Category: Corruption

Not Enough Bullets

I just heard that the head of Goldman Sachs, Lloyd Blankfein is now a billionaire:

Goldman Sachs Group Inc. made hundreds of partners rich when it went public in 1999. Its performance since then has turned Lloyd Blankfein into a billionaire.

The chief executive officer of the Wall Street bank for the past nine years, Blankfein has seen his net worth surge to about $1.1 billion as the firm’s shares quadrupled since the initial public offering, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. As the largest individual owner of Goldman Sachs stock, he has a stake in the company worth almost $500 million. Real estate and an investment portfolio seeded by cash bonuses and distributions from the bank’s private-equity funds add more than $600 million.

All that money is because he was bailed out by the taxpayer.

He should have gone to jail like Depression era NYSE boss Richard Whitney, who was jailed, and after his release, worked on a farm.

This guy should be making license plates for the next few years, and thereafter, he should be banned from the securities industry for life.

These guys should frog marched down Wall Street in handcuffs.

We should make a parade of this, so that for the next few years, the bankster “Whiz Kids” will think twice before adding “innovations” that serve no purpose beyond lining their own pockets.

Yeah, I am So Confident in the Safety of the Keystone XL Pipeline

Up in Alberta, land of the Tar Sands, a brand new bitumen pipeline has just ruptured, causing a major oil spill:

One of the largest leaks in Alberta history has spilled about five million litres of emulsion from a Nexen Energy pipeline at the company’s Long Lake oilsands facility south of Fort McMurray.

The leak was discovered Wednesday afternoon.

Nexen said in a statement its emergency response plan has been activated and personnel were onsite. The leak has been stabilized, the company said.

The spill covered an area of about 16,000 square metres, mostly within the pipeline corridor, the company said. Emulsion is a mixture of bitumen, water and sand.

BTW, that high tech brand new (1 year in operation) pipeline?

The warning system failed as well:

Nexen’s “failsafe” system didn’t detect massive pipeline spill: http://t.co/ULEnxlmQEN pic.twitter.com/DmChECTUX7

— Anna Mehler Paperny (@amp6) July 17, 2015

This is what happens when the private industries capture the government that is supposed to regulate it.

And Once Again, Obama Bails out Crooked Banksters

It looks like the Obama Administration has once again insured that there is no accountability for crooked banksters:

Three top Democrats are accusing the Department of Housing and Urban Development of quietly removing a key clause in its requirements for taxpayer-guaranteed mortgage insurance in order to spare two banks recently convicted of federal crimes from being frozen out of the lucrative market.

HUD’s action is the latest in a series of steps by federal agencies to eliminate real-world consequences for serial financial felons, even as the Obama administration has touted its efforts to hold banks accountable.

In this sense, the guilty plea has become as meaningless to banks as their other ways of resolving criminal charges: out-of-court settlements, or deferred prosecution agreements. “Too Big to Fail” has morphed into “Too Big to Jail” — and then again, into “Bank Lives Matter.”

Sens. Sherrod Brown and Elizabeth Warren and Rep. Maxine Waters fired off a letter to HUD on Tuesday, saying they believe that the timing of the change was designed to clear the way for two banks recently convicted of federal crimes — JPMorgan Chase and Citigroup — to continue to make Federal Housing Administration-insured loans. Last year, JPMorgan Chase wrote $1.67 billion in FHA loans, and Citi wrote $342 million, according to data from the Congressional Research Service.

On May 20 of this year, JPMorgan Chase and Citigroup both entered a guilty plea on one felony count of conspiring to rig foreign currency exchange trades, the largest market on the globe.

Five days earlier, on May 15, HUD slipped a notice into the Federal Register, seeking to alter its standard loan-level certification form, known as HUD-92900-A. This form must be filled out for lenders to receive FHA insurance, which reimburses them if the homeowner falls into foreclosure.

On the current HUD-92900-A form, lenders must certify that their firm and its principals “have not, within a three-year period … been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against them” for a variety of crimes, including “commission of fraud … violation of Federal or State antitrust statutes or commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements or receiving stolen property.”

JPMorgan and Citi’s guilty plea would fall under the antitrust statute, and according to Brown, Warren and Waters’ reading of the certification, that would make them ineligible to obtain FHA insurance on their loans.

On the updated form, this language has been excised. The notice in the Federal Register did not even mention the removal, making it impossible to discover without comparing the old form and the proposed form side by side. The Wall Street Journal ran a story about the certification changes in May, but failed to notice that the new language would let law-breaking banks off scot-free.

The day before HUD released the notice in the Federal Register, the New York Times reported that the Justice Department sought to lessen the consequences of the guilty pleas in the foreign exchange rigging case, ensuring that federal regulators would not use the pleas to bar banks from certain business lines.

The Securities and Exchange Commission then granted waivers from disqualification to JPMorgan Chase, Citi, and the other guilty banks in the case, over the objections of one SEC Commissioner that the big banks had effectively become “Too Big to Bar.”

The HUD changes would similarly take away an automatic penalty for bank misbehavior. Per Brown, Warren and Waters, they “allow HUD to turn a blind eye to criminal violations — putting homebuyers and taxpayers at additional risk.”

HUD spokesperson Cameron French said the agency was not providing comment on the Democratic letter. He said HUD would review it and respond accordingly.

………

The Democratic lawmakers believe removing the certification language results in a change in policy rather than simply a change to the form. They requested that HUD withdraw the notice and issue it again under the Administrative Procedures Act, giving an explicit rationale for the change, and how it would affect JPMorgan and Citigroup’s FHA loan status. The public would then have an additional 60-day comment period.

This sort of crap needs to end.

Ukrainian Humor is Odd

Have you heard the one about how the Ukraine Prime Minister wants to reduce corruption in the country by privitizing state assets?

I’m not quite sure what the punch line is, but it’s clearly a joke: There has never been a privitization deal that has lessened corruption:

Ukraine’s Prime Minister is calling on Canadian investors to take part in a massive privatization of state assets organized by Kiev as a way of weakening the power of wealthy oligarchs blamed for spreading corruption in his country.

Arseniy Yatsenyuk cited, for instance, Ukrainian businessmen who have been “sitting like vampires” on the country’s publicly owned energy sector.

Mr. Yatsenyuk spoke to The Globe and Mail Tuesday after he joined Prime Minister Stephen Harper in Chelsea, Que., to announce that Ukraine and Canada had struck a free-trade deal.

Ukraine is preparing to spin off billions of dollars of government enterprises – including power generation and distribution assets and chemical plants – and the government wants Western investors to bring more orderly business methods to the Eastern European country.

“I don’t want Ukrainian tycoons to buy these state-owned enterprises,” Mr. Yatsenyuk said. “We would be happy to see Canadian folks buying Ukrainian assets and bringing into Ukraine good corporate governance, new investment and new jobs.

