against jpmorgan in which jpmorgan will lose. but then we go another step. if the press dent being established is that you can sue a bank for take over banks b, and c, even though they had nothing to do with bank b, and c's ill begotten gains. then we have to think about wells fargo took over bank? should they be sued? >> so is there some remedy then? you are talking about all of the people who won't get fined or have to pay up. but for the public nobody has really paid up for this. people paid up with their houses and jobs. who would pay up on wall street? >> the remedy would be to go after the people who committed the fraud. and i think that you have got to go well beyond simply jpmorgan, because remember, jpmorgan was given about five days to take a look at bear stearns and the government was begging them to take that company -- >> and that's an interesting point. i want to end on that, dick. because on some cases we'll being told by people, they were asked to do this, and this will come back and bite the government next time

i'm kate kelly in new york. >>> how could the jpmorgan fine impact the housing market? coming up a little later in the program, we'll examine whether the penalty along with the proposed new mortgage rules could make it more difficult for homebuyers to get a home loan. >>> meanwhile, where does jpmorgan's $13 billion settlement with the justice department rank among the biggest corporate fines ever paid? take a look here. bp was fined $4.5 billion for the 2010 oil spill in the gulf of mexico. bank of america paid $8.5 billion in 2011 for selling risky mortgages that later went bad. jpmorgan and 12 other banks agreed to pay the federal reserve and others more than $9 billion earlier this year over abusive foreclosure practices. last year five of the nation's biggest banks including jpmorgan agreed to pay $25 billion in penalties in a separate abusive for closure case. and the biggest ever, the 1998 deal with the five biggest tobacco makers, $246 billion over 25 years. >>> meantime, the banking industry just released the results of a test on its trading systems in the even

>> well, i think to some degree jpmorgan deserves to pay a fine. they maybe shouldn't have paid as much as they did for bear stearns. had they known, they'd be liable for all these mortgage mess, then they would have paid less. on the other hand, it's a little surprising to see jpmorgan, the star through the crisis, the firm in their 2006 annual report had concerns about subprime lending, 2007 annual report right front and center, you can pull it up on the internet right now, you can see they were ringing the alarm bells about the mortgage crisis, and now it's jpmorgan that held up front and center with the -- liz: got bitten by the exact thing they were concerned about. >> but they protected themselves. they went through the crisis fine. today won the war and lost the peace. the last couple years they haven't managed as well as they could have. liz: let's spin it forward. what happens to jamie dimon? does he lose any of his positions such as the chairmanship? >> well, jamie dimon in the view of wall street is "iron man". i mean, he has delivered s

look at the earnings of jpmorgan. so, if you look at the issue that happened in london, whatever you call that guy who did it, he made a mistake, or he did or didn't make a mistake, but the $6 billion that it came to as a percentage of jpmorgan's earnings was invst feticimal. >> i was taken to task on twitter. i would like to mention it's not about the financial strength as much but also about jobs. how many jobs does a firm like jpmorgan create? that's something that sometimes gets lost in it. >> of course it does. >> hundreds of thousands of jobs. >> yeah. think about what happens. they're trying to make jamie admit to wrongdoing. if he admits to wrongdoing, which i hope he never does, the amount of class-action suits that will then be initiated by the trial bar against the firm will be horrendous. i mean, so one thing leads to another. i mean, why are we down on business? we're the ones that create the jobs. >> admitting to wrongdoing. this is something i want to talk about for a moment, and then i want your take o

department and jpmorgan. later trends in higher education tuition cost and declining federal financial aid doug letterman. "washington journal" is next. ♪ good morning. here are your headlines this morning. obamas administration officials are now saying they expect to care.gov by middle november. regulators yesterday announced a multibillion dollar deal with jpmorgan, settling charges related to underwriting of poor quality mortgages leading up to the 2008 financial crisis. in washington dc, thousands of protesters concerned about governor said that about government surveillance are expected together on the 12th anniversary of the patriot act. that is where we let to begin with you. -- where we want to begin with you. with european leaders calling for new restrictions on such actions, we are opening up our phone lines to you this morning. how concerned should america be about the government spying on foreign allies and partners? that is our question for you. republicans can call at 202-585- 3881. 3880.rats,

