|
Post by siriusnews on Nov 16, 2011 17:17:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by siriusnews on Nov 17, 2011 13:39:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by siriusnews on Nov 20, 2011 11:46:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by siriusnews on Nov 20, 2011 12:02:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by siriusnews on Nov 20, 2011 12:51:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by siriusnews on Nov 20, 2011 13:02:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by skoondog on Nov 20, 2011 19:40:03 GMT -5
Now where are the militia groups at?? If you had state militia groups standing up to this, our country would be changing their ways big time. When the groups start having a cause, and train there fellow men. Hell will soon be on our streets. Just give it about 5 more years.... If that is what it takes to get this country on the right track, I'm all for it!! Skoondog
|
|
|
Post by siriusnews on Nov 20, 2011 19:44:42 GMT -5
it will only take a few more months. give it to March 5th, 2012 and the goldman Sachs trial. it will be well known in the coming weeks and hopefully a million people in the streets of SF come trial date
|
|
|
Post by alrich on Nov 20, 2011 21:20:33 GMT -5
Exclusive: Lobbying Firm's Memo Spells Out Plan to Undermine Occupy Wall Street (VIDEO) MSNBC's "Up With Chris Hayes upwithchrishayes.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/19/8896362-exclusive-lobbying-firms-memo-spells-out-plan-to-undermine-occupy-wall-street-videoSat Nov 19, 2011 8:53 AM EST.by Jonathan Larsen and Ken Olshansky (crossposted from MSNBC's "Open Channel" blog) A well-known Washington lobbying firm with links to the financial industry has proposed an $850,000 plan to take on Occupy Wall Street and politicians who might express sympathy for the protests, according to a memo obtained by the MSNBC program “Up w/ Chris Hayes.” The proposal was written on the letterhead of the lobbying firm Clark Lytle Geduldig & Cranford and addressed to one of CLGC’s clients, the American Bankers Association. CLGC’s memo proposes that the ABA pay CLGC $850,000 to conduct “opposition research” on Occupy Wall Street in order to construct “negative narratives” about the protests and allied politicians. The memo also asserts that Democratic victories in 2012 would be detrimental for Wall Street and targets specific races in which it says Wall Street would benefit by electing Republicans instead. According to the memo, if Democrats embrace OWS, “This would mean more than just short-term political discomfort for Wall Street. … It has the potential to have very long-lasting political, policy and financial impacts on the companies in the center of the bullseye.” The memo also suggests that Democratic victories in 2012 should not be the ABA’s biggest concern. “… (T)he bigger concern,” the memo says, “should be that Republicans will no longer defend Wall Street companies.” Two of the memo’s authors, partners Sam Geduldig and Jay Cranford, previously worked for House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio. Geduldig joined CLGC before Boehner became speaker; Cranford joined CLGC this year after serving as the speaker’s assistant for policy. A third partner, Steve Clark, is reportedly “tight” with Boehner, according to a story by Roll Call that CLGC features on its website. Jeff Sigmund, an ABA spokesperson, confirmed that the association got the memo. “Our Government Relations staff did receive the proposal – it was unsolicited and we chose not to act on it in any way,” he said in a statement to "Up." CLGC did not return calls seeking comment. Boehner spokesman Michael Steel declined to comment on the memo. But he responded to its characterization of Republicans as defenders of Wall Street by saying, “My understanding is that President Obama is the single largest recipient of donations from Wall Street.” On “Up” Saturday, Anita Dunn, Obama campaign adviser, responded by saying that the majority of the president’s re-election campaign is fueled by small donors. She rejected the suggestion that the president himself is too close to Wall Street, saying “If that’s the case, why were tough financial reforms passed over party line Republican opposition?” The CLGC memo raises another issue that it says should be of concern to the financial industry -- that OWS might find common cause with the Tea Party. “Well-known Wall Street companies stand at the nexus of where OWS protestors and the Tea Party overlap on angered populism,” the memo says. “…This combination has the potential to be explosive later in the year when media reports cover the next round of bonuses and contrast it with stories of millions of Americans making do with less this holiday season.” The memo outlines a 60-day plan to conduct surveys and research on OWS and its supporters so that Wall Street companies will be prepared to conduct a media campaign in response to OWS. Wall Street companies “likely will not be the best spokespeople for their own cause,” according to the memo. “A big challenge is to demonstrate that these companies still have political strength and that making them a political target will carry a severe political cost.” Part of the plan CLGC proposes is to do “statewide surveys in at least eight states that are shaping up to be the most important of the 2012 cycle.” Specific races listed in the memo are U.S. Senate races in Florida, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Wisconsin, Ohio, New Mexico and Nevada as well as the gubernatorial race in North Carolina. The memo indicates that CLGC would research who has contributed financial backing to OWS, noting that, “Media reports have speculated about associations with George Soros and others.” "It will be vital,” the memo says, “to understand who is funding it and what their backgrounds and motives are. If we can show that they have the same cynical motivation as a political opponent it will undermine their credibility in a profound way.”