“That is what I asked the Canadian Prime Minister: ‘Please tell your investors and your businesses to jump into Ukraine.'”

Mr. Yatsenyuk said Ukraine’s leadership feels privatization and deregulation are the answers to the corruption that has plagued the country for decades.

“Big government always leads to big bribes and big corruption, so the less regulations you have the less authority the government has and the less chances to take bribes,” Mr. Yatsenyuk said.

OK, this isn’t a joke.  It’s a lie.

It’s a lie that is driven by a need to placate his masters in the west who want to buy state assets at pennies on the dollar.

It’s what Naomi Klein has called The Shock Doctrine, where, “Leaders exploit crises to push through controversial exploitative policies while citizens are too emotionally and physically distracted by disasters or upheavals to mount an effective resistance.”

To call this an anti-corruption measure is like calling a case of the Clap aid to picking up women.

The Question Is Not If Sheldon Silver Flips on Andrew Cuomo, but When

Marcello Trebitsch, the son-in-law of former New York State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver has just pled guilty to running a multi-year Ponzi scheme:

A son-in-law of former New York state Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver pleaded guilty to securities fraud Monday, admitting to cheating investors out of nearly $6 million in a Ponzi scheme.

Marcello Trebitsch, 37, of Brooklyn, entered the plea in Manhattan federal court in a written deal with prosecutors that recommended a prison sentence of four to five years. Sentencing was set for Nov. 2.

“I am sorry for what I have done and I apologize to the court and my family,” Trebitsch told Judge Vernon Broderick.

Prosecutors said Trebitsch, who is married to Silver’s daughter, solicited more than $8 million from four investors from 2007 to 2014 based on false and misleading representations.

Silver, a Democrat who resigned from his leadership position after his January arrest on corruption charges, has pleaded not guilty and said he will be vindicated. Prosecutors say Silver took nearly $4 million in payoffs and kickbacks.

Prosecutors said Trebitsch told investors they would secure double-digit gains with minimal risk of loss, but then Trebitsch mainly used the investors’ money for his own benefit and to repay other investors after suffering enormous trading losses on the portion of investors’ money that he did invest.

………

In a release, U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara said Trebitsche “ran a multimillion-dollar Ponzi scheme, defrauding investors who put their faith in him and entrusted him with their hard-earned savings. He returned their faith with deceit and self-dealing, lying about his trading losses and using investor money on himself.”

Note that his wife, Michelle Trebitsch (née Silver), is a co-owner of the firm, Allese Capital, as well as being the certified public accountant who did the firm’s books, so it is likely that they will extract some sort of plea, or at least an admission, out of her.

Additionally, it is likely that  and a whole lot of their assets are going to be forfeited.

I’ve got to imagine that US Attorney Bharara would be eager to have Andrew Cuomo in the dock. It would be a major feather in is cap.

Right now, he has the sentence of Silver’s son in law, the possible prosecution of his daughter, and the potential for leaving his grand children penniless as well as parentless for a few years would be powerful  inducements for former speaker Silver to cooperate.

Silver will talk, and only question is whether he gets Cuomo, or he gets one of his closest associates, because Cuomo managed to create a level of plausible deniability in his dealings by using proxies.

Given that Cuomo is a former prosecutor, my guess is that it will be the latter, but I am hoping for the former.

Least Surprising News of the Day

At The Intercept, Lee Fang notes that Eric Holder has returns to his former law firm, which lobbies for corporate criminals on Wall Street.

Notwithstanding Einstein’s laws, the revolving door is spinning faster than the speed of light:

Eric Holder Returns as Hero to Law Firm That Lobbies for Big Banks

After failing to criminally prosecute any of the financial firms responsible for the market collapse in 2008, former Attorney General Eric Holder is returning to Covington & Burling, a corporate law firm known for serving Wall Street clients.

The move completes one of the more troubling trips through the revolving door for a cabinet secretary. Holder worked at Covington from 2001 right up to being sworn in as attorney general in Feburary 2009. And Covington literally kept an office empty for him, awaiting his return.

The Covington & Burling client list has included four of the largest banks, including Bank of America, Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo. Lobbying records show that Wells Fargo is still a client of Covington. Covington recently represented Citigroup over a civil lawsuit relating to the bank’s role in Libor manipulation.

Covington was also deeply involved with a company known as MERS, which was later responsible for falsifying mortgage documents on an industrial scale. “Court records show that Covington, in the late 1990s, provided legal opinion letters needed to create MERS on behalf of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase and several other large banks,” according to an investigation by Reuters.

The Department of Justice under Holder not only failed to pursue criminal prosecutions of the banks responsible for the mortage meltdown, but in fact de-prioritized investigations of mortgage fraud, making it the “lowest-ranked criminal threat,” according to an inspector general report.

For insiders, the Holder decision to return to Covington was never a mystery. Timothy Hester, the chairman of Covington, told the National Law Journal that Holder’s return to the firm had been “a project” of his ever since Holder left to the join the administration in 2009. When the firm moved to a new building last year, it kept an 11th-story corner office reserved for Holder.

Well, now we know why the Obama DoJ prosecuted fewer financial wrongdoers than did the Bush DoJ.

It’s why I have always called him “Place” Holder.

After 6 Years of Prosecutorial Excess on Behalf of the Vampire Squid, We Finally See Aleynikov’s Total Exoneration

After multiple prosecutions, by multiple prosecutors, at the behest of Goldman Sachs, Sergey Aleynikov is a free man, for a while, at least:

Kevin H. Marino pumped his fist in the air in celebration. Then Mr. Marino, a New Jersey lawyer with a linebacker’s build, turned to his longtime client, Sergey Aleynikov, and gave Mr. Aleynikov, a former Goldman Sachs programmer, a bear hug and a hearty pat on the back.

Just moments earlier, a clerk in State Supreme Court in Manhattan had given Mr. Marino a copy of the judicial ruling that overturned Mr. Aleynikov’s conviction on a charge that he stole confidential computer code for Goldman Sachs’s high-speed trading business.

The clerk, saving Mr. Marino from having to thumb through the 72 pages to learn what Justice Daniel P. Conviser had ruled, simply whispered congratulations to the lawyer. For Mr. Aleynikov, 45, and Mr. Marino, it appeared to be the end of a six-year legal odyssey through the federal and state court systems in New York.

But the celebration may not last long. State prosecutors in Manhattan have already indicated they may appeal the decision issued Monday, which threw out a jury’s verdict.

Once before, Mr. Aleynikov had believed he was in the clear, when a federal appeals court overturned his conviction under a federal corporate espionage law in 2012. The appellate court ruled that federal prosecutors in Manhattan had misapplied the law, and it ordered Mr. Aleynikov to be immediately released from a federal prison.

Less than a year later, however, Mr. Aleynikov was back in court defending himself, after state prosecutors in Manhattan charged him with violating state computer-theft-related laws.

