00:00:00
Our
00:00:03
[Music]
00:00:07
main story tonight concerns crime. Once
00:00:09
again, voted number one by Reasons to
00:00:11
Tiptoe magazine. Specifically, we're
00:00:13
going to talk about corporate crime,
00:00:14
something our current president is
00:00:16
famously not that concerned about. Not
00:00:18
only was he convicted on 34 counts of
00:00:20
falsifying business records, but long
00:00:22
before he was president, CNBC ran a
00:00:24
segment about a law banning American
00:00:26
companies from bribing foreign
00:00:27
governments. or not. Let this
00:00:29
anti-corruption activist pick up the
00:00:30
story from there.
00:00:34
I was asked to come on CNBC and give the
00:00:36
anti-corruption
00:00:38
argument. And I remember laughing at the
00:00:39
time saying, "Well, if is there somebody
00:00:41
that you found who's willing to give the
00:00:42
pro-corruption argument?"
00:00:44
Now, every other country goes into these
00:00:46
places and they do what they have to do.
00:00:48
Sad part, every other country in the
00:00:50
world is doing it. We're not allowed to.
00:00:53
So, it puts us at a huge disadvantage.
00:00:55
Yeah, they clearly got the right guy
00:00:56
there.
00:00:58
I can only assume the producer at CNBC
00:01:00
said to their assistant, "We need
00:01:01
someone willing to give the
00:01:02
pro-corruption argument. Who's the most
00:01:04
unethical person you can think of?" To
00:01:05
which they replied, "Easy, the
00:01:07
Hamburglar." To which the producer said,
00:01:09
"No, wait, what? No, like a real
00:01:10
person." To which they said, "Wait, the
00:01:11
hamburger is not real." To which the
00:01:13
producer said, "Uh, no, he's a fictional
00:01:14
character." To which the assistant
00:01:16
replied, "Well, there goes that dream."
00:01:18
To which the producer said, "What
00:01:20
dream?" To which they said, "Of marrying
00:01:22
the hamburger." To which the producer
00:01:23
said, "I'm sorry, what?" To which the
00:01:24
assistant said, "Let's not talk about
00:01:25
it. How about we get Donald Trump? To
00:01:27
which the producer said, "Oh, that is a
00:01:29
good idea. Are you crying?" To which
00:01:31
they said, "Yeah, sorry. This hamburger
00:01:33
news is just hitting me pretty hard." To
00:01:34
which the producer said, "Did you really
00:01:36
have a crush on a cartoon beef thief?"
00:01:38
To which they replied, "The heart wants
00:01:41
what it wants before storming off to go
00:01:43
cry in the bathroom." Anyway, the point
00:01:46
is, of course, they got Donald Trump to
00:01:48
defend corruption on live TV. And since
00:01:50
taking office, his administration's
00:01:52
halted or dropped more than 100
00:01:54
enforcement actions against corporate
00:01:56
misconduct. And he even issued the first
00:01:58
ever pardon of a corporation, pardoning
00:02:00
this cryptocurrency exchange, which have
00:02:02
been sentenced to a $100 million fine
00:02:04
for violating an anti-moneylaundering
00:02:06
law. It is frankly no wonder experts
00:02:08
have called this moment the ripest
00:02:09
environment for corruption by public
00:02:11
officials and business executives in a
00:02:14
generation. Though to be fair, it's not
00:02:16
like the environment was exactly unripe
00:02:19
before Trump took office. Republican and
00:02:21
Democratic administrations have both
00:02:23
taken a pretty lax approach to corporate
00:02:25
crime for a while now. You might have
00:02:26
noticed stories about corporate
00:02:29
malfeasants rarely end with executives
00:02:31
going to jail or the companies getting
00:02:33
shut down. And tonight's story is going
00:02:34
to focus on a key reason for that.
00:02:38
Deferred prosecution agreements or DPAs.