more on jpmorgan. is the deal with the government falling apart? what's next for jpmorgan? we'll be back in two minutes to discuss that and more as you see the stock falling down 33 cents today, but more if you look at where it was at its high earlier in the session. opportunities aren't always obvious. sometimes they just drop in. cme group can help you navigate risks and capture opportunities. we enable you to reach global markets and drive forward with broader possibilities. cme group: how the world advances. >>> power run jun, thrown out what we were planning to talk about to replace it with a discussion about jpmorgan. is its big deal $13 billion with the department of justice about to collapse? that is the story that dow jones is running with. dominic chu you've been doing reporting on this and what have you found, if anything? >> it's interesting right now. what we're looking at right now is whether or not there is any kind of real i guess truth to what's happening here about something happening on the downside for jpmorgan. we do know that trading volumes have picke

would you defend jpmorgan? >> absolutely. the problem is you can't defend large corporations that have thousands and thousands of employees against an indictment. once they've been indicted, they can be put out of business. so the presumption of innocence doesn't operate in these large cases. a the government, basically dictates the terms of the settlement because you're terrified to litigate even cases you can win. >> right. that's just -- that's the arthur andersen syndrome. >> right. >> puts the whole thing out of business. >> they won and look what happened. they were out of business. >> let's go to some interesting things. my thesis, having you as a guest on our show from time to time which is a great pleasure. my thesis is alan dershowitz is not as liberal as people think he is. now, i just want to begin with this. you're a great defend other telephone first amendment, freedom of speech of all times. so am i i'm a reagan conservative. i completely agree with you. >> i almost wrote a book called "why i left the left but

of course impacted by the settlements from jpmorgan as well. so the banking sector is extended to rbs today. that's some of the key stories around europe. back to you guys. >> rugby? rugby. >> rugby. >> like professional teams that people follow and have standing? really? >> yeah. yeah. >> let me ask you a serious question today. do they wear those rugby shirts? >> do they wear them? >> you know those rugby shirts that we can buy over here. do they wear them? >> yes. >> that is a tough -- >> yeah. >> i can't say i was a -- >> with less padding. >> i would get squished. you'd need a blotter to pick me up. they don't play on astroturf, they don't play on -- your collarbone -- >> there's one thing, joe, they play on artificial pitch. >> your clavicle would be shattered. >> yeah. especially it's a new type of artificial pitch. it has give in it. >> they don't wear equipment. they wear a jock, that's it, man, that's it. never mind. ross, thank you. >> people are called jocks when they're sports greats. nothing wrong with mentioning that. >> just the

what do you think jpmorgan is getting out of this? >> well, they get this pr out there that, you know, this is a huge number and that they're beleaguered, you know, bank. but what they do get out of it in some cases is tax deductibility. certain aspects of settlements are tax deductible. and they can use that as a negotiating chip for the entire settlement if the justice department allows it. so, we're not clear yet on how much of this will be tax deductible. that would certainly be a benefit to jpmorgan chase. and it would mean that the taxpayers are once again subsidizing this very profitable large institution. also there's a sense that, you know, maybe we can put this behind us, we've paid the freight, we are -- we've been held accountable. but again the problem with that argument is that it is the shareholders who are being held accountable, paying the price, not the actual perpetrators. >> what i hear you saying is that the wrongdoing at jpmorgan, jamie dimon's own failure to manage the offenses created by other executives and by

boss of jpmorgan want it to do. i'm not sure what the department of justice or the states agree with any deal that does that. they are the two key things. >> you are saying that jpmorgan has not yet admitted to any wrongdoing. >> well, we don't know what the deal is. it's coming through the newspapers. we don't quite know what the deal is. i think it's heavily rumoured to be $13 billion. >> as you are saying, this would be, if it goes through, it would be the biggest settlement of its kind paid by an american company. what does this mean for regulation? is paying a fine enough to change things in the industry? >> jpmorgan was regarded as being the one big american investment bank that had a good crisis, if i can put it like that. it didn't have the problems, the financial problems, that so many of the others did. yet as we have gone through the last couple of years, jpmorgan is whiter than white reputation gradually got dirtier and dirtier. if you remember we had the london whale trader who lost jpmorgan's $6 billio