Now Justice Conviser — much like the federal appellate court before him — ruled that the decades-old state law that Mr. Aleynikov was convicted of violating did not apply to the accusations against him.

………

But Mr. Marino was at no loss for words in criticizing Goldman.

“Goldman Sachs is powerful enough to provoke two failed criminal prosecutions to settle a private score,” Mr. Marino said. “Goldman Sachs has also spent millions in shareholder dollars to evade their obligation to pay Mr. Aleynikov’s legal fees for winning two criminal cases.”

I rather expect Vance to appeal, since the Manhattan district attorney is clearly bought and paid for by Wall Street.

At the time, I was hoping that this would turn over the rock that is the illegal front running high frequency trading conducting by the biggest brokerage firms, but the prosecutors were determined to keep that covered up, and to continue to avoid prosecutions that might bot reveal Goldman’s skullduggery, and follow up with prosecutions grounded in bizarre legal theories.

Background here.

If True, Then the Germans Are up to Their Old Tricks, but One Must Consider the Source

Somehow or Other, this got deleted from my blog, and so I am reposting:

Andrew Ross Sorkin (of all people) teases an interesting tidbit out of Timothy Geithners self-serving and factually challenged memoir, Stress Test: Reflections on Financial Crises, specifically that in discussions with German FM Wolfgang Schäuble, Angela Merkel’s go to guy on finance had as his goal maximizing pain for the Greeks with the hope that they would be compelled to leave the Euro:

In July 2012, Timothy F. Geithner, the United States Treasury secretary at the time, traveled to Sylt, an island off Germany in the North Sea.

Mr. Geithner was there for a meeting with Wolfgang Schäuble, Germany’s finance minister, who would spend his summers at his vacation home on the tiny island.

The topic was Greece.

In the home’s library, the two men spoke about Greece’s prospects and begun discussing ways for the European Union to keep the country in the eurozone.

To Mr. Geithner’s dismay, however, Mr. Schäuble took the conversation in a different direction.

“He told me there were many in Europe who still thought kicking the Greeks out of the eurozone was a plausible — even desirable — strategy,” Mr. Geithner later recounted in his memoir, “Stress Test: Reflections on Financial Crises.” “The idea was that with Greece out, Germany would be more likely to provide the financial support the eurozone needed because the German people would no longer perceive aid to Europe as a bailout for the Greeks,” he says in the memoir.

“At the same time, a Grexit would be traumatic enough that it would help scare the rest of Europe into giving up more sovereignty to a stronger banking and fiscal union,” Mr. Geithner wrote. “The argument was that letting Greece burn would make it easier to build a stronger Europe with a more credible firewall.”

Fast-forward three years. What Mr. Schäuble articulated that summer afternoon to Mr. Geithner is finally taking shape.

………

A crucial decision made over the weekend had largely gone unremarked upon but is telling. The European Central Bank decided to halt an expansion of its emergency lending facility to Greek banks. That facility could have allowed the banks to continue operating without as much panic and helped avoid some of the capital controls by providing additional liquidity.

………

By closing the cash spigot, the E.C.B. managed to instill additional fear and panic into the day-to-day lives of the Greek people, ahead of the vote on the referendum.

That panic could cut two ways. The Greeks could look at the lines around the banks as a warning of what’s about to come, which would undoubtedly be worse in the short term, and vote in favor of the latest bailout agreement.

Of course, they could also view the lines as further evidence of their subjugation to the eurozone and the continued austerity they would experience under the bailout, pushing them to vote against it.

The E.C.B.’s decision also has another important purpose outside of Greece: It might be a warning to countries like Spain and Italy, should they ever consider following Greece out of the eurozone — if that comes to pass.

It may seem counterintuitive, but rather than make a Greece exit easy and seamless to avoid dislocations in financial markets, the E.C.B. has the perverse incentive to make it messy and difficult to deter others.

None of this is to suggest that the E.C.B. is the source of Greece’s problems. They were largely self-inflicted. Regardless of whether you think that the creation of the euro was a terrible mistake, Europe has severely mishandled the situation in Greece.

“The economics behind the program that the ‘troika’ (the European Commission, the European Central Bank, and the International Monetary Fund) foisted on Greece five years ago has been abysmal, resulting in a 25 percent decline in the country’s G.D.P.,” Joseph Stiglitz, an economist and professor at Columbia University, wrote on Monday. “I can think of no depression, ever, that has been so deliberate.”

In his book, Mr. Geithner reflected on his conversations with European leaders about the measures they sought to take. “The desire to impose losses on reckless borrowers and lenders is completely understandable, but it is terribly counterproductive in a financial crisis,” Mr. Geithner said.

At one point, he told Mr. Schäuble: “You know you sound a bit like Herbert Hoover in the 1930s. You need to be thinking about growth.”

(emphasis mine)
If this report is true, and note that I do not consider Geithner’s memoir to be much more than an exercise in self-hagiography, then much of the pain of the that Greece has experienced over the past 6 years has largely been an exercise in sadism for its own sake by the Germans.

If there is a flaw at the heart of the European Union, it is Germany hegemony, which allows them to enforce their chauvinism on the other members.

Óχι!*

Not only did the no vote win the referendum vote on further austerity for Greece, it absolutely crushed:

Greek voters gave their government a desperately needed victory Sunday in its showdown with European creditors as the country decisively rejected a bailout proposal that officials here had scorned as “blackmail.”

With nearly all of the votes counted, “no” had won a landslide 61 percent — a bigger figure than nearly anyone had predicted. The result sent thousands of government supporters streaming into central Athens’s Syntagma Square to wave blue-and-white Greek flags, dance to traditional folk songs, and revel in their collective defiance of dire European warnings.

But even as they celebrated, an angry reaction from European officials suggested that Greece’s profound economic struggles may be only beginning. With Greek banks on the verge of in­solvency, analysts immediately raised the odds that Greece will be ejected from the euro zone. Government opponents despaired that the country may have taken a dark turn.

………

Several top European officials suggested that there would be no new leeway for Greece, and that in fact the vote had made a deal less likely.

Germany’s deputy chancellor, Sigmar Gabriel, said Greece had “destroyed the last bridges across which Europe and Greece could have moved toward a compromise.”

“Tsipras and his government are leading the Greek people onto a path of bitter sacrifice and hopelessness,” he told the Berlin daily Der Tagesspiegel.

Julia Klöckner, deputy chairwoman of Germany’s ruling party, tweeted: “The E.U. is not a make-a-wish club in which a single member sets the rules and the others pay the bill.”

Nice words from the Krauts, but it is also a bald faced and pernicious lie, as the latest IMF report has revealed that the Troika has been negotiating in bad faith:

On July 2, the IMF released its analysis of whether Greek debt was sustainable or not. The report said that Greek debt was not sustainable and deep debt relief along with substantial new financing were needed to stabilize Greece. In reaching this new assessment, the IMF stated it had learned many lessons. Among them: Greeks would not take adequate structural reforms to spur growth, they would not sell enough of their assets to repay their debt, and they were unable to undertake sufficient fiscal austerity. That left no choice but to grant Greece greater debt relief and to provide new financing to tide Greece over till it could stand on its own feet. The relief, the IMF, says must be provided by European creditors while the IMF is repaid in whole.

