Category: Good Writing

Martin O’Malley 2012

This has to be one of the best slams of the Presidential election so far:

Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley introduced a new line of attack on Gov. Mitt Romney today, saying the public should be suspicious of him because in 2008 Sen. John McCain considered the now-presumptive Republican nominee to be his running mate…but picked Sarah Palin instead.

“What about running for the office of the presidency this year makes it less important than the job that he didn’t get over Palin the last time around?” O’Malley asked BuzzFeed, referencing the 23 years of returns Romney allowed McCain to examine while he was being vetted but hasn’t released to the public.

Pressed in an interview at the National Governors Association meeting here whether there would be anything in those returns that would disqualify Romney from the presidency, O’Malley said he doesn’t know — and that’s why Democrats want to see them.

“But why would you pick somebody — why would you pick Palin over Romney?” he asked.

(emphasis mine)

Sweet!

Yes, This is Worth Breaking My Embargo of HuffPo

The invaluable Dan Froomkin looks at Patrick Fitzgerald’s record as a prosecutor, and concludes that he went out of his way to avoid a serious investigation of the people at the top of the pyramid:

U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald’s prosecution of former CIA officer John Kiriakou for talking to journalists about the Bush/Cheney torture program has at least one thing in common with his conviction of I. Lewis (“Scooter”) Libby in 2007.

In both cases, Fitzgerald went for the little fish. But the big fish got away. (See related story on the Kiriakou case.)

In the Plame case, Fitzgerald prosecuted Libby, then-vice president Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, for perjury and obstruction of justice related to the leak of Valerie Plame Wilson’s identity as a covert CIA operative. But he stopped short of charging Cheney or top presidential adviser Karl Rove — both of whom had been targets of his investigation.

It appears that FBI investigators thought that they had Rove completely nailed, and that Cheney was at significant risk of indictment, but that Fitzgerald backed off.

Well, he was appointed by a Republican president on the recommendation of a Republican senator.

Once Again Matt Taibbi Proves Me Irrelevant

In this case, he’s all over the LIBOR manipulation scandal, where banks manipulated reporting of interbank lending rates in order to generate additional profits and create the illusion of financial health, with Barklays being at the center of the investigation for now (it’s cooperating with authorities)

So just go read Taibbi on the emails and recorded conversations, the Royal Bank of Scotland joining the dance, and allegations that the Bank of England (the British central bank )directed the conspiracy, which are backed up by internal emails.

He’s gets to the heart of the matter in a way that the non-financial wonk can understand.

Just go read him.

Still No Prosecutions

The great Matt Taibbi has a scoop about how Wall Street cheated municipalities on their bond sales, and they have it on tape:

Someday, it will go down in history as the first trial of the modern American mafia. Of course, you won’t hear the recent financial corruption case, United States of America v. Carollo, Goldberg and Grimm, called anything like that. If you heard about it at all, you’re probably either in the municipal bond business or married to an antitrust lawyer. Even then, all you probably heard was that a threesome of bit players on Wall Street got convicted of obscure antitrust violations in one of the most inscrutable, jargon-packed legal snoozefests since the government’s massive case against Microsoft in the Nineties – not exactly the thrilling courtroom drama offered by the famed trials of old-school mobsters like Al Capone or Anthony “Tony Ducks” Corallo.

But this just-completed trial in downtown New York against three faceless financial executives really was historic. Over 10 years in the making, the case allowed federal prosecutors to make public for the first time the astonishing inner workings of the reigning American crime syndicate, which now operates not out of Little Italy and Las Vegas, but out of Wall Street.

The defendants in the case – Dominick Carollo, Steven Goldberg and Peter Grimm – worked for GE Capital, the finance arm of General Electric. Along with virtually every major bank and finance company on Wall Street – not just GE, but J.P. Morgan Chase, Bank of America, UBS, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, Wachovia and more – these three Wall Street wiseguys spent the past decade taking part in a breathtakingly broad scheme to skim billions of dollars from the coffers of cities and small towns across America. The banks achieved this gigantic rip-off by secretly colluding to rig the public bids on municipal bonds, a business worth $3.7 trillion. By conspiring to lower the interest rates that towns earn on these investments, the banks systematically stole from schools, hospitals, libraries and nursing homes – from “virtually every state, district and territory in the United States,” according to one settlement. And they did it so cleverly that the victims never even knew they were being ­cheated. No thumbs were broken, and nobody ended up in a landfill in New Jersey, but money disappeared, lots and lots of it, and its manner of disappearance had a familiar name: organized crime.