00:02:39
They're basically an outofc court
00:02:41
settlement for companies to avoid being
00:02:43
prosecuted. Essentially, the government
00:02:44
will come to a company and say, "Hi,
00:02:47
company government here. You did a crime
00:02:49
and we have enough evidence to prosecute
00:02:52
you." But instead of then doing that,
00:02:53
they strike a deal where if the company
00:02:55
behaves itself for a certain amount of
00:02:57
time, the criminal charges eventually
00:02:59
disappear. Sometimes they'll go with an
00:03:01
even weaker option, a nonprosecution
00:03:03
agreement or NPA, which doesn't even
00:03:05
have to be filed in court. Either way,
00:03:07
they're terms that tend to slide past
00:03:10
you whenever you hear them on the news.
00:03:11
The Justice Department announcing a
00:03:14
deferred prosecution agreement with Teva
00:03:14
Pharmaceuticals.
00:03:16
First Energy entered into what's called
00:03:18
a deferred prosecution agreement.
00:03:20
McKenzie has also entered into a
00:03:22
deferred prosecution agreement. Uber has
00:03:24
entered into a nonprosecution agreement
00:03:27
by the Swiss close to finalizing that
00:03:28
deferred prosecution agreement.
00:03:30
What's known as a deferred prosecution
00:03:30
agreement?
00:03:32
Deferred prosecution agreement.
00:03:34
Deferred prosecution agreement. Every
00:03:36
bank on Wall Street has a deferred
00:03:38
prosecution or an NPA. Every bank has
00:03:41
more than one, most likely.
00:03:44
It's true. AIG has two NPAs and a DPA.
00:03:47
Barclays has a DPA and an NPA. Credit
00:03:49
Swiss has a DPA. JP Morgan has an NPA
00:03:52
and a DPA. Lloyds has two DPAs. The
00:03:53
Royal Bank of Scotland has a DPA.
00:03:56
Wakovia has a DPA and an NPA. And UBS
00:03:59
has a DPA and two NPAs. And just so you
00:04:01
know, when I say a sentence like UBS has
00:04:06
a DPA and two NPAs, I do hear myself.
00:04:08
I'm fully aware that one day this show
00:04:10
will just be me reading one long acronym
00:04:12
for 40 minutes. We'll have achieved our
00:04:14
perfect form and on that day I'll
00:04:16
finally be allowed to die. But the point
00:04:19
is, these agreements are absolutely
00:04:21
everywhere. Honestly, the only things
00:04:23
more ubiquitous than DPAs on Wall Street
00:04:25
are fleece vests and undiagnosed
00:04:27
sociopaths.
00:04:29
Unfortunately, as you're about to see,
00:04:31
DPAs don't really do much. In fact,
00:04:33
sometimes companies that have done
00:04:36
massive harm have used them to literally
00:04:37
get away with murder. So, given that,
00:04:40
tonight, let's talk about deferred
00:04:41
prosecution agreements, where they came
00:04:43
from, how ineffective they can be, and a
00:04:45
few amazing examples of what they can
00:04:47
look like in practice. Let's start with
00:04:49
the fact that DPAs were never actually
00:04:51
intended to be used on corporations. The
00:04:54
concept grew out of a 1974 law that was
00:04:55
meant to help firsttime and juvenile
00:04:58
non-violent offenders avoid prosecution
00:05:00
so they could focus on rehabilitation.
00:05:03
But that is not how we use them today.
00:05:05
And you can trace the explosion of
00:05:07
corporate DPAs back to one of the most
00:05:09
famous times a large company was
00:05:11
prosecuted in this country, Arthur
00:05:13
Anderson. It was the accounting firm for
00:05:15
Enron whose name is now synonymous with
00:05:18
accounting fraud. Very basically with
00:05:21
the help of Anderson, Enron completely
00:05:23
invented future earnings for itself. And
00:05:24
when the government tried to
00:05:26
investigate, Anderson undertook a
00:05:28
massive document purge during which they
00:05:30
deleted around 30,000 computer files and
00:05:32
emails and at one point shredded more
00:05:34
documents in 3 days than they usually
00:05:36
destroyed in a year. something that
00:05:39
became so famous it was even parodyied
00:05:42
in a Heineken commercial where the
00:05:44
documents became snowflakes and the
00:05:46
tagline was to all those who weren't
00:05:49
naughty this year happy holidays
00:05:52
and just think how remarkable that is. A
00:05:54
beer company thought to themselves, you
00:05:56
know, we could just show off our crisp,
00:05:58
refreshing product in this commercial,
00:06:00
but instead let's give people what they
00:06:02
really want this Christmas and say
00:06:04
you to an accounting firm.