|
|
|
Post by siriusnews on Nov 21, 2011 10:05:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by siriusnews on Nov 22, 2011 11:03:49 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by siriusnews on Nov 24, 2011 0:58:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by siriusnews on Nov 24, 2011 10:38:15 GMT -5
Happy Thanksgiving to All
|
|
|
Post by siriusnews on Nov 24, 2011 13:19:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by alrich on Nov 28, 2011 13:37:47 GMT -5
SEC SUX PER JUDGE News Alert: Federal Judge Blocks Citigroup's Mortgage Settlement With S.E.C. Breaking News Alert The New York Times Monday, November 28, 2011 -- 12:46 PM EST Federal Judge Blocks Citigroup’s Mortgage Settlement With S.E.C. A federal judge in New York on Monday threw out a settlement between the Securities and Exchange Commission and Citigroup over a 2007 mortgage derivatives deal, saying that the S.E.C.’s policy of settling cases by allowing a company to neither admit nor deny the agency’s allegations did not satisfy the law. The judge, Judge Jed S. Rakoff of the Federal District Court in Manhattan, ruled that the S.E.C.’s $28 million settlement, announced last month, is “neither fair, nor adequate, nor in the public interest” because it does not provide the court with evidence on which to judge the settlement. The ruling could throw the S.E.C.’s enforcement efforts into chaos, because a majority of the fraud and other cases that the agency brings against Wall Street firms are settled out of court, most often with a condition that the defendant does not admit that it violated the law while also promising not to deny it. Read More: www.nytimes.com/?emc=na ;D SEC SUX PER JUDGE
|
|
|
Post by gotcmkxdiamonds on Nov 28, 2011 16:50:16 GMT -5
DO WE HAVE AN UNCORRUPTED JUDGE HERE
BRAVO
|
|
|
Post by alrich on Nov 29, 2011 12:53:08 GMT -5
It would be amazing if this SEC JOKE "The majority of the fraud and other cases that the agency brings against Wall Street firms are settled out of court, most often with a condition that the defendant does not admit that it violated the law while also promising not to deny it...... WILL BE REVOKED AND ALL PAST DECISIONS OVERTURNED. MAYBE, JUST MAYBE, THIS IS THE "ENDS WITH CITI" WE HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR. IRONIC THIS IS JUST BEFORE DEC. 5TH.