let's get to the jpmorgan story. reports are out jpmorgan $13 billion settlement with the government may be fallen through. charlie gasparino with exclusive details on just who has the upper hand. charlie: does fallen through liz: it isn't happening. charlie: here are the headlines you and i should hash out a little bit. despite this snag, people close to the deal itself are saying the negotiations are ongoing. they still think a deal is possible. depending on who you talk to, they say it is likely. but here's what we got from jpmorgan on the structure of this deal. it involves the trust involved with washington mutual bankruptcy and how much money jpmorgan can get from that bankruptcy. it's really difficult, we will write things up on foxbusiness.com. i suggest you go there to get the details. bottom line is jpmorgan and the terms of this deal from what i understand is worried about unquantifiable legal liability that they sign off on this thing. we should also point out people close to jpmorgan are telling me and h

admit wrong doing and the second thing is will jpmorgan then go on to face criminal prosecutions? they may want to do a deal that reduces - that gets rid of all the criminal liability. so those are the two key things that we await from the deal. >> you would have heard the story that the head of jpmorgan, diamond, would do a deal with eric holder to drop criminal charges, and holder is alleged to have said, "no way." >> exactly. we don't know. that may be what the $2 billion bought him. it goes back to the subprime mortgage crisis. it was to do with banks giving home owners - people the chance to pie -- buy a house, giving them completely unpayable mortgages, like 10 times the sally. jpmorgan and others - they are not alone - they packaged poor quality mortgages into investment products and sold them to their clients, their investing clients. the big deal - the deal here is that the view is that jpmorgan knew the mortgages were never going to be repaid but sold them as higher quality investment products. that's what the fine is for. >> you say $4 billion may go back to the people

kate kelly outside jpmorgan's office in new york city. as a jpmorgan shareholder, i guess the only good thing you take from this trying to put another issue of litigation behind it. you want to get all of the stuff out of the way to move forward on the fundamentals. >> right. if you focus on fundamentals, they're pretty good in the quarter if you compare it to other companies, bank of america, citi group, goldman sachs. jpmorgan did a good job of controlling what they could control. they talked about $23 billion reserve base, right? this $13 billion is more than $13 billion but if you get the largest chunk out of it out you focus back on fundamental. the stock's trading at 17% discount to its peers. typically trade at 5% premium. >> our next guest owns jpmorgan and add new picks to his market beating portfolio. bill nygren, welcome back. >> thanks. >> let me talk first about jpmorgan before we move on. what's your opinion of the tentative agreement, $13 billion? >> well, our opinion is life isn't always fair and this is just great to get

wamu acquired by jpmorgan in the heat of the financial crisis. and there is lingering uncertainty, i'm told, even in the contract of sale document, as to who is responsible for future wamu loans going sour. is it jpmorgan, the buyer, or could it ultimately be the federal deposit insurance corporation? the dispute could ament to billions of dollars in exposure. as you discussed earlier in an interview, it could be bad publicity on one hand for the jpmorgan to go after the fdic, but very expensive if it does. there are language disputes over how to handle this in the settlement. while talks have not fallen apart, it's a key issue in resolution. as we're looking for resolution by the end of the week but it's unclear as they continue to muddle through and try to come up with some terminology that everyone's comfortable with. >> kate, thank you so much. kate kelly with the latest there. as we've been telling you, we are live today in chicago from the paulson institute financial crisis symposium. with me right now, in a cnbc exclusive, is former treasu

nor is jpmorgan chase the only culprit under scrutiny. bank of america was found guilty just this week of civil fraud, and eight other banks are being investigated by the government for mortgage fraud. no wonder wall street's camp followers at "fox news," "the wall street journal," cnbc and other cheerleaders have ganged up to whitewash the banks. this could be the biggest egg yet across the smug face of unfettered, unchecked, unaccountable capitalism. let's sort this out with someone who covers wall street without fear, favor or flaming headlines. gretchen morgenson has been called "the most important financial journalist of her generation." she won the pulitzer prize for her tough journalism and her "fair game" column for "the new york times" combines old fashioned, shoe leather reporting with hard-won knowledge to help the rest of us understand finance both high and low. i recommend her most recent book, written with joshua rosner, "reckless endangerment." welcome back. >> thank you so much, bill. >> is the justice department finally g