00:06:07
But the thing is,
00:06:08
the Justice Department actually got a
00:06:10
lot of blowback for prosecuting Anderson
00:06:12
because at the time it was a massive
00:06:15
firm with 28,000 employees, many of whom
00:06:18
felt like they'd done nothing wrong.
00:06:20
I am Anderson. I am Anderson.
00:06:23
After weeks of suffering in silence,
00:06:25
Anderson workers have found their voice.
00:06:28
Fight. Stand tall. Don't give up. By the
00:06:30
grace of God, we're going to win cuz
00:06:33
we're Anderson.
00:06:35
Everybody you see out here is worried
00:06:36
about their job right now.
00:06:38
We're all being penalized for something
00:06:41
that we didn't have anything to do with.
00:06:44
Yeah. Arthur Anderson's employees felt a
00:06:45
range of emotions from resentment to
00:06:47
anxiety to a level of unbridled
00:06:50
exuberance. Best described as Price is
00:06:51
Right contestant who just won a Honda
00:06:54
Civic. And they were right to be
00:06:56
concerned. Anderson being convicted of a
00:06:57
felony meant they lost their accounting
00:07:00
license which for an accounting firm is
00:07:02
generally not great for business. The
00:07:04
company eventually folded. Thousands of
00:07:06
people lost their jobs and many like
00:07:08
this Anderson partner placed the blame
00:07:10
squarely on the government.
00:07:12
In the history of the world of business,
00:07:14
this will come out in my judgment as the
00:07:17
largest act of corporate murder ever.
00:07:20
Okay, that is a wild overstatement
00:07:21
though because what happened to Anderson
00:07:23
is a lot more complicated than that. The
00:07:26
company had started shedding clients
00:07:28
long before their conviction and the SEC
00:07:30
was already investigating them. So the
00:07:32
truth is Anderson was likely heading out
00:07:34
of business anyway, saying this
00:07:36
prosecution is what doomed Anderson is
00:07:38
like saying that the ground is what
00:07:41
doomed the Hindenburg. Sure, it might
00:07:42
have been the final issue it
00:07:45
encountered, but things weren't exactly
00:07:48
smooth sailing before then.
00:07:50
But after Anderson, prosecutors became
00:07:52
very reluctant to risk putting a company
00:07:55
out of business. And that is when DPAs
00:07:57
became popular. In the decade prior to
00:07:59
Anderson's collapse, DPAs and NPAs had
00:08:02
been used just 18 times. But in the 14
00:08:04
years following, the DOJ entered into
00:08:06
419
00:08:08
such settlements. And the argument for
00:08:10
DPAs is that they prevent innocent
00:08:13
employees from getting hurt, dissuade
00:08:15
future wrongdoing, and still allow the
00:08:18
DOJ to go after individuals. But there
00:08:20
are problems with literally all that.
