A Congressional report, issued in the US “Too Big to Jail,” details a tame settlement with HSBC, a large global bank, that clearly protected executives from criminal charges.

It is important to note that when Barack Obama assumed the Presidency in the US, his background in finance and economics was weak.  He took the advice and advisors of Bill and Hillary Clinton.  The Clintons have always protected the higher ups of the financial sector.

A Department of Justice 2012 settlement with HSBC, after the bank had been accused of laundering over $900 million for drug traffickers and processing transactions for countries subject to US sanctions.

HSBC and its American subsidiary, HSBC Bank USA, agreed to pay almost $2 billion under the settlement.  Yet prosecution was delayed because the company agreed to change its behavior.

Such deals suggest that banks are too important to prosecute.

The report on HSBC was not adopted by the full House committee, but neither did it generate a dissent from others on the committee. It was released, the staff said, “to shed light on whether D.O.J. is making prosecutorial decisions based on the size of financial institutions and D.O.J.’s belief that such prosecutions could negatively impact the economy.”

David A. Skeel, a professor of corporate law at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, said he was struck by this change. “This is one case where it looks like the government might have been able to prosecute misbehaving executives during the crisis period, yet it waived its right to do so,” he said in an email.

The report should be viewed as “evidence of an abuse of the regulatory system,” finance professor Edward J. Kane said. “And unless proven otherwise, this is just the tip of the iceberg.”