|
|
|
Post by alrich on Nov 29, 2011 16:05:43 GMT -5
Judge Spurns SEC-Citigroup Deal as Contrary to Interest in Truth Mark Hamblett New York Law Journal November 29, 2011 Southern District Judge Jed S. Rakoff (See Profile) yesterday rejected a proposed $285 million settlement between the Securities and Exchange Commission and Citigroup over the marketing of collateralized debt obligations the bank was also selling short. Judge Rakoff said Citigroup created a billion-dollar fund "that allowed it to dump some dubious assets on misinformed investors" but was allowed to settle the case with no admission of wrongdoing. There was "an overriding public interest in knowing the truth," he said, and he would not approve the settlement without some "cold, hard, solid facts." The decision in U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission v. Citigroup Global Markets Inc., 11 Civ. 7387, comes just weeks after Judge Rakoff grilled Matthew T. Martens, the SEC's chief litigation counsel, at a hearing on the consent judgment, which was filed simultaneously with the lawsuit on Oct. 19. For more coverage, visit The American Lawyer. Specifically, the judge wanted Mr. Martens to explain why the court should be compelled to approve the settlement as against the public interest even if he found the settlement to be otherwise fair, reasonable and adequate and after he gave due deference to the SEC's judgment (NYLJ, Nov. 10). The consent judgment requires Citigroup to disgorge $160 million in profits, with $30 million in interest, and pay a civil penalty of $95 million. It also requires Citigroup to adopt internal controls and measures to hold individuals accountable for signing off on public statements about the worthiness of the investments pitched by Citigroup, measures that counsel Brad S. Karp of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison said at the hearing had already been undertaken. Mr. Martens had submitted papers saying the public interest was not part of the judge's analysis. "This is erroneous," Judge Rakoff said in his 15-page opinion and order. "A large part of what the S.E.C. requests, in this and most other consent judgments, is injunctive relief, both broadly, in the request for an injunction forbidding future violations, and more narrowly, in the request that the court enforce future prophylactic measures." "The Supreme Court has repeatedly made clear, however, that a court cannot grant the extraordinary remedy of injunctive relief without considering the public interest," he said, citing eBay, Inc. v. MercExchange, 547 U.S. 388 (2006). In the end, Judge Rakoff concluded "regretfully" that "the proposed consent judgment is neither fair, nor reasonable, nor adequate, nor in the public interest." The reason, he said, was that he had not been given enough evidence to make an informed judgment, for when a public agency asks a court "to become its partner in enforcement" both the public and the court need to know what the underlying facts are. Otherwise, he said, "the court becomes a mere handmaiden to a settlement privately negotiated on the basis of unknown facts, while the public is deprived of ever knowing the truth in a matter of obvious public importance." He said the SEC "of all agencies, has a duty, inherent in its statutory mission, to see that the truth emerges; and if it fails to do so, this court must not, in the name of deference or convenience, grant judicial enforcement to the agency's contrivances." Judge Rakoff criticized a settlement with no admission of wrongdoing, where Citigroup is charged only with negligence, and where the deal involves a civil penalty that is "pocket change" to Citigroup and imposes injunctive relief that Citigroup knew the "SEC had not sought to enforce against any financial institution for at least the last 10 years." "It is harder to discern from the limited information before the court what the SEC is getting from this settlement other than a quick headline," he said, adding that Citigroup might just see the money paid as the cost of doing business. Spokeswoman Danielle Romero-Apsilos said in a statement that Citigroup "respectfully disagrees" with the ruling. "We believe the proposed settlement is a fair and reasonable resolution to the SEC's allegation of negligence, which relates to a five-year-old transaction," she said. "We also believe the settlement fully complies with long-established legal standards. In the event the case is tried, we would present substantial factual and legal defenses to the charges." Robert Khuzami, director of the SEC's division of enforcement, said in a statement that the judge's criticism "disregards the fact that obtaining disgorgement, monetary penalties, and mandatory penalties and mandatory business reforms may significantly outweigh the absence of an admission when that relief is obtained promptly and without the risks, delay, and resources required at trial." These kind of settlements