In fact, stripped of all the camouflaging financial verbiage, the crimes the defendants and their co-conspirators committed were virtually indistinguishable from the kind of thuggery practiced for decades by the Mafia, which has long made manipulation of public bids for things like garbage collection and construction contracts a cornerstone of its business. What’s more, in the manner of old mob trials, Wall Street’s secret machinations were revealed during the Carollo trial through crackling wiretap recordings and the lurid testimony of cooperating witnesses, who came into court with bowed heads, pointing fingers at their accomplices. The new-age gangsters even invented an elaborate code to hide their crimes. Like Elizabethan highway robbers who spoke in thieves’ cant, or Italian mobsters who talked about “getting a button man to clip the capo,” on tape after tape these Wall Street crooks coughed up phrases like “pull a nickel out” or “get to the right level” or “you’re hanging out there” – all code words used to manipulate the interest rates on municipal bonds. The only thing that made this trial different from a typical mob trial was the scale of the crime.

USA v. Carollo involved classic cartel activity: not just one corrupt bank, but many, all acting in careful concert against the public interest. In the years since the economic crash of 2008, we’ve seen numerous hints that such orchestrated corruption exists. The collapses of Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, for instance, both pointed to coordi­nated attacks by powerful banks and hedge funds determined to speed the demise of those firms. In the bankruptcy of Jefferson County, Alabama, we learned that Goldman Sachs accepted a $3 million bribe from J.P. Morgan Chase to permit Chase to serve as the sole provider of toxic swap deals to the rubes running metropolitan Birmingham – “an open-and-shut case of anti-competitive behavior,” as one former regulator described it.

………

How did the government manage to make a case against so many Wall Street scam artists? Hubris. As was the case in Jefferson County, Alabama, where Chase executives blabbed criminal conspiracies on the telephone even though they knew they were being recorded by their own company, the trio of defendants in Carollo wantonly fixed bond auctions despite the fact that their own firm was taping the conversations. Defense counsel even made an issue of this at trial, implying to the jury that nobody would be dumb enough to commit a crime by phone when “there was a big sticker on the phones that said all calls are being recorded,” as Grimm’s counsel, Mark Racanelli, put it. In fact, Racanelli argued, the conversations on the tapes hardly suggested a secret conspiracy, because “no one was whispering.”

But the reason no one was whispering isn’t that their actions weren’t illegal – it’s because the bid rigging was so incredibly common the defendants simply forgot to be ashamed of it. “The tapes illustrate the cavalier attitude which the financial community brought toward this behavior,” says Michael Hausfeld, a renowned class-action attorney whose firm is leading a major civil suit against Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Chase and others for this same bid-rigging scam. “It became the predominant mode of transacting business.”

Seriously, what does it take for these guys to get indicted?

He has an addenda on the article here.

Quote of the Day

If a 14 Year-Old Can Deliver Your Message, It’s Not Because He’s Gifted, It’s Because Intellectually You’re a Child

— Bill Maher

He is referring to the fact that 14-year old Caiden Cowger’s hate filled screed against gays:

When 14 year-old boys sound exactly like you [Rush Limbaugh] do and can produce radio shows and books and speeches that sound exactly like yours, maybe you should rethink the sh%$ that’s coming out of your mouth.

Video:

H/t Cthulhu.*

*No, not the unspeakably malevolent super-being, the contributor to the Stellar Parthenon BBS.
OK, I’ve never seen the two of them together, so Cthulhu might actually be the Cthulhu, but the mere fact that he is on a BBS, interacting with humans would seem to mitigate against this.
Yes, I know, this is the internet, where no one knows if you are a dog.

Snark of the Day

Jonathan Chait, writing in the New York Magazine, has an article, titled, “Beltway Sleazeoids Concerned About Partisanship, about Howard Kurtz’s puff piece on the joint venture between Michael Steele (Mr. Foot in Mouth), and Lanny Davis (Lobbyists for brutal dictators).

His criticism is that Kurtz is far to credulous, and far too laudatory, of their efforts.