The IMF’s report is important because it reveals that the creditors negotiated with Greece in bad faith. For months, a haze was allowed to settle over the question of Greek debt sustainability. The timing of the report’s release—on the eve of a historic Greek referendum, well after the technical negotiations have broken down—suggests that there was no intention to allow a sober analysis of the Greek debt burden. Paul Taylor of Reuters tells us that the European authorities worked hard to suppress it and Landon Thomas of the New York Times reports that, until a few days ago, the IMF had played along.

As a result, the entire burden of adjustment was to fall on the Greeks before any debt reduction could even be contemplated. This conclusion was based on indefensible economic logic and the absence of the IMF’s debt sustainability analysis intentionally biased the negotiations.

As an international organization responsible for global financial stability, it is the IMF’s role to explain clearly and honestly the economic parameters of a bailout negotiation. The Greeks, many said, benefited from low interest rates and repayments stretched out over many years. Therefore, no debt relief was needed. But, of course, as the IMF now makes clear, if a country has to repay about 4 percent of its income each year over the next 40 years and that country has poor growth prospects precisely because repaying that debt will lower growth, then debt is not sustainable. If this report had been made public earlier, the tone of the public debate and the media’s boorish stereotyping of Greeks and its government would have been balanced by greater clarity on the Greek position.

………

The creditors’ serial errors are well documented, including by the staff of the IMF. Continuing deliberately to suppress past errors is an act of bad faith but continuing to repeat those errors in making future projections of the Greek debt burden is a willful abuse of the trust that the international community has placed in an organization set up to serve the best interests of all nations. If the IMF’s latest numbers are properly reconstructed, the Greek debt burden is much greater than portrayed—and the policy measures proposed to reduce that burden will make matters worse.

………

Here is how this principle applies today to Greece. Recall that prices in Greece have been falling for about two years now. Since debt repayment obligations do not change when businesses sell at lower prices or when wages fall, businesses and households struggle to repay their debt in that deflationary environment. Investment and consumption are held back, the government receives less revenue, making its debt repayment harder. If fiscal austerity is imposed in such a deflationary setting, prices and wages are forced down faster, making debt repayment even harder. This is Fisher’s debt-deflation cycle. Greece is in a debt-deflation cycle. It is the medical equivalent of a trauma patient: the blood flow does not stop on its own and, in such a condition, austerity is like asking the patient to run around the block to demonstrate good faith.

The IMF’s latest numbers bear out this diagnosis. In November 2012, the IMF tentatively concluded that Greek debt was borderline sustainable if it would undertake austerity to reduce its debt burden and structural reforms to spur growth. The primary surplus (the budget surplus without interest payments) was to rise from -1½ percent in 2012 to 4½ by 2016—an extraordinary additional austerity on top of the extraordinary austerity that had already been undertaken since 2010. The Greek government actually delivered on the austerity through 2014, bringing the primary budget in balance, as per the proposed timeline.

But look what happened along the way—and this is the debt deflation cycle. In 2012, prices were expected to be broadly stable over the coming years. Instead, prices fell by over 5 percent just in 2013 and 2014. True, it is important for Greek wages and prices to eventually fall. But because of the Irving Fisher theorem, when prices fall, the debt burden increases. To reduce the debt burden, Fisher says, not only must austerity stop, but the economy must be “reflated.” He emphasizes that it was President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s policy of reflation that ultimately stopped the Great Depression. In an analogy similar to the trauma patient, Fisher says that when tipped beyond a point, the boat continues to tilt further until it has capsized. In a deflationary economy, the bankruptcies and distress can go on in a vicious spiral for years.

………

We may not like the conclusion, but it is quite simple. Greece has not grown and prices have fallen because that was to be expected when persistent austerity is laid on top of an unsustainable debt. The debt-deflation spiral always outpaces the returns from structural reforms. As certainly as these things can be predicted, on the path set out by the creditors, the stakes will continue to be escalated: the debt-to-GDP ratio will continue to rise, the calls for more austerity will grow, and, as the pattern repeats, more debt relief will needed.

The IMF report is very specific, it says that Greece needs billions in debt forgiveness or the debt will remain unsustainable: (See also here)

The International Monetary Fund, a big Greek creditor, conceded a point on Thursday that the Athens government has long been making: Without some reduction in the country’s staggering debt load, Greece has little hope of a sustained economic recovery.

It was a significant acknowledgment, and an indication that if or when bailout negotiations resume, Greece might win some relief from its debt of 300 billion euros, or about $330 billion. It just might not be relief granted to the leftist government of Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras.

It should be noted that the EU bureaucracy aggressively tried to suppress this report:

Euro zone countries tried in vain to stop the IMF publishing a gloomy analysis of Greece’s debt burden which the leftist government says vindicates its call to voters to reject bailout terms, sources familiar with the situation said on Friday.

The document released in Washington on Thursday said Greece’s public finances will not be sustainable without substantial debt relief, possibly including write-offs by European partners of loans guaranteed by taxpayers.

It also said Greece will need at least 50 billion euros in additional aid over the next three years to keep itself afloat.

Publication of the draft Debt Sustainability Analysis laid bare a dispute between Brussels and the Washington-based global lender that has been simmering behind closed doors for months.

This may be the reason for the lopsided vote: Any Greek voter who understood these dynamics could help but conclude that the Troika have no interest in Greece beyond making an example of the country.

My guess is that Germany, with the acquiescence of the EU bureaucracy, will attempt to expel Greece from the Euro Zone, since the alternative is to rip the mask off their attempt at regime change, but Greece could tie this up in legal proceedings for months, if not years:

“The Greek government will make use of all our legal rights,” proclaimed the finance minister, Yanis Varoufakis, according to The Daily Telegraph.

We are taking advice and will certainly consider an injunction at the European Court of Justice. The EU treaties make no provision for euro exit and we refuse to accept it. Our membership is not negotiable.

But, can a hypothetical Grexit decision adopted by the EU institutions be legally challenged?

………

So, what decision would Greece be challenging? It would be a decision adopted by the EU institutions and the Eurogroup finance ministers to force a Greek exit of the eurozone due to its default on fulfilling the obligations attached to its participation in the monetary union (criteria laid down in Article 140.1 of the Treaty of the Function of the European Union) and the conditions attached to Greece’s bailout program.

Greece would then still be an EU member state but it will have to revert to the drachma or adopt a new currency. Nevertheless, as mentioned, there is no explicit legal basis for such a decision. One can argue that the failure to fulfil the eurozone commitments would amount to a serious violation of the founding treaties, and that it is possible to adopt the decision based on the principles embodied in the treaties. But the fact is that the treaties would need to be amended in order to provide for this.

