the committee will come to order. the gentleman from texas, mr. green, who is also the chair for subcommittee and oversight for investigations is recognized for five minutes. thank you, madam chair. madam chair, as a practitioner, i once represented a recipient of welfare who was charged with a crime because she made more money at a job and received some benefits from the federal government. she had to be prosecuted. a crime was alleged. if this bank, where it s mu was smaller, had maybe ten employees, had engaged in this type of activity, opening fraudulent accounts, creating fraudulent credit cards, someone would be prosecuted. a small bank would have had prosecutions take place within the ranks of the person within the bank. evidence shows that small banks have had persons prosecuted. but wells fargo created 1.5 million fraudulent accounts. wells fargo had over 500,000 credit cards created, fraudulently. is it the case that if you become so big and you create such a gran
and they re coming out of the woodwork and if you re an investor, the most terrifying phrase in the english language is, we re in a top! let me say up front, i don t think this market s peaking. i don t think we re at a top, but the average has rallied so hard so long that it s rational to expect a pullback and every time we get pulled down, you ll be bombarded by this endless and yes, i think worrisome, if not frightening top talk so, tonight i want to vaccinate you against these vociferous top callers by laying out the ten best reasons why the market might be peaking again, i don t think that s what s going to happen, but i want you to be prepared when you hear pundits and portfolio managers make these arguments in a more emphatic, and yes, hysterical way in tone, rather than calm and rational, which will allow you to think about what you should do, some selling, maybe you raise some cash i don t want to spook you. they do. so, what is the number one concern you re going to
was we got here fast. that s amazing were you walking by? we re thrilled to have you on this day, and really just want to try to understand this transaction. we should say our understanding is that it s a $65 a share in cash and stock that, by the way that s a pretty sizable premium almost 40% premium over where the stock traded just yesterday. tell us how this happened. we re alleges looking to make our portfolio even stronger. it takes a great company and makes it even better it really plays to our strengths in shale, deep water, and natural gas. it will allow us to continue to win in any environment and deliver great value for our shareholders we don t use him as an advisor, but you don t want to pay him anything it was his idea? no, but this is something that yeah. he said anadarko for chevron. just speak to how you got to $65. we think it s fair for anadarko s shareholders and a good price for our shareholders. this really brings together two sets
i am i think and as far as liberty is meaningful. that liberty to these women would mean liberty from being forced to continue the unwanted pregnancy. branch of your argument simply on the due process clause in the 14th amendment. we had originally brought the suit alleging both the due process clause equal protection clause the 9th amendment and a variety of others then anything else. it might. yeah, right, you know since the district court found the right to reside in the nights amendment we pointed our attention in the brief. so that particular aspect of the constitution. that was an exchange between jane roe council sarah weddington and supreme court justice potter stewart in the december 13th, 1971 argument of roe vs. suede joshua prager. you ve spent 12 years working on a book about the row case. did it lead you to being able to explain or understand better why this has been as in your words the most enduringly divisive case ever decided by the supreme court. well, i
i am i think and as far as liberty is meaningful. that liberty to these women would mean liberty from being forced to continue the unwanted pregnancy. branch of your argument simply on the due process clause in the 14th amendment. we had originally brought the suit alleging both the due process clause equal protection clause the 9th amendment and a variety of others then anything else. it might. yeah, right, you know since the district court found the right to reside in the nights amendment we pointed our attention in the brief. so that particular aspect of the constitution. that was an exchange between jane roe council sarah weddington and supreme court justice potter stewart in the december 13th, 1971 argument of roe vs. suede joshua prager. you ve spent 12 years working on a book about the row case. did it lead you to being able to explain or understand better why this has been as in your words the most enduringly divisive case ever decided by the supreme court. well, i