00:08:22
For starters, nearly half of those
00:08:23
getting deferred and non-prosecution
00:08:26
agreements paid no fine at all. And when
00:08:28
it comes to individuals, in twothirds of
00:08:31
cases, no employees were prosecuted. And
00:08:33
to show you just how glaringly apparent
00:08:35
this system shortcomings can be, we're
00:08:37
going to focus on three companies. GM,
00:08:40
HSBC, and Boeing. We actually talked
00:08:42
about GM all the way back in our first
00:08:45
season. But just in case I wasted my
00:08:48
precious, let's call it youth shouting
00:08:50
at you about things you don't remember,
00:08:52
here is a quick refresher on what the
00:08:54
company did wrong. Last year, GM began
00:08:57
recalling 2 and a half million cars with
00:08:59
ignition switches that could suddenly
00:09:00
shut off the engine, cutting off the
00:09:02
power to the airbags and disabling the
00:09:05
power steering and power brakes, causing
00:09:07
crashes. GM has since determined that
00:09:09
the switches caused accidents that led
00:09:13
to 124 deaths and 273 injuries. Yeah, it
00:09:17
was a wild story. GM sold cars with
00:09:19
faulty switches that could shut off the
00:09:22
engine, steering, brakes, and airbags
00:09:23
despite the fact that they are, and this
00:09:25
is true, some of the key differences
00:09:27
between something being an automobile or
00:09:30
a metal coffin moving at 70 mph. And
00:09:32
there was evidence the company knew
00:09:34
about the problem. In 2008, they showed
00:09:36
their employees a PowerPoint encouraging
00:09:38
them to avoid words like problem,
00:09:41
safety, and defect when writing about
00:09:43
GM's cars and added as a fun joke that
00:09:45
they should also probably stay away from
00:09:48
terms like kavorinesesque, tomblike,
00:09:51
maniacal, or rolling sarcophagus.
00:09:53
And I kind of hope that that just
00:09:55
inspired GM employees to use other
00:09:58
options instead, like the Widow Maker,
00:10:00
Chitty Chitty Smashbang, Final
00:10:03
Destination, The Car, and the Lean Mean
00:10:06
James Dean machine. GM reached a DPA
00:10:08
with the government in 2015, which meant
00:10:11
they didn't have to plead guilty, just
00:10:13
agreed to a statement of facts about
00:10:14
their misconduct. For instance, they
00:10:17
admitted that by early 2012, they not
00:10:19
only knew about the problem, they were
00:10:21
aware of several fatal incidents that
00:10:23
may have been caused by the defective
00:10:24
switch. And while the law required GM to
00:10:26
report such knowledge to the government
00:10:28
within 5 days, it took them
00:10:31
approximately 20 months, which fun fact
00:10:32
is around the length of an elephant's
00:10:35
gestational period. And if writing an
00:10:38
email takes longer than making a
00:10:41
elephant from scratch, there is clearly
00:10:44
something else going on. Now, as part of
00:10:46
GM's DPA, they did have to pay a $900
00:10:48
million fine. And Mary Bar, their then
00:10:51
and current CEO, went to great lengths
00:10:53
to argue that the deal was not letting
00:10:55
them off easy.
00:10:58
This is a tough agreement. It further
00:11:00
highlights the mistakes that were made
00:11:04
by certain people in GM and it imposes
00:11:07
significant penalties and obligations.
00:11:09
Okay, but I don't know how significant a
00:11:12
$900 million fine was to a company whose
00:11:14
profits were just under $10 billion that
00:11:17
year. I'm not saying it's nothing, but
00:11:20
9% of one year's profits just doesn't
00:11:21
seem enough for essentially marketing
00:11:23
the automotive equivalent of the Titan
00:11:25
submersible.
00:11:27
Also, while she said mistakes were made
00:11:30
by certain people at GM, notably, no
00:11:33
individuals ended up facing charges for
00:11:35
any part of this. And that's something
00:11:37
extra glawing for people like Candace
00:11:39
Anderson. She lost control of her car in
00:11:40
a crash that killed her boyfriend. And
00:11:43
when GM conducted an internal review of
00:11:45
the accident in 2007, they ruled that
00:11:48
their car was to blame. Unfortunately,
00:11:50
they never told anyone that. Instead,
00:11:53
allowing Candace to plead guilty to
00:11:56
negligent homicide 5 months later.
00:11:57
Thankfully, her conviction has since
00:11:58
been overturned, but the way that she
00:12:01
sees it, that's not nearly enough.
00:12:04
There's someone within General Motors
00:12:07
that should be held responsible.
00:12:08
Are you saying that you think
00:12:10
individuals at General Motors should
00:12:12
stand trial?
00:12:16
Yeah, I do. They didn't have a problem
00:12:19
sitting by while I was charged.
