While there are many valid issues with BofA, the OP and many of the linked articles are very misleading (accidental or deliberate?) and should not go unquestioned here at DU. "Facts" are cherry-picked, sometimes out of context, and strung together to build a case against BofA as the biggest villan on Wall Street.

Some of the "points" being repeated here probably originated in the ongoing short selling attacking various financial institutions and many other publicly-traded firms. Consider what happened wrt VW late last year. A lot of this activity is ultimately driven by large private equity groups prepared to buy at the fire sale after having set the fire, although everyone now seems to have joined in.

Before you pile on attacking BofA, double check your sources and their claims. My only connection to BofA is as a typical small retail customer (e.g. checking, credit card) for over 40 years who has had modest complaints with them. From my perspective on them and from my long-term involvement with Wall Street, I find the OP to be based on several myths and misconceptions:

1. BofA is not really part of Wall Street. (Some recent acquisitions are/were.)

At its core, BofA is really "North Carolina National Bank" (later shortened to "NCNB"), formed by merging over time various banks across the state of NC. (Wachovia and several others had similar origins in NC.) Wall Street ignored them as unimportant, just another bunch of Southern rubes not up to doing important things like stocks, bonds, M&A and the resulting big paychecks. If you were important, your HQ would be in NY -- or at least in a financial center: Boston, Chicago, SF, and (for a while) Dallas. WS did not see that NCNB was developing the skills, infrastructure, and the people for later expansion. NCNB did this by focusing on meeting the retail banking needs of the individual and small business customers in the community, treating its customers fairly, avoiding risky ventures, and being a respected part of the community. Being a very good Bank.

2. With the 1980's came the rise of "interstate banking". Until then, laws and regulations, mostly by states, made it nearly impossible for a bank to expand into another state directly or by acquisition. During this era of deregulation, most of these barriers were removed or were taken from the states and made a Federal responsibility. At the time, nearly everyone expected the large money-center banks would acquire the regionals, reaping the rewards of economies of scale. The regionals feared this was likely. NCNB had other plans. Mostly by luck and a quirk of timing and law, it already had a tiny presence in Florida and used this to enter the FL market early. As regional or state rules changed, NCNB merged/acquired banks in neighboring states, sending in those in-house trained managers at all levels to the acquired operations, spreading the NCNB way. The Hugh McColl way.

NCNB becomes NationsBank. The "oil patch recession" and the savings and loan scandals were much like today but were more localized and involved fewer derivates and such. Texas was particularly hard hit, many high-flyers left with little more than a hat and an ego. Add the insult of some unknow bank in NC or SC taking over some of the largest banks in Texas, literally "taking over" -- sending in a herd of managers to "ride herd" on the Texas way and many of these new managers were women! Of course, not everything was being changed. More-conventional and sounder banking practices were coupled with the enormous task of cleaning up the non-performing assets/loans/properties. It was Hell for everyone, on all sides. Many people still lost nearly everything they had; many likely still hate and despise NationsBank/BofA whether for cause or just proximity. Over time, NationsBank was so effective in this cleanup that some charged that the assets had been sold at too great a discount by the RTC. Certainly possible, but there were not a lot of qualified buyers lining up at the time.

This effort took a lot resources, a "gamble" backed by confidence in a large and experienced team that understood what they were getting into.

Wall Street took notice, and they did not like what they saw. Even as NationsBank, Wachovia, et al continued to move up the list of largest banks, they remained in NC. When NationsBank acquired by merger the original BofA (of SF), it was presented as a merger of equals and pundits expected a HQ in SF or maybe a new one in NYC (of course!). BofA-SF had actually taken too much risk and there were hidden losses from trading and from lending for things like derivative trading. When these were unearthed in a few months, McColl removed many of the BofA-SF executives and forbid such practices.

BofA-SF had acquired several large banks itself before being acquired, and a lot of work remained to integrate the various operations. Some of these and others like Fleet have brought their own set of problems including their own histories and abuses, now all merged into the BofA-NC history, balance sheet, legal actions, etc.

The recent additions, bought at a discount (Countrywide) or "forced" to buy by the Fed (ML), are big challenges. But from my limited vantage point, it appears that NCNB/BofA is again acting as a bank and working through the portfolio. I find it interesting that the woman VP of IT is leading that effort.

NCNB/BofA is still not part of the "club" that dominates Wall Street, the Fed, and much of Congress.Little love in either direction. Some of these people seem to relish exercising their power and position to take BofA down a bit. I see others gleeful at any prospect that BofA might fail. Don't foreget the short sellers.

Not sure what is up with the OP.

I just hope that BofA will continue acting as a bank while cleaning up a lot of mess. I have more confidence in them than I have with the smart guys in DC and NY.