have been "repeatedly approved for good reason" by other federal courts, Mr. Khuzami said, including by Judge Rakoff's colleagues. In June, Southern District Judge Richard Berman (See Profile) approved the SEC's $153.6 million settlement with J.P. Morgan Securities in a case that contained nearly identical provisions to the Citigroup settlement and also dealt with an ill-fated CDO. And in July 2010, Judge Barbara Jones approved the SEC's $550 million deal with Goldman Sachs over its ABACUS CDO. Judge Rakoff had faulted the $285 million settlement, an amount he said the consent judgment "only suggests that the SEC 'may'" return to defrauded investors. It was an amount, he said, that "still leaves investors shortchanged." But in his statement, Mr. Khuzami said the securities laws generally limit the SEC to pursuing disgorgement for Citigroup's ill-gotten gains plus a penalty in an amount up to its gain, and he insisted the SEC had intended to deliver the entire $285 million to investors. "We will continue to review the court's ruling and take those steps that best serve the interests of investors," he said. @|Mark Hamblett can be contacted at mhamblett@alm.com. David Bario, a reporter at The American Lawyer, an affiliate publication, contributed to this report. www.newyorklawjournal.com/PubArticleNY.jsp?id=1202533638995&slreturn=1
|
|
|
Post by alrich on Nov 29, 2011 16:09:32 GMT -5
November 28, 2011 4:12 PM With Latest Ruling, Rakoff Cements Status as Populist FirebrandPosted by Ed Shanahan By David Bario The Am Law Litigation Daily The Securities and Exchange Commission is certain to appeal Monday's 15-page decision by Manhattan federal district court judge Jed Rakoff refusing to approve the agency's $285 million settlement with Citigroup. And it's nearly impossible to envision the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upholding the ruling, since, as Judge Rakoff himself noted, it rejects "the SEC's long-standing policy--hallowed by history" of allowing defendants to settle without admitting or denying the underlying allegations. But whether or not it survives, the ruling has already achieved at least two things: Combined with Judge Rakoff's prior objections to SEC settlements, it reminded the SEC and its Wall Street targets that gaining judicial approval for their behind-the-scenes dealmaking isn't just a formality, at least in the Southern District of New York. And it cements Judge Rakoff's reputation for challenging the SEC, even if it means departing with his colleagues on the bench. As the New York Law Journal reports, Judge Rakoff found that the SEC failed to provide "any proven or admitted facts upon which to exercise even a modest degree of independent judgment" about whether to approve the deal, which would resolve allegations that Citi duped investors by secretly including a large percentage of toxic assets in a $1 billion collateralized debt obligation and then betting against the CDO. He consolidated the case with the SEC's related fraud suit against Citi employee Brian Stoker and set a July 2012 trial date. Judge Rakoff has been publicly stewing over the SEC's approach to settlements with alleged Wall Street malefactors since 2009, when he refused for months to sign off on the SEC's settlement with Bank of America over alleged disclosure shortcomings its Merrill Lynch acquisition. He ultimately approved that deal early last year after the parties agreed to beef up BofA's penalty from $33 million to $150 million and to include safeguards against similar conduct in the future. Judge Rakoff was also highly critical of a settlement of backdating claims that the SEC reached with Vitesse Semiconductor earlier this year, though he approved the deal in March. So what caused the judge to finally boil over in the Citi case and reject the deal altogether? For one, the $285 million settlement combined elements of both the BofA and Vitesse deals that earned his ire. As in the previous cases, Judge Rakoff blasted the SEC for allowing Citigroup to keep mum on its culpability and neither contest not admit to the allegations while nevertheless agreeing to pay a fine. "The injunctive power of the judiciary is not a free roving remedy to be invoked at the whim of a regulatory agency, even with the consent of the regulated," he wrote. "If its deployment does not rest on facts--cold, hard, solid facts, established either by admissions or by trials--it serves no lawful or moral purpose and is simply an engine of oppression." It particularly irked Judge Rakoff that in its separate complaint against Stoker, the SEC claimed that Citigroup knowingly misled investors over the CDO, but its complaint against Citi alleged only that the bank was guilty of negligence. He noted that Citi was "a recidivist" and that the SEC's financial penalty amounted to "pocket change" for the bank, concluding that the settlement didn't meet standards he set forth in considering the BofA settlement: