I was prepared todazzle CU Times readers this week with advice on how toattract and retain members using social media, but I've been toobusy SMH to do so.

For those of you who aren't hip to social media lingo, SMH meansshaking my head, usually in disbelief.

I've been doing that since Tuesday evening, when the WallStreet Journal published a leaked report from the U.S.Treasury's Financial Crimes Reporting Network that was veryunflattering to credit unions.

FinCEN, formed in 1990, collects and analyzes financialtransaction data with the intent of rooting out financial crimeslike money laundering.

I'm not a fan of the bureau. For starters, its effort isduplicative. If a credit union is breaking the law, or allowingmembers or vendors to do so, the NCUA should detect that in itsexams. If existing financial regulators are unable to effectivelymonitor those activities, they should be provided with moreresources – or forced to use existing resources more effectively –instead of creating yet another government bureau to double checktheir work.

It's enough to make me SMH.

Additionally, FinCEN is one of those secretive, conspiracytheory-inducing agencies that used 9/11 to increase its powers andas a result, weaken privacy rights.

Yes, terrorists could harm the U.S. by taking down our financialsystem. However, anytime the government uses fear of an overseasboogie man to collect vast amounts of data on the everydayactivities of Americans, I'm suspicious and can't help but SMH.

The leaked document called out 50 credit unions that FinCEN saidworks with suspicious money services businesses. However, none ofthese credit unions were accused of breaking the law or violatingregulations.

Instead, FinCEN said the network is concerned credit unionsaren't sophisticated enough to detect money laundering operationsand might not report them to authorities. Here's the part thatmakes me SMH: FinCEN arrived at this conclusion because creditunions are filing more suspicious activity reports toauthorities.

After 9/11, there was a much publicizedfederal government effort to increase communication and informationsharing among agencies. The million-dollar Sensitive CompartmentedInformation Facility at the NCUA, required by Treasury no less, waspart of that effort.

But did FinCEN involve the NCUA in this report at all? Mysources say no. Instead, FinCEN delivered the report to the NCUAlike an authority figure to a peon. That doesn't say much aboutTreasury's confidence in the NCUA or its respect for the agency'sregulatory authority. SMH.

NCUA Chairman Debbie Matz should be furious FinCEN produced thisreport without any input from the industry's primary regulator.Further, she should be livid the report was leaked from such asecretive agency.

This leak wasn't an accident.

They say there are no true friends in Washington, and that'sespecially true for journalists. Oh, people are friendly, but onlyas long as it advances their agenda. Even among true friendsthere's the understanding the agenda always come first. It's alwaysabout the agenda.

I'm not sure what the agenda was here. Maybe the Treasury istrying to chip away at the NCUA's reputation in an attempt todisband the agency. Maybe a banking lobbyist convinced a FinCENemployee to leak the information for banker political gain onCapitol Hill. Maybe this is another example of Treasury's OperationChoke Point initiative, which bullies financial institutions intocutting ties with industries it claims are risky, but are alsoconveniently politically unfavorable.

I don't know, but each possibility makes me SMH.

I also SMH because the NCUA continues to focus so much onprotecting the share insurance fund while focusing too little onthe industry's reputation risk that arises from fraud.

Maybe another NCUA action that makes me SMH could solve thisproblem. Joe Shoshoo, WesCorp's former onsite examiner, wasrecently named the agency's specialty examiner of the year. Maybethe NCUA should put him in charge of BSA compliance.

(Don't laugh. Remember, this is Washington, it couldhappen!)

CU Times has pressed the reputation risk issue for years,and now that NCUA Board Member Mark McWatters is focused on thetopic, I'm sure we'll cover it again in the future.

And I'm sure I'll SMH.