government singling out jpmorgan? couldn't be the stockholders are forced to pay for a government vendetta against a political enemy? a former federal prosecutor is year and also for a real clear markets, john is the editor. we had had dick po-faced to knows a lot about banks in he is not one for conspiracy but the asking if it was a hit against political enemy. david: did this a vendetta that they don't like with the administration is doing? >> yes. absolutely. david: what do you say? >> no question what happened to jpmorgan is jaime dimon questioning what the administration was doing to the bank -- to the banks when you have a foul administration they will come after you. all the banks did not want to take our money but they were told if you don't recall you the next day jaime dimon spoke bill now he pays for it now in the shareholders are paying for it. david: i look get your notes id to save the department of justice is used as a political hit man? >> i am shaking my head because whole thing discussed me. i cannot

let's turn it over to jpmorgan. the bank is close to reaching a tentative $13 billion settlement with the justice department and other government agencies. our own kate kelly speaking with the ceo jamie dimon as he arrived at work. as we now learn from the "times," not only chief cheerleader for the bank but also chief negotiator. >> reporter: that's right, simon. interesting. this deal has not yet been finalized. it cob a couple of days. there is a chorus of criticism about this record $13 billion fine jpmorgan is expected to pay. among other things, you brought this up in the past, these are issues related to jpmorgan's acquisition. they issued in the heat of the housing boom and later caused problems for those. they bought those partly as the government's urging. some believe they are being penalized with the wall street journal calling this a shakedown. i asked jamie dimon about this very question as he walked into the office this morning. here is what he told me. >> i want to get the problems resolved. that's w

jpmorgan and wells fargo out with their earnings reports. they beat the estimates but there are worrisome signs. should investors bank on the banks or not. the top banking analyst on the street. ty is down on the nyse. >> sue, thank you very much. again, stocks as you point out in rally mode. the dow up about 97 points, 96 right now and the standard & poor's back above 1700 at 1702 on this day 11 of the government shutdown. five days and counting until the u.s. hits the debt ceiling. the house gop offering a debt limit hike and the shutdown. is it being played out behind closed doors right now? luke russert of nbc news live on capitol hill. luke, what is the latest state of play? >> the latest we can report is tomorrow morning at 9:00 a.m. the house gop conference is going to have a meeting where they will presumably leadership will present the plan forward in terms of the deal to raise the debt limit and possibly fund the government. the offer that was put forward to the white house by the house gop staffers earlier this morning, does two t

going back to jpmorgan chase. the controversy is this. they feel they have given the government cover in acquiring their sterns and washington mutual which were both insolvent in 2008. essentially 80% of jpmorgan losses on mortgage bonds come from the bonds at bear stearns and washington mutual. where it stands right now, we could see an agreement this week or next. what is key is admitting to guilt. if they do that, it will open the door wider to places and lawsuits. the second thing is criminal probe still under way out of the sacramento offices of the attorney general for the state of california. washington mutual bond coming out of pennsylvania. the government said you take these, sacramento, take the jpmorgan owned bonds. and you take bear stearns. ashley: the hiring practices in asia. just a side note. stay right here. our twitter question, prosecution or persecution? the government crackdown on jamie dimon and kathleen and jp. your options will be appearing at the bottom of the screen. let's ask former sec enforcement attorney now

here is jpmorgan chase's rap sheet. june 2010, $48.6 million fine co-mingling bank and client funds in lound. april 2011, $56 million settlement in overraj charges. june 2011, $163.6 million in penalties, from sec charges of misleading investors. july 2011, 228 million dollar settlement of 93 rigged municipal bond transactions in the united states. 900 other instances of the settlements, fines -- credit card fees to -- improper home foreclosures to yesterday's news. >> jpmorgan in the process of making a huge settlement with the federal government. but criminal charges are still possible. >> at the same time jpp morgan -- ultimately going up. the compensation of the chief executive jamie dimon totaling more than $61 million from 2010 through 2012 alone. and the accolades are more affordable. >> it's a cash generating machine, sure they have had their regulatory issues, but he's looking to settle them. jpmorgan posted a loss because of all the legal expenses, but under jamie dimon, that didn't come from the hand of the m