00:12:22
Yeah, I get that. If someone does
00:12:24
something terrible to you, it is
00:12:26
understandable to want them to get a
00:12:27
taste of their own medicine. It's one of
00:12:29
the many reasons why I personally love
00:12:31
to see someone on a pigeon. Yeah,
00:12:34
not so much fun when we do it to you, is
00:12:36
it pigeons?
00:12:39
And look, thankfully GM hasn't killed
00:12:41
any more people with its cars since then
00:12:44
as of taping. But other companies with
00:12:46
DPAs have shown a much greater
00:12:48
propensity for recidivism. And that
00:12:50
brings us to our second example, HSBC. A
00:12:52
few years back, it got in trouble for
00:12:54
allowing Mexican cartels to launder at
00:12:56
least $881 million in drug trafficking
00:12:59
proceeds and facilitating approximately
00:13:01
$660 million in transactions involving
00:13:03
sanctioned regimes like Burma, Iran,
00:13:06
Cuba, and Libya. Here is how bad it was.
00:13:08
At one point, Mexican law enforcement
00:13:10
recorded a cartel leader on a wiretap
00:13:13
saying HSBC was the place to launder
00:13:16
money. And the Sinaloa cartel deposited
00:13:18
so much money in their bank that the
00:13:20
cartel designed special cash boxes to
00:13:23
fit HSBC's teller windows, which is
00:13:25
surprisingly considerate in a way. After
00:13:27
all, who hasn't been stuck in a teller
00:13:30
line behind some guy trying to stuff a
00:13:31
blood soaked duffel full of cash through
00:13:34
the window? Finally, a cartel that
00:13:37
thinks about other people's time.
00:13:39
Now, in response, HSBC put together a
00:13:41
new compliance department, but it wasn't
00:13:44
exactly inspiring, as this man will tell
00:13:46
you. His name is Everett Stern, and he
00:13:48
once had a dream. Tell everyone about
00:13:49
your dream, Everett.
00:13:51
Sure. I mean, um I mean, my my my dream
00:13:55
was to join um uh uh the um CIA.
00:13:57
Okay, thanks, Everett. That's sounds
00:14:00
like a really nice dream. Unfortunately,
00:14:03
ever got rejected by the CIA, but he did
00:14:05
get hired as a compliance officer at
00:14:08
HSBC, which he was excited about until
00:14:09
he got there.
00:14:11
I remember like my first day on the job.
00:14:14
It was It was a shopping center. I It
00:14:15
wasn't like a bank building. I was
00:14:17
expecting to show up at this bank
00:14:18
building and I'm I'm in this suit. There
00:14:21
were all these people like in jeans and
00:14:23
t-shirts and I didn't understand what's
00:14:24
going on. And when I walked in, there
00:14:27
were all these empty cubicles and the
00:14:29
walls were half painted and there were
00:14:31
maybe 15 compliance officers in the
00:14:33
whole department. Uh, at the time I
00:14:35
thought I was like this they hired me
00:14:38
because I was like this smart guy and I,
00:14:39
you know, I had it all going and
00:14:41
everything and no, they hired me because
00:14:42
I was an idiot and I didn't know what I
00:14:43
was doing.
00:14:47
Yeah. As far as ever could see, HSBC was
00:14:50
intentionally looking to hire idiots.
00:14:51
And the only time that that is an
00:14:53
acceptable hiring strategy is if you're
00:14:55
casting a baby food commercial. We need
00:14:57
to hire, you know, one of those tiny
00:14:58
idiots who doesn't know what they're
00:15:00
doing. Oh, a baby. Sorry, a baby. That's
00:15:03
the word. We need to hire a baby. And
00:15:05
while HSBC was going through the motions
00:15:07
of compliance publicly, internally, they
00:15:10
were going to egregious lengths to avoid
00:15:12
it altogether. For example, the Treasury
00:15:13
keeps a list of sanctioned organizations
00:15:15
that banks aren't allowed to do business
00:15:17
with. On that list is a company called
00:15:20
Tajko, which has had ties to Hezbollah.