I would note that throughout all of this, someone is spreading a rumor that the Greek government is working on a program of depositor bail-ins, where depositor accounts would be raided to pay off the EU lenders, as happened in Cyprus.  (My money is that these rumors are coming from Brussels)

One hopes that the confluence of all these events will result in something other than the moral and economic bankruptcy that we have seen from the EU, IMF, and Germany, but I doubt it.

*Greek for no.

I So Hope that Cuomo is Toast

Bill De Blasio, the mayor of the world’s greatest city, has had enough, and he has accused Governor Andrew Cuomo of prosecuting a vendetta against him at the expense of the City of New York:

Mayor Bill de Blasio, in candid and searing words rarely employed by elected officials of his stature, accused Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo on Tuesday of stymieing New York City’s legislative goals out of personal pettiness, “game-playing” and a desire for “revenge.”

In an extraordinary interview, Mr. de Blasio, appearing to unburden himself of months’ worth of frustrations, said that Mr. Cuomo — who, like the mayor, is a Democrat — “did not act in the interests” of New Yorkers by blocking measures like reforming rent laws and the mayor’s long-term ability to control the city’s public schools.

“I started a year and a half ago with a hope of a very strong partnership,” Mr. de Blasio said of the governor, whom he has known for two decades. “I have been disappointed at every turn.”

Mr. Cuomo, the mayor said, had acted vindictively toward the city, citing cuts in state financing for public housing and what he called an abrupt ramp-up of state inspections of city homeless shelters “with a vigor we had never seen before.”

“That was clearly politically motivated,” Mr. de Blasio said, “and that was revenge for some perceived slight.”

The mayor added: “It’s not about policy. It’s not about substance. It’s certainly not about the millions of people affected.”

………

There is a long history of bitterness between mayors and governors of New York, even those from the same party. But Mr. de Blasio, speaking calmly and deliberatively, indicated that his relationship with the governor had deteriorated to a historic low.

The mayor summoned journalists to his City Hall office for a pair of interviews on Tuesday afternoon, only hours before he was to leave New York for a weeklong family vacation to the Southwest. He said he had finally run out of patience with Mr. Cuomo, who has been widely viewed as being an obstacle to the mayor’s agenda since Mr. de Blasio took office in 2014.

“We will not play these games,” Mr. de Blasio said, adding that Mr. Cuomo’s behavior was “not anything like acceptable government practice, and I think people all over the state are coming to the same conclusion.”

………

Some mayoral aides suggested that Mr. de Blasio might be able to convince city liberals and Democrats that Mr. Cuomo was no longer representing their interests, threatening the support for a governor who was defeated outside New York City in last year’s campaign.

………

“I’m not going to be surprised if these statements lead to some attempts at revenge,” Mr. de Blasio said, his voice even. “And we’ll just call them right out. Because we are just not going to play that way.”

If the 5 boroughs sit on their hands in the next gubernatorial election,  Andrew Cuomo loses.

In fact, there is a reasonable chance that if New York City works against him, he loses the primary.

After all, running as “inevitable” in 2014, Zephyr Teachout, who had next to no money, and started late, got 34% of the vote against a Democratic Party apparatus that was uniformly against her.

He is widely loathed by the party base, and he returns the feelings.

It’s also clear that he is still a person of interest in federal investigations of corruption in Albany.

I do not think that Cuomo gets it, but stick a fork in him. he’s done.

Disclaimer:  It is possible that I am projecting my own feelings into this matter.

The Clown Car Gets Bigger, a Lot Bigger

Jabba the Governor, AKA Chris Christie, has announced his candidacy for the Presidency:

Gov. Chris Christie declared an uphill candidacy for president on Tuesday with New Jersey-style swagger, unconcealed disgust for Washington and a high regard for his own candor, vowing that “there is one thing you will know for sure: I say what I mean and I mean what I say.”

Relying on his biggest, and perhaps his last, remaining advantage in a field of better-financed and better-liked rivals — his personality — Mr. Christie portrayed himself as the only candidate in the Republican field who is forthright and forceful enough to run the country.

“We need strength and decision-making and authority back in the Oval Office,” he said.

Pacing the stage without a prepared text and raising his voice to a shout at times, he vowed to campaign and govern as a colorful teller of difficult truths, even if “it makes you cringe every once in a while.

The unfortunate part about his role as self-proclaimed truth teller, is that no one buys it any more:

After 14 years of watching Christie, a warning: He lies

Tom Moran | Star-Ledger Editorial Board

Most Americans don’t know Chris Christie like I do, so it’s only natural to wonder what testimony I might offer after covering his every move for the last 14 years.

Is it his raw political talent? No, they can see that.

Is it his measurable failure to fix the economy, solve the budget crisis or even repair the crumbling bridges? No, his opponents will cover that if he ever gets traction.

My testimony amounts to a warning: Don’t believe a word the man says.

If you have the stomach for it, this column offers some greatest hits in Christie’s catalog of lies.

Don’t misunderstand me. They all lie, and I get that. But Christie does it with such audacity, and such frequency, that he stands out.

He’s been lying on steroids lately, on core issues like Bridgegate, guns and that cozy personal friendship with his buddy, the King of Jordan. I’ll get to all that.

But let’s start with my personal favorite. It dates back to the 2009 campaign, when the public workers unions asked him if he intended to cut their benefits.

He told them their pensions were “sacred” to him.

“The notion that I would eliminate, change, or alter your pension is not only a lie, but cannot be further from the truth,” he wrote them. “Your pension and benefits will be protected when I am elected governor.”

He then proceeded to make cutting those benefits the centerpiece of his first year in office.

This, we know now, was vintage Christie. Other lying politicians tend to waffle, to leave themselves some escape hatch. You can almost smell it.

But Christie lies with conviction. His hands don’t shake, and his eyes don’t wander. I can hardly blame the union leaders who met with him for believing him.

………

And that’s my warning to America. When Christie picks up the microphone, he speaks so clearly and forcefully that you assume genuine conviction is behind it.

Be careful, though. It’s a kind of spell.

He is a remarkable talent with a silver tongue. But if you look closely, you can see that it is forked like a serpent’s.

Admittedly, this is just The Largest Newspaper in the State of New Jersey saying this, and who reads the papers these days.

However, the New York Times, which is where the Sunday morning gasbags get their talking points, said the same thing, though they did not use the word “Lie” because they are such delicate flowers:

On his new website, Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey portrays himself as a guy who gets attacked for “telling it like it is,” but that’s what his mom told him to do from her deathbed.

It is part of the legend Mr. Christie has carefully cultivated for many years, with startling success. He is described as “brash” and “bold,” with a certain rough charisma that his political opponents just cannot handle. “I get accused a lot of times of being too blunt and too direct and saying what’s on my mind just a little bit too loudly,” he says in the first video for his presidential campaign, showing him with a selected group of adoring voters.