jpmorgan's close to a deal to settle u.s. related problems. the bank could still face more legal woes. >> the edf is going to clean up the fukushima plant in japan. >> announcer: you're watching "worldwide exchange" bringing you business news from around the globe. >>> hello. warm welcome to the start of "worldwide exchange" for the week. plenty to get through on today's show as ever. finally, it is u.s. jobs tuesday this week, but how should investors expect the bull market to go. the treasuries we'll talk about at 10:20 c.t. the weaker than expected numbers don't really move the needle. we'll discuss that as we look at japanese exports at 10:30. as the new department gets set to protect data, we'll ask whether twitter and google are right to get concerned. that's 10:45 c.e.t. plus, it's being billed as the biggest auction ever. we'll hear from a latin american analyst and why the government has low expectations. >>> plenty of earnings state side. how is mcdonald's new strategy to manage low u.s. margins fairing. we'll discuss the q 3 numbers

jpmorgan just out with its earnings. looks like the company came in with the net income of $1.42 a share. that's when you exclude litigation expenses and reserves that were brought back through. the street was looking for $1.17. of course, with litigation expenses and the release reserves, you're looking at a loss of 17 cents a share. revenue came in at $23.9 billion. >> do you remember earlier this week we had people on that said the reason they're going after jpmorgan is because they're so -- >> the money. >> they make so much money. >> bill daly. >> yeah, right. so is this good or bad they beat expectations? actually, if you do the lower number and did you see the litigation expense? that's a pretty big number. >> it's a huge number. >> $7.2 billion. >> while we have strong underlying performance across the businesses, they go into how the number one ranked in just about everything. we continue to evaluate our legal reserves. with escalating demands and penalties from multiple government agencies, we thought it was pr

was it worth it for jpmorgan to do that? even with this fine? >> well, it's going to be very, very hard to figure out exactly how much money they made off of mortgage-backed securities that bear stearns or jpmorgan chase sold, but what we do know for a fact is that they picked up both bear stearns and washington mutual for a song. it's added greatly to their footprint as we call it on wall street, in other words, the size of the company, the fact that now washington mutual gives jpmorgan branches in california. bear stearns gave jpmorgan capital markets capabilities it didn't already have. so the value to jpmorgan chase overall in the last few years has been well in excess of anything they paid for it, even factoring in the $13 billion. if you told jamie dimon in my guess he would have to pay an extra $13 billion for bear stearns and washington mutual, i bet he would still do that deal. >> so you noted that the stock is up. why? >> why, because wall street investors don't like uncertainty. they don't like the speculation, is it going to be $11 b

dennis: forget about jpmorgan's $13 billion fine. "new york times" reports the nation's biggest bank might not be held liable for even more for turning a blind eye to may have had may have had's ponzi scheme -- bernie madoff. jpmorgan was madoff's private bank for 20 years but is the government grasping at straws with this? we have former sec chairman harvey pitt and wallace. thanks for being with us. harvey, start with you, appreciate you being here tonight. gosh, i'm wondering why the feds would have to go after jpmorgan when the sec hat clear wanings about bernie madoff around they failed to catch bernie madoff and it is their job to do it. is there a way to come up with a fine for the sec? >> i don't think you will come up with a fine for the sec. i do think what we're seeing with jpmorgan is starting to take on a lot of the attributes of what in professional football they call piling on. i think, i think there's way too much bashing of jpmorgan at this point in time. dennis: right. wallace, i think you will disagree. we talked a

we have to get to the jpmorgan story. reportedly they will play $13 billion in mortgage settlement with the fed. back to you. show me the jpmorgan stocks, will you? nicole: it is actually up right now. paying out $13 billion. this is all about that loans and mortgage settlements prior to the financial crisis, right? jamie dimon has been out touting his company talking about how proud he is of his company. just working with the regulators. this is a huge payout. 13 billion. stuart: it sure is. charles, $13 billion. this is where it seems to be coming from to me. jpmorgan is being fined for the sins of bear stearns and washington mutual, companies they were asked to take over and now they have to pay for doing the good deed. charles: they do. they are very powerful organization have to wonder why they didn't fight this even more. they set aside $23 billion. maybe my mind they just wanted to get it over with. it will be interesting to see who pays the criminal finds the top part of the letter, but it is a gigantic amount of