00:15:22
HSBC system should have automatically
00:15:23
flagged any transactions involving
00:15:26
Tajko. And yet, even a self-described
00:15:28
idiot who didn't know what he was doing
00:15:29
could quickly see that the bank was
00:15:31
processing thousands of dollars for
00:15:33
them. And I'll let him describe how he
00:15:36
discovered it and what he did next.
00:15:38
I noticed they were putting little dots
00:15:42
and dashes in the actual names in the
00:15:44
wire filter. So for instance, if you had
00:15:46
Tajiko that was sending money from
00:15:49
Hezbollah to some other organization,
00:15:51
instead of T AJCO
00:15:53
in the that that's the normal name for
00:15:56
it in the HSBC wire filter, it would be
00:15:58
T AJ.co
00:16:01
or T AJ-CO.
00:16:04
And that's how they criminally
00:16:07
manipulated the wire filter to allow
00:16:09
moneyaundering for terrorists and drug
00:16:12
cartels. This is why 3 weeks in I
00:16:14
started passing information to the CIA.
00:16:17
yeah you did, Em. yeah you
00:16:21
did. That is great news for him and
00:16:23
frankly terrible news for whoever
00:16:25
thought it was a good idea to hire an
00:16:28
aspiring CIA officer to oversee your
00:16:30
extremely lazy attempts to launder money
00:16:33
for criminals. And once the government
00:16:35
started poking around within HSBC, they
00:16:37
quickly found some pretty compelling
00:16:40
evidence. Internal documents show HSBC
00:16:42
executives knew exactly what they were
00:16:45
doing. "We are allowing organized
00:16:46
criminals to launder their money," wrote
00:16:48
one executive.
00:16:50
"Wow, it is hard to imagine how the
00:16:52
evidence could get more damning than
00:16:55
that, unless maybe the email signature
00:16:57
included the phrase sent from my crime
00:17:00
phone followed by the sh emoji." And
00:17:02
yet, incredibly, the government brought
00:17:05
no charges against individuals. The bank
00:17:08
itself just got a DPA and the terms of
00:17:10
it seems more than a little weak. For
00:17:12
example, it agreed to pay a fine of
00:17:14
almost $2 billion, which might sound
00:17:16
like a lot until you remember they made
00:17:18
over 13 billion in profits that year
00:17:21
alone. And look, maybe the DOJ really
00:17:23
thought that a hefty but entirely
00:17:25
manageable fine would make HSBC change
00:17:27
their ways. And the bank did agree to
00:17:29
monitoring and apparently even issued
00:17:31
their US-based staff certificates with
00:17:34
little parrots on them reading, "I am a
00:17:37
changed bird." But were they? Because
00:17:39
even that monitoring program illustrates
00:17:42
something immensely frustrating here
00:17:43
because DPAs aren't criminal
00:17:45
proceedings. Monitoring reports on
00:17:47
whether or not companies are complying
00:17:49
aren't required to be public records.
00:17:52
So, we don't really know what HSBC did
00:17:55
to clean up its act. But the glimpses we
00:17:57
got during that period aren't great. As
00:17:59
in the bank's own annual report, they
00:18:00
openly admitted that their monitor
00:18:03
expressed significant concerns about the
00:18:06
pace of their progress and instances of
00:18:08
potential financial crime. But despite
00:18:11
that, their DPA expired as planned at
00:18:13
the end of 2017 and the government
00:18:15
dropped all charges against them. So
00:18:18
they were in the clear until the very
00:18:21
next month when this happened. HSBC is
00:18:23
said to have agreed to pay $100 million
00:18:25
to resolve a US Justice Department
00:18:27
investigation into the rigging of
00:18:29
currency rates. A source tells Bloomberg
00:18:31
the deal includes a deferred prosecution
00:18:34
agreement and a promise to help with the
00:18:36
criminal case against former traders.
00:18:38
Yeah, they were caught again and they
00:18:41
got another DPA. That is ridiculous. At
00:18:43
this point, it's not even a deferred
00:18:44
prosecution agreement. It's more like
00:18:46
prosecutorial edging. I've said it
00:18:50
before and I'll say it again. Let the
00:18:52
government come.
