I think your answer was inaccurate.

All right. Now, you also wrote in the email that the bank said, quote, that if you--referring to the OCC-- 'have been watching the position reports and the P&Ls,' do you know what position reports and P&Ls you could have been watching?

shifting the pricing practices to minimize losses is not acceptable.

In fact, it was increasing in size.

There was no relationship between the fact that the losses were piling up and that there was a way in which the marks were made to reduce the impact of those losses on the books.

It turned out that was not true.

Jamie Dimon testified to the Senate that the SCP was to protect against a financial crisis

the bank needs to provide true, accurate, independent marks every day.

You had no reason to believe it until April 2012?

Did the London traders have to get approval of the CIO risk managers like you to put on positions?

Would you call that a high-risk approach?

Now, rather than identifying risks to be offset, are you also going to identify the assets to be offset?

We had a $157 billion high-risk derivatives portfolio here that OCC hardly knew existed, and that strikes me as being a hidden financial risk.

We identified serious risk management weaknesses throughout the entire Firm, and they became particularly evident in the CIO office.

Now, when the bank reviewed the new model for approval, at that time it said that implementation issues, certain issues, had to be worked out before the model was activated.

Did you know that these limits were supposed to be reviewed every year?

But its general direction, its general theme is to lead to tougher risk controls, is it not?

We have gone into the concerns which we have had about the whale trades all day long.

Now, it seems to me that the numbers tell the story, just as the OCC examiner told us.

Well, in general, let me ask you, Mr. Curry, what is your reaction to that activity, reducing the RWA not by selling risky assets but by designing models in order to produce lower numbers?

You think the average person listening to this would not think you were referring to the trades that were at issue that blew up?

We will have 12-minute rounds, if that is OK.

Should the OCC have been informed about that?

it was Mr. Dimon who was responsible for directing the data cutoff.

Did the OCC know any about that, what I have just described?