to be a discrete one, although answer most likely isn't, which is probably why it's not being asked.