Conundrum for all Sloggers: show me that last time that voluntary self-regulation worked


What the sleazy powerful need now more than ever is a bogey man they’re genuinely scared of

In case it passed you by, the last time MPs held an enquiry into one of their own, no case was found to answer. Nor the time before that.

Not even the one before that, or before that, or even before that.

Some people like Michael Fallon and Boris Johnson were well worthy of investigation…and still are. But their little, um, alleged petty crimes never even got to the enquiry stage.

It has taken ordinary citizen Nicholas Wilson years of his life and most of his money to get to the stage of having the various HSBC corruption, fraud and extortion cases the bank should face reopened. He has done it – and the bloke is a bloody hero: but can somebody tell me please, since when did being British require everyone with that millstone of nationality to become the new Ralph Nader?

The American Congress also ‘regulates’ itself. As far as I can see, it regulates the number of bungs and crooked donations taken per year to a maximum of 1,070….or two per legislator. Sorry, I’m being sarcastic – but not too sarcastic.

Observe: lowlife lawyers representing the, um, House of Representatives are escalating their bid to block congressional insider trading investigations – one  involving allegations that Brian Sutter, a former senior staff member of the Ways and Means Committee, passed along secret information concerning a Medicare reimbursement rate change to a lobbyist with Greenberg Traurig in April 2013. It seems the information was then disclosed to Wall Street geckos, and a series of somewhat incriminating buy/sell stuff inexplicably followed.

Because it’s their job, the Securities & Exchange Commission opened an investigation, eventually serving subpoenas on Sutter and the Ways & Means Committee.

Despite Congress having passed a free-vote law to address legislator insider trading — the STOCK Act of 2012 — attorneys acting for that self-same body have tried at every turn to block, nobble and generally derail the course of Justice.

Among other ludicrously (almost hiariously) Orwellians stunts, the Congress’s attorneys argued that the case can’t proceed because lawmakers and their staff are constitutionally protected from such inquiries. Doncha love it – they pass a law the Supreme Court isn’t even asked to find constitutionally unsound, and then when some poor taxpaying sap tries to act upon the law, well – how very dare he! Offside ref – Offside!

The filibustering continues with mad people very well paid to act mad continuing to insist that a law passed specifically to catch and prosecute legisator insider trading has no jurisdiction over, er, legislators. As such.

The full story by Lee Fang is at the increasingly entertaining US site The Intercept, but my point here is simple: as the bank robber replied when asked by a judge why this was his chosen profession, “Because your honour, that’s where the money is”. If you’re an SEC cop paid to investigate breaking a law specifically aimed at bent legislatures, you don’t expect some legal beagle dickhead to ask what right you have to investigate legislators.

Let’s just stop and think for a moment about all the excrement that’s been hitting revolving propellers for the last seven years. When has the self regulation of a bank, a police force, a legislature, a bureaucracy, a school, a communications medium or a bourse ever led to the guilty rushing to confess without even the hint of a cover-up in sight?

In contemporary western cultures, it is farcical bordering on depraved to suggest that self-regulation has a snowball in Hell’s chance of leading to justice. It is an excuse – a rationale – to allow overfed privileged mega-rich crooks to crap on all of us even more than they do already. Humphrey Bogart was right:


 “Frankly lady, that comes under the heading of you would say that”.

22 thoughts on “Conundrum for all Sloggers: show me that last time that voluntary self-regulation worked

  1. ‘Self regulation’ has never worked, since it is a contradiction in terms. The City of London has allowed the publication of false prospectuses, since time immemorial, as witnessed by Nat Rothschild’s debacle.The question should be, ‘Do you think the courts are impartial, truly independent of all the bodies of the Establishment?There are, apparently, 2 MPs under investigation by DCI Knacker….


  2. The washington spivvery occasionally sacrifices a particularly egregious specimen eg Jack Abramoff. Otherwise business as usual. Sad thing is that the entryists continuing this sort of this stuff in Uk politics seem to be all pervasive, with the honourable exception of Sir Oink-a-Lot the Loony Candidate @ Oldham who didn’t get any postal votes.


  3. the benefits of self regulation and getting rid of red tape is just wonderful. see how fabulous the market is performing. Just get rid of all protection for the chickens and the foxes have a great time.


  4. I guess you should ask the Catholic church on children/catholic family during the period when contraception was banned and such mores were rigorously enforced by the Pope and his messengers of God…….they made the big mistake of not introducing young men to hookers first, not letting them loose on ‘reputable girls’ until they’d learn to control their randy urges sufficiently to obey God’s dictums……..


  5. “In contemporary western cultures, it is farcical bordering on depraved to suggest that self-regulation has a snowball in Hell’s chance of leading to justice.”

    “No, you’re completely mistaken, and anyway Humphrey Bogart was my mother.”


  6. Jw thanks for the link to “the intercept” lee fang on guns, the 128 comments largely from n.r.a gun nut trolls were an education. 40ish sufficed before I stopped alternately gasping/laughing.some arthropod sized brains in a regular ferment & no mistake.


  7. ..”show me the last time…”
    perhaps, but looking ahead there is some hear say that if the imbecile elites push their luck too much further, without the democratic backing expected of them – something might happen to affect their longevity, but we don’t know exactly what yet.


  8. I recall the chairman of the FSA being interviewed in the early days of the banking scandals. I was expecting outrage and retribution but no, his main point was ” none of this is covered by criminal law”. I think what he should have said and was probably thinking was we are above and beyond the law so rod off.


  9. Self Regulation sits alongside them pesky ‘National Security’ statements that hide the breaking of domestic and international laws.

    They are mearly PR to help the coach potatoes sleep at night.


  10. Oh crap. What we need, old chap, is a beat up, half dead, enemy we can fight a war against.

    Maybe then the peasantry won’t notice that the rule of law, their very basic fundamental freedoms and rights, their economic well being and those of their progeny, their hopes and dreams even, count as nothing.

    Maybe they won’t notice that they are mere chattel, Mere slaves.

    Beasts of burden, born only to serve their masters, until they are no longer fit to labour.

    Then it’s off to the knackers yard.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s