how about $13 billion settlement for jpmorgan. that doesn't even make all their problems go away. we will hear from a former bank of america executive who says jpmorgan and jamie dimon are being punished for helping to save the financial industry during the crisis. and then we'll get reaction from former congressman barney frank after the lead op-ed piece in "the wall street journal" this morning said that barney frank should be arrested before any bank ceo. when it comes to this crisis. of course, mr. frank will respond to that in only the way he can. >> i'm looking forward to him coming on and responding to it because people want to know why regulators were asleep at the wheel while all of this was going down. >> was it a health care law pep rally? many more questions than answers as to why obama care websites remain frustratingly slow. no one know to be held accountable, as well as kathleen sebelius, secretary of health and human services. >> this is really the hot-button issue right now. many furloughed federal workers who received unemployment checks during the shutdown will

it is wrong for the government to be going after jpmorgan. the government, either through the fed or the treasury or the fdic, asked jpmorgan to take over both bear stearns and washington mutual. typically, in that kind of process that washington mutual through, the legal liabilities are stripped away. i think that is jpmorgan's position. it does not stop people from suing you. we are taking action. dennis: yes. denny's comment you say one of the important things is to make sure the punishment fits the crime. >> i think you have to look at this as a three-part program. first you have the restitution to the marketplace. you also need to beef up supervisory and compliance. you want these people to have more support and to be supervised and overseeing. the lawyers that are coming in are coming in to overhaul the system. to make sure that the largest bank in the country does not let this happen again the five did other banks make bigger mistakes? the bank was investing its own money. how is that just at all? >> how is it just. we want to be sure

went to goldman sachs, jpmorgan. jpmorgan. those were the lead bankers. fox business exclusive finding out they're here at the mandarin oriental. that meeting underway at 1:30. we have every base covered to get questions out to the two leaders. they will be somewhere in manhattan tomorrow for more meetings. these are small private client meetings. then they head up to boston, chicago, then to denver, los angeles and finally san francisco. of course where twitter is based. tracy and ashley, certainly it's a different scene this time around with twitter. we saw facebook so flashy with the ipo we all can agree pretty much a technical disaster. what we're seeing with twitter a much more cautious approach to how they're approaching wall street, guys and investors. back to you. tracy: can't seem to escape us, cheryl, can they? nice work out there. ashley: good job. wherever they are tomorrow we'll probably get thrown out again. tracy: gently escorted out of security. ashley: been thrown out of better places than that. for sure. a quarter past the hour. time to

last year jpmorgan's revenue was more than 97 billion. today it has more than 23 billion dollars reserved for legal problems. and what's most troubling is that not only are they apparently going to extinguish almost all civil liability for innumberable egregious violations in wrongdoing relating to compliances in mortgages and other things, but not a single individual is being held accountable, yet again, for all this wrongdoing. and unfortunately, if we don't hold individuals responsible and accountable, then these things are going to happen again and again and again. >> ifill: the expert ely, let me ask you this question. jpmorgan is one of the companies, that actually went in and helped rescue troubled properties. and for their effort they get this kind of prosecutional, or potential for prosecution. did they-- does that discourage anybody else from even trying? >> i think if definitely does. that in effect jpmorgan chase is being tagged for problems that it did not cause, that happened under the management of the companies that they a

they're going on into jpmorgan chase. there's a criminal probe in place right now, and there's nothing in the deal that would give them or anybody who works for jpmorgan or past workers immunity from criminal prosecution. that's interesting. that might hold it up. how much does jpmorgan agree to say? do they actually have to say they did anything wrong? do they just settle? that might be the detail holding it up. >> can i ask you another question here? >> yeah. >> i'm trying to understand the nuts and bolts of this. this is a big bank. we talked for years about jamie dimon and the ceo of the bank. the sale of bad mortgages rights before the housing crash, what does it mean? >> like every other bank, jpmorgan chase gave mortgages out and bundled them up and sold it and there's an allegation they misrepresented how good or bad the mortgages were. the other bigger deal is jpmorgan took over bear stearns and wachovia, and there's a sense those banks did it, too. should jpmorgan have to pay for the misdeeds of those banks? it'

