[ by Howard Haykin ] Jamie Dimon has testified before many Congressional committees, and often greeted to a 'hero's welcome - as someone who could do little or no wrong.  This week, he will appear before the Senate Banking Committee in a different role.  He'll be called upon to explain JPMorgan Chase's recent trading debacle.  Probably the first questions he can expect are:

• How much more will the estimated $2 billion trading loss grow?
• Wasn't the purported failed hedging strategy, in reality, a speculative bet?

Compliance Insights believes the 3rd opening question, should be:

• Isn't it true that these trades were part of a strategy that bank management endorsed, and not some large trades that somehow went undetected until it was too late?

Regulators also are facing criticism and sharing some of the embarrassment with JPMorgan officials.  The FDIC and others now are being asked about lapses in oversight, and the adequacy of proposed rules curbing proprietary trading. The Senate Banking Committee has asked Mr. Dimon to come prepared to provide "a thorough accounting of the trading losses," a committee aide said.  Senators will also want to know what Dimon and other JPM officials knew about the risks involved in the trading strategy. Dimon's Probable Demeanor. For all his past victory laps - salvaging the wreckage of Bear Stearns and WaMu during the financial crisis, Mr. Dimon can't be too coy in his answers.  People want to know how happened, and how did it mysteriously materialize from nothing to something in relatively short order, and was not detected until it was too late." So far Mr. Dimon has been contrite, calling the trades "sloppy" and saying "egregious mistakes" were made.  And in 4 prior public appearances about the trades, Dimon has declined to provide many details, saying that he feared doing so would give trading adversaries clues to how to take advantage of JPMorgan's still-open positions. Mr. Dimon will at least have to show he's got a handle on the portfolio, according to Mark Calabria, a former Republican aide on the Banking Committee, now with the libertarian Cato Institute.  "He's got to relay that ‘I've got control of the company, I've got some sense of what's going on and there are not a whole lot of little bombs in the company that I'm not aware of.'" Wait Until Mid-July. Barclays analyst Jason Goldberg expects the market will get just a morsel of information about the trades. Dimon has said that investors and analysts will have to wait for more details on the portfolio until mid-July when the company announces its Q2 financial results.  "I view Wednesday as the appetizer, but you have to wait to mid-July for the main course." Dimon however, may shed more light on the bank's decision to radically change the way risk was measured in the chief investment office responsible for the loss. Whale of a Loss. Dimon initially pegged the loss at $2 billion on 5/10/12, when he announced the derivatives losses generated from the bank's London office and trader Bruno Iksil, dubbed the "London Whale" in credit markets due to the size of the trading positions he took.  At the time, Dimon said the loss could go to $3 billion, "or more."  Some analysts estimate the losses could reach $5 billion, based on market talk about the exact trades.  But, even at $5bn, the loss would not be debilitating for the company, which last year spent $3.2bn on litigation and still made a $19bn profit. Yet, the larger questions raised by the loss, is whether bank executives and regulators can spot growing risks before it's too late.  Another questions is whether Dimon can reestablish his position as the unofficial spokesman for Wall Street banks - particularly in their fight for more moderate versions of the Volcker Rule. For further details, go to:  [Reuters, via CNBC, 6/10/12].