I agree. Even on a cursory examination, this is clearly concern trolling for lobbying dollars.

What stands out though is his slam against Howie for his lack of journalistic integrity:

There’s an old saying, “patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels,” but patriotism’s scoundrel-cleansing abilities have worn off with time. The newest refuge is surely bipartisanship. Thus, deposed Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele and disgraced lobbyist Lanny Davis have formed their own firm. Howard Kurtz reports — or, at any rate, writes down — that Steele and Davis are pitching their firm dedicated to urging people to “tone down the negativity and personal attacks.”

(emphasis mine)

The criticism for years about Kurtz has been two fold, that he has a conflict of interest because his wife is a paid political operator, and that he is little more than a stenographer for the conservative side of the Beltway consensus.

As to the stenography allegation, Chait must be commended for being clever, clear, and original in his statements.

Heh.

Shorter Sally Quinn

Sally Quinn’s writes an article complaining about how she can no longer throw, or go to, dinner parties with the movers and shakers in Washington, DC.

Fortunately, Jonathan Chait read the article so you don’t have to, and reaponds with “Sally Quinn Forced to Dine With Non-Fake Friends.”

While the title is good, the last ‘graph is even better:

Once Washington was a happy place where a girl and her mother could be groped simultaneously in good fun by a white supremacist. Sadly, it has all been ruined by Kim Kardashian and Ezra Klein.

This is a classic example of the snark genre.

Go read.

What Needs to be Said

A democracy and anti al Queda activist from Yemen has published an OP/ED in the New York Times saying that our drone war in Yemen is bolstering the terrorist organization:

“DEAR OBAMA, when a U.S. drone missile kills a child in Yemen, the father will go to war with you, guaranteed. Nothing to do with Al Qaeda,” a Yemeni lawyer warned on Twitter last month. President Obama should keep this message in mind before ordering more drone strikes like Wednesday’s, which local officials say killed 27 people, or the May 15 strike that killed at least eight Yemeni civilians.

Drone strikes are causing more and more Yemenis to hate America and join radical militants; they are not driven by ideology but rather by a sense of revenge and despair. Robert Grenier, the former head of the C.I.A.’s counterterrorism center, has warned that the American drone program in Yemen risks turning the country into a safe haven for Al Qaeda like the tribal areas of Pakistan — “the Arabian equivalent of Waziristan.”

Anti-Americanism is far less prevalent in Yemen than in Pakistan. But rather than winning the hearts and minds of Yemeni civilians, America is alienating them by killing their relatives and friends. Indeed, the drone program is leading to the Talibanization of vast tribal areas and the radicalization of people who could otherwise be America’s allies in the fight against terrorism in Yemen.

The first known drone strike in Yemen to be authorized by Mr. Obama, in late 2009, left 14 women and 21 children dead in the southern town of al-Majala, according to a parliamentary report. Only one of the dozens killed was identified as having strong Qaeda connections.

…………

This is why A.Q.A.P. is much stronger in Yemen today than it was a few years ago. In 2009, A.Q.A.P. had only a few hundred members and controlled no territory; today it has, along with Ansar al-Sharia, at least 1,000 members and controls substantial amounts of territory.

His entreaties will likely fall on deaf ears, because Obama has been thoroughly captured by the high-tech remote violence crowd in the state security security apparatus.

How to Write a Sincere Apology

I’m not sure that I’m particularly good at this sort of thing, but actor Jason Alexander is, and he shows himself to be a mensch in the process:

So, I would like to say – I now get it. And to the extent that these jokes made anyone feel even more isolated or misunderstood or just plain hurt – please know that was not my intention, at all or ever. I hope we will someday live in a society where we are so accepting of each other that we can all laugh at jokes like these and know that there is no malice or diminishment intended.

But we are not there yet.

So, I can only apologize and I do. In comedy, timing is everything. And when a group of people are still fighting so hard for understanding, acceptance, dignity and essential rights – the time for some kinds of laughs has not yet come. I hope my realization brings some comfort.

Go read the rest.

Saroff’s Rule Again

Click for full size



How they shuffled around funds to create the appearance of liquidity


And this is how they covered up their exposure

Yves Smith is all over the report by the bankruptcy trustee for MF Global.

I suggest that you read it, so I will show you to two graphics from the report, and remind you of “Saroff’s Rule”, “If a financial transaction is complex enough to require that a news organization use a cartoon to explain it, its purpose is to deceive.”