It’s fundamentally nonsense. There are lines between brash and belligerent, between open and obnoxious, and, most important, between “telling it like it is” and not telling the truth. Mr. Christie crosses those lines all the time, as Tom Moran, the editorial page editor of The Star-Ledger of Newark, documented in a blistering column about Mr. Christie’s “catalog of lies.”

………

Expect to see a lot of Mr. Christie at those phony “town hall” meetings, staged with selected supporters. You will hear a lot about his common touch, his “straight talk” and his love for Bruce Springsteen.

It’s a smoke screen. Look behind it at the governor whose own constituents say by an overwhelming majority that he has done a bad job, should not run for the White House and would make a bad president.

I don’t think that I’ve ever seen the New York Times editorial board gone after an American with such vehemence.

The media’s man crush on Chris Christie is over.

His brand of “straight talk” has gone from an asset to a joke line.

If He Doesn’t Get Impeached, Paul LePage Should Be Horsewhipped in the Public Square

In the Maine State House, Speaker Speaker Mark Eves has been a consistent thorn in the side in the side of Governor, and Teabagger Supremo, Paul LePage.

Because of this, LePage threatened to pull funding a the school that had recently hired him:

The board of Good Will-Hinckley School withdrew its job offer to House Speaker Mark Eves just days before he was to become the school’s new president, making the decision after Gov. Paul LePage apparently threatened to withhold state funding for the school.

The school said Wednesday that the board of directors had “voted to seek a new direction for the institution’s leadership” in order to avoid “political controversy.” But Eves’ attorney said the state legislator had been “terminated … without cause” and hinted at legal action against the governor.

Eves, meanwhile, released a statement accusing LePage of “blackmailing” the school for at-risk youths by threatening to cut $500,000 in state funding. He said that could potentially cause the loss of another $2 million in private funding for the school, which has an annual budget of $4.5 million.

“The governor knows that these financial losses would put the school out of business, but he has refused to back down,” said Eves, D-North Berwick. “This is an abuse of power that jeopardizes Maine children. The governor’s actions represent the worst kind of vendetta politics Maine has ever seen. If it goes unchecked, no legislator will feel safe in voting his conscience for fear that the governor will go after the legislator’s family and livelihood.”

Good Will-Hinckley, in Fairfield, announced June 9 that it had hired Eves as the school’s new president despite a last-minute intercession by LePage. On Wednesday, board Chairman Jack Moore announced the decision to withdraw the offer to Eves, who was scheduled to begin work next Wednesday.

“The basis for this decision is grounded in the institution’s desire not to be involved in political controversy that will divert attention away from our core mission of serving children and has the potential to jeopardize the future of our school,” Moore said in a prepared statement. “Good Will-Hinckley has a very dedicated staff. The board’s first priority is to act in the best interest of students and educators alike and the board’s actions reflect its unwavering commitment to them.”

Eves is seriously considering suing LePage, and it appears that “Hizzoner” made his threats in writing.

The Maine Attorney General is also, “Very troubled,” by the Governor’s behavior, though she has issued no further comment.

My first question was, “Where is the impeachment investigation?”

Well, here it is:

Six lawmakers said Thursday they will attempt to launch impeachment proceedings against Republican Gov. Paul LePage for his alleged role in pushing Democratic House Speaker Mark Eves out of a new job at Good Will-Hinckley School.

Independent Reps. Jeffrey Evangelos of Friendship and Ben Chipman of Portland and Democratic Reps. Pinny Beebe-Center of Rockland, Lydia Blume of York, Roberta Beavers of South Berwick and Charlotte Warren of Hallowell said Thursday they are exploring disciplinary action against LePage, including impeachment.

“I’m asking my fellow legislators to study abuse of authority, conduct unbecoming and possible misuse of public assets,” said Evangelos, who is leading the effort. “I believe that Gov. LePage has violated his authority by intimidating a private entity with the end objective of violating speaker Eves’ civil rights, his ability to seek outside employment and provide for his family.”

The House of Representatives has “sole power of impeachment” according to Article 4 of the Maine Constitution. The Senate has the “sole authority to try all impeachments.” Impeachment requires a two-thirds vote of the Senate.

Unfortunately, the leadership in the House are going all wobbly on this:

Democratic leaders on Friday said they are reviewing all options to deal with what they describe as a disturbing pattern of behavior by Republican Gov. Paul LePage. At the same time, they have asked their colleagues to not act rashly and to stay focused on legislative work – especially an override of an expected LePage budget veto that will require a bipartisan, two-thirds vote.

House majority leader Rep. Jeff McCabe, D-Skowhegan, and assistant leader Rep. Sara Gideon, D-Freeport, said that “nothing is off the table,” when it comes to possible actions against LePage, but they urged restraint among activists and rank-and-file lawmakers.

The two spoke a day after House Speaker Mark Eves, D-North Berwick, said that LePage threatened to yank state funding from the Good Will-Hinckley school unless it broke its contract to hire Eves as its next president. The story has dominated discussion at the state Capitol, where attention had been focused on getting a state budget passed, with members of both parties expressing concern that LePage overstepped his executive power by using funding for the school as a weapon against a political foe.

………

The Eves controversy has prompted a call for impeachment – unprecedented in Maine gubernatorial history – among some liberal lawmakers and activists. On Friday, McCabe and Gideon didn’t rule out such a proceeding, but focused more on the possibility of an investigation, by either state or federal authorities.

“Based on some of the comments that the governor has had recently, as well as his actions with Speaker Eves and impeding Speaker Eves from obtaining a job, I think there’s a lot of research that’s going to go on,” McCabe said. “There’s also some pending legal matters. So there’s nothing that’s off the table, but there’s a lot of research that needs to be done.”

Too many weasel words from the leadership.

This sort of sh%$ has former Texas Governor Rick Perry under indictment in Texas.  Do the people of Maine really want to be on the wrong side of abuse of power and Texas?

In that case, Perry had the fig leaf of a  DUI arrest for the DA, but here, the Governor is claiming that his threats are only as a result of the political stances of an opponent.

I hope not.

Looters Gotta Loot

And, since the days of GHW Bush’s father Prescott laundering Nazi money, the Bush family has been at the top of the looting pyramid:

Jeb Bush had just completed his successful campaign for re-election and now confronted a second term as governor of Florida. Seeking to shape his immediate agenda, he solicited advice from one of his most trusted advisors: David Rancourt, his former deputy chief of staff, who had since become a corporate lobbyist at one of the most powerful firms in the state, the Southern Strategy Group.

“If you were governor, what would you be focusing on for the next two or three years,” Bush wrote Rancourt in an email dated Aug. 13, 2003. “What initiatives do you think we should pursue? How do you think we should do it?”