that such deals must be fair, reasonable, adequate, and in the public interest. Judge Rakoff emphatically rejected the SEC's contention that the pubic interest shouldn't be part of the standard of review. "In any case like this that touches on the transparency of financial markets whose gyrations have so depressed our economy and debilitated our lives, there is an overriding public interest in knowing the truth," he wrote. "[T]he combination of charging Citigroup only with negligence and then permitting Citigroup to settle without either admitting or denying the allegations deals a double blow to any assistance the defrauded investors might seek to derive from the S.E.C. litigation." Citi counsel Brad Karp of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison declined to comment on the decision. SEC enforcement chief Robert Khuzami released a lengthy statement on the ruling, stating that it "ignores decades of established practice throughout federal agencies and decisions of the federal courts" approving similar settlements. "The settlement provisions cited by the court have been included in settlements repeatedly approved for good reason by federal courts across the country--including district courts in New York in cases involving similar misconduct," Khuzami said. In June, Manhattan federal district court judge Richard Berman approved the SEC's $153.6 million settlement with J.P. Morgan Securities in a case that contained closely similar provisions and also dealt with an ill-fated CDO. And in July 2010 Judge Barbara Jones approved the SEC's $550 million deal with Goldman Sachs over its ABACUS CDO. Former Skadden, Arps, Slate Meagher & Flom partner Dennis Kelleher, whose public interest group Better Markets sought to intervene in the Citi case to appose the SEC settlement, said in a statement that Judge Rakoff's ruling means "that the cozy business-as-usual relationship between the SEC and Wall Street might finally be over." That sounds a bit premature, but we're sure of one thing: If the case winds up before the Second Circuit, the appeal is going to be one to remember. amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdaily/2011/11/rakoff-as-populist-firebrand.html
|
|
|
Post by alrich on Nov 29, 2011 16:40:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by skoondog on Dec 1, 2011 14:42:18 GMT -5
Happy Thanksgiving to All Acca a long time did say and many others did too. Get starts with Citi, and ends with citi!! skoondog
|
|
|
Post by alrich on Dec 5, 2011 10:30:58 GMT -5
Wall Street Sues CFTC Over Trading Crackdown By Reuters Friday, December 02, 2011 WASHINGTON (Reuters)—Two major financial trade groups sued the U.S. futures regulator on Friday [Dec. 2] over new rules to crack down on commodity speculation, launching the second legal assault against the biggest financial overhaul in decades. In a broadside from Wall Street that had been widely expected, the groups said the Commodity Futures Trading Commission's so-called position limits rule was deficient in its make up and that the rule "lacked a reasoned basis." The Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, and the International Swaps and Derivatives Association filed suit in the federal court in the District of Columbia. It will be the first ever lawsuit against a CFTC rule. "The Associations believe that the Position Limits Rule may adversely impact commodities markets and market participants, including end-users, by reducing liquidity and increasing price volatility," the groups said in a statement. The suit comes amid intensifying efforts by both the financial sector and Republicans to push back regulators' efforts to implement last year's sweeping Dodd-Frank reforms, including starving the CFTC of funds. The CFTC narrowly approved in October its position limits rule by a 3-2 vote, but it was clear there was internal dissent within the agency on whether the rule was even needed. Republicans Jill Sommers and Scott O'Malia opposed the measure. Mr. O'Malia said the agency had overreached its mandate and echoed the industry's argument that there was no "empirical evidence" to substantiate the rule. Other regulators are already facing the legal backlash. After an eight-month battle, the Securities and Exchange Commission in July had its first Dodd-Frank rule overturned when a federal appeals court found the SEC had conducted a flawed analysis to support a rule that would make it easier for shareholders to nominate directors to corporate boards. By Christopher Doering; additional reporting by Jonathan Leff www.hedgeworld.com/open_news/read_newsletter_aa.cgi?section=dail&story=dail19755.html
|
|
|
Post by alrich on Dec 7, 2011 23:04:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by alrich on Dec 9, 2011 11:20:32 GMT -5