00:18:55
And that is the thing here. DPAs and
00:18:57
their associated fines have now become a
00:18:59
routine cost of doing business, which is
00:19:02
a real problem because the stakes can be
00:19:04
incredibly high. Which brings us to our
00:19:06
final company, Boeing. Last year, we did
00:19:08
a whole segment about its fall from
00:19:10
grace and discuss their infamous 737 Max
00:19:12
planes, which have been involved in two
00:19:15
devastating crashes that killed 346
00:19:16
people. I won't recap the whole thing,
00:19:19
but suffice to say, there were flaws
00:19:21
with the aircraft's design, and they
00:19:23
weren't exactly a secret within the
00:19:24
company.
00:19:26
The 737 Max became Boeing's bestselling
00:19:29
jet ever. But in 2017, just as the
00:19:31
planes were taken to the skies
00:19:34
worldwide, a Boeing employee sent this
00:19:36
message to a colleague. This airplane is
00:19:38
designed by clowns, who in turn are
00:19:41
supervised by monkeys. Other employees
00:19:43
calling the design piss poor and
00:19:46
comparing the fixes to patching a leaky
00:19:49
boat. In October 2018, Lionaire flight
00:19:53
610 737 Max crashed, killing 189 people
00:19:56
on board. In May of that year, as Boeing
00:19:58
was pursuing FAA approval for the Max
00:20:01
flight simulator, one test pilot wrote,
00:20:04
"I'll be shocked if the FAA approves
00:20:07
this turd." Yeah, it seems like the only
00:20:09
real disagreement within Boeing was on
00:20:11
what hilarious language to use when
00:20:13
describing their catastrophic products.
00:20:16
Okay, so we got piss poor, leaky boat,
00:20:18
turd. You know what? Can someone get GM
00:20:19
on the phone and see if we can borrow
00:20:22
Kavorianesque from them? I kind of like
00:20:24
the sound of that. Following those
00:20:26
crashes, Boeing entered into a DPA in
00:20:28
2021, admitting to misrepresentations to
00:20:31
regulators about a key software feature
00:20:33
tied to the crashes. should also agree
00:20:35
to pay a fine and show 3 years of good
00:20:37
behavior in exchange for avoiding
00:20:39
prosecution. It's agreement that many
00:20:41
felt was toothless, especially given
00:20:42
that one judge involved with the case
00:20:44
later called what Boeing had done the
00:20:47
deadliest corporate crime in US history.
00:20:49
And following that DPA, things didn't
00:20:51
seem to improve much at Boeing. Because
00:20:55
by the start of 2024, just 2 days before
00:20:56
their three-year probationary period was
00:20:59
set to end, this happened. What was
00:21:01
supposed to be a short trip from
00:21:03
Portland to Ontario, California for
00:21:05
Garrett Cunningham turned out to be one
00:21:07
of the most frightening experiences of
00:21:08
his life.
00:21:11
A gush of of air. I look to my left and
00:21:13
part of the plane is gone.
00:21:16
Yeah, not ideal. It It is never good
00:21:18
when you feel a sudden gush of air on a
00:21:20
flight. Even if the plane hasn't just
00:21:22
cracked open, odds are it's going to be
00:21:23
the toddler in the seat behind you
00:21:26
breathing directly on your face or your
00:21:27
seatmate cracking the lid on a tub of
00:21:29
tuna salad they brought with them. There
00:21:32
is no surprise whoosh of air that brings
00:21:35
good tidings in a metal sky can. But in
00:21:37
this case, yeah, a door plug blew off a
00:21:40
737 Max mid-flight. An incident that was
00:21:42
a clear indication, according to the
00:21:44
DOJ, Boeing had violated its initial
00:21:47
DPA. But instead of then prosecuting
00:21:50
them, the DOJ offered them a plea deal
00:21:51
which just required them to pay another
00:21:53
fine, boost their spending on safety and
00:21:55
compliance programs, and report to an
00:21:57
independent monitor overseeing their
00:21:59
compliance. And this understandably
00:22:02
angered some of the family members of
00:22:04
crash victims. Here is the mother of one
00:22:06
of them summing it all up.