Two days after sending that note, Bush effectively delivered on one of Southern Strategy Group’s key aims: He signed legislation limiting the dollar value of damages that hospitals and insurance companies could be forced to pay to resolve instances of medical malpractice. The Florida Supreme Court would eventually overturn the bill, arguing that it effectively punished victims of mistreatment in hospitals. But at least for the moment, the governor’s signature handed a victory to Rancourt’s firm, which represented a major association of hospitals. It added to the cachet of the Southern Strategy Group, whose leadership was drawn heavily from the ranks of former Bush staff members and trusted associates.

………

According to IBTimes’ review of email correspondence between Jeb Bush, his top aides and Southern Strategy Group lobbyists, the firm frequently engineered meetings with the governor for its clients. A lobbyist at the firm helped write two of his major speeches. In some instances, Bush sought the direct input of Southern Strategy lobbyists as he crafted his legislative agenda, and he gave them private glimpses of public policy as they represented the corporate interests that had a financial stake in his decisions.

The Bush family has a long history of enriching themselves, and themselves through their political clout.  (Look at the deal that with the Texas Rangers Baseball Team that made George W. Bush’s fortune)

Corruption and self dealing?  It’s a family tradition.

Cable Company F%$#ery, Fiber Edition

Rather unsurprisingly, much like its cable competitors, Verizon* is steadfastly refusing to do infrastructure build-outs that in promised in exchange for its getting a cable franchise:

New York City officials today ordered Verizon to complete fiber builds that the company was supposed to finish a year ago. If Verizon doesn’t comply, the city can seek financial damages.

“In a 2008 agreement with New York City, Verizon committed to extend its FiOS network to every household across the five boroughs by June 30, 2014,” said the announcement of an audit released today by the city’s Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications (DoITT).

Verizon’s FiOS fiber network delivers Internet, TV, and phone service to areas traditionally served by Verizon’s copper landlines and DSL Internet.

“Through a thorough and comprehensive audit, we have determined that Verizon substantially failed to meet its commitment to the people of New York City,” Mayor Bill de Blasio said. “As I’ve said time and again, Verizon must deliver on its obligation to the City of New York and we will hold them accountable.”

The agreement, which gave Verizon a cable television franchise, says NYC may “seek and/or pursue money damages” from Verizon if it fails to deliver on its promises.

Verizon also failed to meet broadband promises in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, but those states let the company off the hook.

Verizon is disputing New York City’s findings. Verizon met the requirement to pass all households with fiber, though not all residents can actually buy fiber service, the company says. Verizon last year blamed landlords for delays. It also blamed Hurricane Sandy from October 2012, even though Verizon was still claiming to be “ahead of schedule” in April 2013.

………

Verizon further said that “it is important to note that it’s not a mere coincidence that the report is made public today, and labor negotiations with our largest union begin on Monday. It’s well known the union has ties to the city administration, and things like this are a familiar union tactic we have seen before.” The Communications Workers of America union has blamed Verizon’s fiber shortcomings on job cuts.

Verizon has also called complaints about its landline maintenance “meaningless rhetoric and hyperbole from the unions.”

The city’s audit report said refusal of access by landlords cannot explain the full extent of Verizon’s failure to bring fiber to all residents. Property managers interviewed by the city said Verizon has refused to extend service to buildings unless the company was granted exclusive agreements that would shut out other providers.

If the contract allows for pulling the franchise, I would like to see that.

If it doesn’t, use eminent domain to purchase the fiber infrastructure, and get the money for it from Verizon’s fines.

In a perfect world, of course, Verizon executives would be invited (compelled) to participate on that classic game show, Ow! My Balls!, but I will take what I can get.

What the free market mousketeers refuse to understand about this crap is that companies make more money from maintaining a monopoly and shutting out other competitors, so the free market will not lead to competition and lower prices.

*Full disclosure, I am a relatively satisfied (monopoly rents make them too expensive) Verizon FIOS® customer.

Light is a Disinfectant

A few weeks back, the New York Times reported on how Disney was laying off IT workers, and forcing them to train their H-1B (Gastarbeiter) replacements.

Now that this has come to light, and generated a sh%$ storm of condemnation,. Disney has decided not to lay off its workers:

In late May, about 35 technology employees at Disney/ABC Television in New York and Burbank, Calif., received jarring news. Managers told them that they would all be laid off, and that during their final weeks they would have to train immigrants brought in by an outsourcing company to do their jobs.

The training began, but after a few days it was suspended with no explanation. In New York, the immigrants suddenly stopped coming to the offices. Then on June 11, managers summoned the Disney employees with different news: Their layoffs had been canceled.

“We were read a precisely worded statement,” said one of the employees, who was relieved but reluctant to be named because he remains at the company. “We were told our jobs were continuing and we should consider it as if nothing had happened until further notice.”

Although the number of layoffs planned was small, the cancellation, which was first reported by Computerworld, a website covering the technology business, set off a hopeful buzz among tech employees in Disney’s empire. It came in the midst of a furor over layoffs in January of 250 tech workers at Walt Disney World in Orlando, Fla. People who lost jobs there said they had to sit with immigrants from India, some on temporary work visas known as H-1B, and teach them to perform their jobs as a condition for receiving severance.

 Let’s be clear on this:  If you have to train your replacements, and your replacements are brought in under H-1B (or the related L-1) visa, and you have to train them, then you are violating the law.

It is required that the visa recipients have, “highly specialized knowledge,” and if they need months of training, as is reported in the Disney World stories, they clearly do not have this knowledge.

It’s not about, “highly specialized knowledge,” it is about getting cheaper and more docile (they have to leave the country if they leave the job) workers, and about depressing wages in the field.

Many people suggest that the solution is aggressive enforcement, but I disagree.

The solution is to ensure that the cost of an H-1B visa is always more than that of hiring a citizen or Green Card holder.

You can either do this through setting the fees high, or conduct monthly auctions for the right to make applications (I favor the latter because it fits into the “free market” ethos that seems to dominate national political discourse).

If tech companies have to pay a guest worker significantly of what they would pay an American, the number of visa applications would fall,and tech workers’ salaries would rise.

Nope, No Corruption Here………

It is not surprising that Obama wants to move a portion of military pension to defined contribution (401(k) type) plan, because, after all, Obama has been all about allowing Wall Street to loot, but it is a bit unseemly for the White House to direct most of the business a longtime political supporter, Blackrock:

American service members are confronting a potential haircut. Under a proposal the Pentagon outlined last week, new members of the armed forces would see their guaranteed retirement benefits cut by one-fifth if Congress approves the plan.

But if future veterans are being asked to make do with less, one key constituency stands to capture more: Wall Street.

Under the details of the Pentagon plan, the federal government would divert 3 percent of service members’ pay into a 401(k)-style plan that would be managed largely by BlackRock, a financial firm whose executives helped bankroll President Barack Obama’s election campaigns.

