He demonstrates that coverage of the regulatory action against the bank has been driven by the public relations demands of political interests.
But it is the wording in the agreement entered into between the bank and the Department of Financial Services that demonstrates the ulterior motive of the regulator whose Supervisor is a former prosecutor.
The article says
** It is interesting that the final agreement states NY DFS's position that the bank "prevented New York State regulators from performing complete safety and soundness examinations and from identifying suspicious patterns of activity, which could, among other things, allow regulators to assist law enforcement authorities."
** The final part of that statement is most telling: DFS impliedly admits moving into a political arena, beyond reporting suspicion but of using or desiring to use bank data for policy making. It also shows that it expects access to the totality of customer data, even absent suspicion or, even, grounds for suspicion. In short, it wants to go fishing.
The article appears today at http://www.bankinginsurancesecurities.com