00:22:08
It seems that beginning of January, just
00:22:10
two days before the expiration of the
00:22:14
DPA, oops, I did it again. This is boy
00:22:17
in song. Oops, I did it again.
00:22:20
Yeah, that woman's outrage is completely
00:22:22
justified. And it's honestly smart to
00:22:23
site the musical cannon of Britney
00:22:25
Spears given that Boeing essentially
00:22:28
just pleaded not that innocent.
00:22:30
[Applause]
00:22:33
Yeah.
00:22:36
But it gets worse because this year the
00:22:38
Trump administration downgraded Boeing's
00:22:40
punishment to a nonprosecution
00:22:41
agreement, removing even the
00:22:44
hypothetical chance of prosecuting them
00:22:45
over this in the future, which is just
00:22:48
completely infuriating. Unless, I guess,
00:22:50
you're this guy on CNBC who chose to
00:22:52
announce the news like this.
00:22:54
The DOJ says it expects to file the
00:22:55
written agreement with Boeing by the end
00:22:57
of the week. Should be viewed as good
00:22:58
news. I wouldn't be surprised to see the
00:23:01
stock move higher. Yeah, great news
00:23:03
everyone. The stock should move higher.
00:23:04
So, I guess that's at least one thing
00:23:07
that Boeing can keep in the air.
00:23:10
But, but even if that is good news for
00:23:12
stockholders, it's clearly not great for
00:23:14
anyone else. Because while it means that
00:23:15
Boeing does have to pay out an
00:23:18
additional $444 million into a crash
00:23:20
victim's fund, they also avoid being
00:23:22
branded a convicted felon and will no
00:23:24
longer face oversight by an independent
00:23:26
monitor, but instead will hire a
00:23:28
compliance consultant. As one consumer
00:23:30
rights advocate puts it, this deal isn't
00:23:32
even a slap on the wrist. It's barely a
00:23:35
feather on the wrist. Look, clearly when
00:23:37
it comes to corporate accountability, we
00:23:39
have a problem here. Because a company
00:23:41
engages in flagrant misbehavior, even
00:23:43
putting evidence of it in writing,
00:23:44
people get hurt. They're caught
00:23:46
red-handed. The government finds them
00:23:47
and says, "You better not do that
00:23:50
again." Then they do, and the whole
00:23:53
cycle restarts. This is not sustainable.
00:23:55
And unfortunately, I wouldn't expect any
00:23:57
of that to change for at least say three
00:23:59
and a half years. But but it is worth
00:24:01
asking for a hypothetical future when we
00:24:03
have a government that isn't run by a
00:24:05
procorruption felon. What could we be
00:24:08
doing better to hold corporations
00:24:10
accountable? Well, we could make DPAs
00:24:12
more of a deterrent by making the fines
00:24:14
much more serious and prosecuting
00:24:16
executives a lot more often. We could
00:24:18
also bring both DPAs and NPAs into the
00:24:20
official legal system so that their
00:24:22
monitoring would be more transparent and
00:24:23
companies would build up records of
00:24:25
misconduct instead of constantly getting
00:24:28
to wipe their slate clean. But the hard
00:24:30
truth here is if we want more
00:24:32
accountability, the government is going
00:24:34
to have to show more willingness to
00:24:37
prosecute repeat offenders, even if it
00:24:39
affects a large company's ability to do
00:24:42
business, which really doesn't seem too
00:24:44
much to us because you've seen tonight
00:24:47
just how much damage companies can do
00:24:49
when they operate unchecked. And right
00:24:51
now we have a system where essentially
00:24:53
corporations can with very limited
00:24:55
resistance sell cars with a surprise off
00:24:58
button operate as a haven for blood
00:25:00
money and build planes that unbuild
00:25:03
themselves in the sky. And I'd argue
00:25:05
that to not make significant changes to
00:25:07
a system like that would be, if I may
00:25:09
quote GM's most cursed PowerPoint of all
00:25:14
time, maniacal.