now that talks hit a roadblock in jpmorgan's settlement with the government one analyst says jpmorgan will never reach settlement. charlie gas is here to discuss whether there is accurate prediction or there are flaws with that. >> dick bove we had drinks and he wasn't drunk, before his first stip, i think he had a man -- manhattan, before the first sip of the manhattan around the corner he made a couple predictions. he doesn't think this will happen. he was more certain. he said no way it will happen, the settlement as currently laid out between the justice department and jpmorgan, the particularly sort of notion that the jpmorgan can not grow back to the fdic and get paid for some of its legal issues, right? when fdic mandates or helps you as part after bailout of a bank which jpmorgan bailed out washington mutual some of your legal liabilities get covered by fdic. part of that whole mechanism. as part of that government doesn't want them to give them ability. doesn't want fdic to pay anymore money to jpmorgan. he think it will die on that. we're not talking about of trialing of mon

jpmorgan shares going crazy as you mentioned. within 20 minutes after this news first came out, we saw about 4.5 million shares changing hands. that's gone to 6 million shares in the last half hour on a day where the total stock traded, kayla and brian, only about 14 million shares. a ton of activity ons these headlines. >> this is something that the market, of course, has been waiting for. the company really tell graphing this on its earnings call. we want to talk about how this will impact the stock and we bring in jeff hart. thanks for being with us. given the fact that jpmorgan has said look we have $23 billion lying in wait to pay for these issues, does this nuance really matter about whether they have a potential refund to the fdic? >> you know, i do think it's kind of noise. what we're seeing with jpmorgan shares, this what is i'm seeing, is a relove tance to buy -- reluctance to buy because of the fear of unknown, not so much because of a desire to sell because they think a catastrophic end is coming. getting the settleme

, jpmorgan was bailout. dennis: they paid back every penny plusnterest. >> the best way to think of it that the whole system, whethe it was money market funds or currency swaps, the whole system was about to melt down. so even though kaytoo did not miss -- jpmorgan did not necessary needed an infusion, they benefited from the system. >> by that logic we get bailed out to. dennis: we have seen meltdowns in the late 80's and in 2000. and in 2008. every time t government has to find a few culprits to make in the poster child and to kind of beat up on them so that we all get our moral lesson. what about aall street amnesty? what about a treat and reconciliation commission? let's stop all ts because i feel le we are bleeding the very banks that we had to bailt to save the system. >> the bigger problem is the way we are leang the banks. there is validity to some of the vernment investigation. t all, some. i also think that the regulation is going to strangles. >> t regulation is going to shrink kaytoo and some of

jpmorgan? >> no. jpmorgan acknowledged they are now saying there is a loophole so there is going on about this. >> you believe the government, not jpmorgan? >> if you say they are not ours. if it is your liability, but otherwise charlie, guess what, otherwise it is a security fraud. liz: so the great news is the twitter battle will continue. take it to twitter. >> he wants to destroy the american banking system. liz: that is exactly what he said. come on. can you guys both come back? >> they are going to agree to it, right? without the fdic having to risk his reputation. >> they're going to cave, right? >> jpmorgan is likely to cave, probably. liz: good to have you both. good to see you both. we will do this, we will make it a regular thing because we know you love seeing this guy. do your toes starts to cringe a little bit? an exclusive interview with goldman sachs senior investment strategist abby joseph cohen. no, he cannot play in on this. if this talks can keep climbing or if they're headed for a

jpmorgan and wells fargo reporting quarterly results. shares are both trading in negative territory. let's get some advice. jason goldberg is managing director and senior equity analyst at barclays. also with us paul miller managing director and head of financial institutions research. >> good morning. >> of the two of you, jason, you are the more upbeat on both of these names. let's talk about jpmorgan, first of all. jamie diamond provisions for fines further down the line. why should people buy his stock now, jason? >> they have some legal issues and took a big step forward to put those issues on the back burner. the sooner they can get these litigation concerns in the rearview mir aror the better off for the shares. >> and do you have can can have deny that's happening now because they've taken the provision, they put a number on where they need to take their stockpile of provisions? i think it's $23 billion, isn't it? >> a big step. now they've disclosed for the first time their legal reserve is $23 billion. another $2 billion in mor