It appears that this applies to bankruptcy trustees as well as news orgs.

Go read, and wonder why John Corzine isn’t being frog marched out of his mansion in hand cuffs.

We Are Doomed

Felix Salmon explains how the insurance that is not insurance has wiped out the banks and turned them into casinos:

Entities who want to really take on credit risk are called banks, and they do so by lending. People who sell credit protection in the markets, by contrast, are traders and speculators who trust in the liquidity of the CDS market and who are sure that they will be able to get out quickly if things turn against them. And thus is the CDS market used shunt risks off, unseen, into the tails.

Liquidity isn’t just dangerous in the loan market. Look at houses, which used to be highly-illiquid investments characterized by a long-term relationship between a homeowner and a lender. When did things fall apart? When that relationship was replaced by a frenzy of securitization and refinancings, with even 30-year mortgages lasting for just a year or two before they were paid off by someone flipping their house or deciding they needed a cash-out refinance. The more liquid housing became — the closer it came to being piggy bank, to be tapped for cash at any time — the more dangerous it became, as well.

Mr. Salmon does not believe that the CDS will be banned, but I’d like to see them regulated as real insurance, which would prohibit the naked CDS, for the same reason that they don’t allow you to buy insurance that pays you when you torch your neighbor’s home.

That’s been the law of the land for 266 years, but about 20 years ago, we let it slide, with disastrous results.

So Not Shocking

Matt Taibbi is looking at documents from the Overstock.com case against the banksters, and discovers some remarkably informative unintentional release of information:

The lawyers for Goldman and Bank of America/Merrill Lynch have been involved in a legal battle for some time – primarily with the retail giant Overstock.com, but also with Rolling Stone, the Economist, Bloomberg, and the New York Times. The banks have been fighting us to keep sealed certain documents that surfaced in the discovery process of an ultimately unsuccessful lawsuit filed by Overstock against the banks.

Last week, in response to an Overstock.com motion to unseal certain documents, the banks’ lawyers, apparently accidentally, filed an unredacted version of Overstock’s motion as an exhibit in their declaration of opposition to that motion. In doing so, they inadvertently entered into the public record a sort of greatest-hits selection of the very material they’ve been fighting for years to keep sealed.+

………

The lawsuit between Overstock and the banks concerned a phenomenon called naked short-selling, a kind of high-finance counterfeiting that, especially prior to the introduction of new regulations in 2008, short-sellers could use to artificially depress the value of the stocks they’ve bet against. The subject of naked short-selling is a) highly technical, and b) very controversial on Wall Street, with many pundits in the financial press for years treating the phenomenon as the stuff of myths and conspiracy theories.

Now, however, through the magic of this unredacted document, the public will be able to see for itself what the banks’ attitudes are not just toward the “mythical” practice of naked short selling (hint: they volubly confess to the activity, in writing), but toward regulations and laws in general.

“F%$# the compliance area – procedures, schmecedures,” chirps Peter Melz, former president of Merrill Lynch Professional Clearing Corp. (a.k.a. Merrill Pro), when a subordinate worries about the company failing to comply with the rules governing short sales.

We also find out here how Wall Street professionals manipulated public opinion by buying off and/or intimidating experts in their respective fields. In one email made public in this document, a lobbyist for SIFMA, the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, tells a Goldman executive how to engage an expert who otherwise would go work for “our more powerful enemies,” i.e. would work with Overstock on the company’s lawsuit.

(%$# mine)

Here’s the nickel version.

Short selling works as follows:

  • Locate the requisite shares of stocks.
  • Borrow them (and pay a fee).
  • Sell the borrowed shares.
  • Wait.
  • Buy shares, and return to borrower.

If the share price falls in the interim, you make money.

If it rises, you lose money.

Fairly simple and straightforward, and legal.

What isn’t legal is naked shorting, where you sell the shares, but have never borrowed them.

At one point, because of naked shorts, 107% of all outstanding shares were for sale, with the obvious effect of depressing the stock price (supply and demand), which pretty much guarantees a profit by short sellers, and you do not have to pay fees to borrow the stock.

It’s a win-win for everyone, except of course, the poor dupes who think that they won’t get ripped off by the banksters when they try to invest.