>> they were not added goerge. specifically the one i expect your referring to in january, it was not ignored. it caused action and escalation. it was a situation where we relied upon the explanation that turned out to be wrong about the new model, implementations that was agreed by the risk-management in place of the time by multiple review or trailed or reliance was erroneously placed on that. >> let me tell you what is hard to explain to my constituents when their tax dollars are insuring their deposits. they are going to ask how could we possibly balloon up to $6 billion loss and basically not only ignoring the facts but sort of endorsing the behavior for and it seemed that the traders seemed to have more responsibility and authority than the higher a executives. i have to go to a town hall meeting in arizona. you tell me what i am supposed to tell my constituents and with their tax dollars some of these deposits were insured, this kind of gambling went on when there are extreme difficulties in getting their ho