The change could wind up transferring as much as $50 billion from military paychecks to BlackRock, generating tens of millions of dollars in fees for the Wall Street giant. BlackRock employees have donated over $90,000 to Obama’s campaigns directly, and nearly $75,000 to the Democratic National Committee during the course of Obama’s two presidential campaigns, according to data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics. BlackRock Chairman and CEO Larry Fink was also a prominent supporter of Obama’s election campaigns, and the company in 2013 named Hillary Clinton’s former State Department chief of staff to its board of directors.

Gee, what a surprise.

Well, I guess that funding for the Barack Obama Presidential library, and 6-7 figure speaker fees don’t generate themselves.

Cleveland Prosecutors and Police Just Got Served

On Monday, I noted that communities in Cleveland had used a peculiarity in Ohio law to ask a judge to file charges against the two police involved in the shooting death of Tamir Rice.

Well, the judge has ruled that there is probable cause to file charges, but that he cannot actually file the charges:

A judge in Cleveland ruled Thursday that probable cause existed to charge two Cleveland police officers in the death of a 12-year-old boy, Tamir Rice, but the judge also said he did not have the power to order arrests without a complaint being filed by a prosecutor.

In his ruling, Judge Ronald B. Adrine, presiding judge of the Municipal Court, found probable cause to charge Officer Timothy Loehmann, who fired the fatal shot, with murder, involuntary manslaughter, reckless homicide and dereliction of duty. He also found probable cause to charge Officer Loehmann’s partner, Officer Frank Garmback, with negligent homicide and dereliction of duty.

“This court determines that complaints should be filed by the prosecutor of the City of Cleveland and/or the Cuyahoga County prosecutor,” Judge Adrine wrote.

The shooting of Tamir last Nov. 22 was one of a series of killings of unarmed black males by police officers around the country that have prompted widespread protests and calls for reform in race relations and the use of force by officers. The county prosecutor, Timothy J. McGinty, has been handling the case, and although Judge Adrine’s ruling is not binding, it puts added pressure on Mr. McGinty in a closely scrutinized case.

Mr. McGinty released a terse statement indicating that he would not be rushed into filing a criminal complaint.

………

This week, a group of activists and community leaders asked the court to have the officers arrested under an Ohio law that allows “a private citizen having knowledge of the facts” to start the process by filing an affidavit with a court. They argued that the widely seen video of an officer killing Tamir had given nearly everyone “knowledge of the facts.”

The Ohio law, in effect in various forms since 1960, is unusual and rarely invoked, and lawyers have disagreed about what might be achieved by using it.

………

The Cuyahoga County sheriff’s office conducted a five-month investigation and handed its findings to Mr. McGinty’s office early this month, but they have not been made public, and Mr. McGinty said his office still had investigating of its own to do. Eventually, his office said, prosecutors will take the case to a grand jury, which will decide whether to issue indictments. But no one could say how long that would take.

That, the petitioners said, was the problem; they argued that if the people involved had not been wearing uniforms, they would have been arrested long ago. Yet nearly seven months after Tamir died, no decision has been made.

“The video in question in this case is notorious and hard to watch,” Judge Adrine wrote in his order. “After viewing it several times, this court is still thunderstruck by how quickly this event turned deadly,” he wrote, adding that Officer Loehmann fired his gun before the car he was riding in had even come to a stop.

It’s been 7 months.

Prosecutors have not even interrogated Loehmann.

When prosecutor McGinty says that he will, “Not be rushed into filing a criminal complaint,” it means that he has no intention at all of prosecuting these officers unless he is absolutely forced to.

Unlike, Baltimore States Attorney Marilyn Mosby, and like St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Robert McCullogh and Richmond County District Attorney Dan Donovan, McGinty is trying his level best make this case go away, or, if this proves unavoidable, he is trying to deliberately lose.

Hopefully, this judge’s ruling will put his back to a wall, but I do not see how you get an indictment, much less a conviction, with a prosecutor who is trying to lose.

F%$# Them if They Can’t Take a Joke

Sepp Blatter is still running FIFA, and he just fired FIFA’s public relations weasel for telling a very funny joke about the current scandal:

Fifa communications director Walter De Gregorio has been sacked after sealing his fate with a joke about the governing body on Swiss TV.

Gregorio told Swiss chat show Schawinski: “The Fifa president, secretary general and communications director are all travelling in a car. Who’s driving? The police.”

Fifa announced in a statement that De Gregorio had “relinquished his office”.

But the BBC understands he was asked to leave by president Sepp Blatter.

Sorry, but this is funny, and Sepp Blatter is such a delicate flower.

It’s amazing how sensitive corrupt bureaucrats are.

Obama’s Lawless Behavior in Support of the Security State

You may recall that the NSA bulk data collection of phone records were ruled by an Federal appellate court.

It not turns out that the Obama administration tried to get a ruling from the FISA court saying that they could ignore this ruling.

The interesting bit here is that the FISA court is technically a district court, and so is subordinate to an appellate court.

This shows a complete contempt for the rule of law:

The Obama administration has asked a secret surveillance court to ignore a federal court that found bulk surveillance illegal and to once again grant the National Security Agency the power to collect the phone records of millions of Americans for six months.

The legal request, filed nearly four hours after Barack Obama vowed to sign a new law banning precisely the bulk collection he asks the secret court to approve, also suggests that the administration may not necessarily comply with any potential court order demanding that the collection stop.

US officials confirmed last week that they would ask the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance court – better known as the Fisa court, a panel that meets in secret as a step in the surveillance process and thus far has only ever had the government argue before it – to turn the domestic bulk collection spigot back on.

Justice Department national security chief John A Carlin cited a six-month transition period provided in the USA Freedom Act – passed by the Senate last week to ban the bulk collection – as a reason to permit an “orderly transition” of the NSA’s domestic dragnet. Carlin did not address whether the transition clause of the Freedom Act still applies now that a congressional deadlock meant the program shut down on 31 May.

But Carlin asked the Fisa court to set aside a landmark declaration by the second circuit court of appeals. Decided on 7 May, the appeals court ruled that the government had erroneously interpreted the Patriot Act’s authorization of data collection as “relevant” to an ongoing investigation to permit bulk collection.

Carlin, in his filing, wrote that the Patriot Act provision remained “in effect” during the transition period.

“This court may certainly consider ACLU v Clapper as part of its evaluation of the government’s application, but second circuit rulings do not constitute controlling precedent for this court,” Carlin wrote in the 2 June application. Instead, the government asked the court to rely on its own body of once-secret precedent stretching back to 2006, which Carlin called “the better interpretation of the statute”.

While it is true that  the FISA court is not technically under the 2nd court of appeals, which ruled the program illegal, because they are not in the 2nd district, (technically, they are not in any district) but blithely asking the court to overrule an appeals court shows a complete contempt for due process and the rule of law.

Worst Constitutional Law Professor Ever!