Now What ?! Shareholder update 12.9.2011 To all CMKM shareholders, The management team of CMKM has changed. The company’s statement earlier this year read as follows: “The goal of this management is to build a company one step at a time. It is of the opinion of the company that a round table team of shareholders be assembled with approximately 7 individuals. These individuals will assist the company in their past knowledge and their ideas moving forward. It is important that these individuals have a good standing with our shareholders” Please be advised that the company received several responses to the quest for the round table group and for the CEO position. October 31, 2011 Tom Stevenson and Stan Polsom resigned their positions as Directors of the Company leaving Roger Summers as the sole remaining Director. November 17, 2011, Mr. Summers signed a resolution to bring new management onboard to bring in a fresh new perspective. November 18, 2011 Mr. Steve Kirkpatrick accepted the position as the new President and Chairman of the Board. Please join the Company in welcoming Mr. Steve Kirkpatrick. Mr. Kirkpatrick was one of the people who applied for the position of CEO earlier this year and brings with him a wealth of business contacts and experience that he will utilize in moving the Company forward. December 6, 2011, Mr. Summers tendered his resignation as a Director of CMKM. The Company would like to sincerely thank Mr. Tom Stevenson; Mr. Stan Polsom, and Mr. Roger Summers who unselfishly and freely gave of their time to CMKM. It is because of these Men and the Company’s management that CMKM is prepared to move forward. The Shareholders of CMKM Diamonds will be happy to know that Mr. Kirkpatrick is motivated to continue the growth of the company, the communication between company and shareholders will be better than it has ever been using the new technologies and social media. Mr. Kirkpatrick will be personally addressing the shareholders through an update on this website by early next week. The Company's 2010 Tax Return can be found HERE www.cmkmdiamondsinc.com/index.html
|
|
|
Post by alrich on Dec 14, 2011 12:23:02 GMT -5
SEC Watchdog Bought Radio Host’s Game Tickets By Robert Schmidt and Joshua Gallu - Dec 14, 2011 12:00 AM ET . SEC Watchdog Bought Radio Host’s Eagles Tickets Jim McIsaac/Getty Images H. David Kotz, the inspector general in charge of policing conflicts of interest inside the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, may face further questions about his own activities. The watchdog is already under scrutiny for a videotaped interview he gave to a financial adviser who uses it in marketing a “crash-proof” retirement plan on the Internet and a paid radio show. Phillip Cannella III, the adviser, rejected an SEC request that he remove the interview from his website, saying he obtained it from Kotz without misrepresentation. Now, Kotz has confirmed that Cannella got him three tickets to a sold-out football game between the Philadelphia Eagles and New York Giants two months after the interview. Kotz paid $95 per ticket, according to Cannella, for club-level seats in the Philadelphia stadium. Eagles spokesman Rob Zeiger, who said tickets in that section don’t have a price stamp, said the team values the seats Kotz used at $240 each. Cannella, the chief executive officer of First Senior Financial Group who did the 75-minute interview with Kotz in late July, said he offered the tickets as a gesture of gratitude for his “truthful and forthcoming” remarks. Kotz refused to take them unless he could pay, and sent a $285 check a few days after the Sept. 25 game. “All my actions related to Phil Cannella’s radio program were completely vetted and cleared by the SEC Ethics Counsel,” Kotz said in an e-mailed statement to Bloomberg News. “None of my actions were inappropriate or improper and no one at the SEC has ever indicated to me otherwise.” SEC Concerns Kotz, who has served as inspector general for four years, has been the subject of complaints by current and former officials who have said some of his probes are overly aggressive and his reports lack evidence of wrongdoing. Kotz and his supporters say his work has helped the agency to recover from missteps such as overlooking the Bernard Madoff Ponzi scheme. Cannella, who said he’s licensed as an insurance broker in more than 40 states, isn’t regulated by the SEC because he doesn’t sell securities. After the interview was posted on Cannella’s website, the SEC general counsel’s office contacted Kotz with concerns the video clips could be seen as investment advice or an endorsement of financial services, according to two people briefed on the matter. Kotz told the agency he would ask the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency to look into whether he said or did anything improper. Football Season It isn’t known if the group is also reviewing the football tickets, which Kotz requested from Cannella’s firm in a Sept. 2 e-mail from his SEC account. “Now that football season is upon us, I wanted to let you know that I spoke with our ethics office who advised me that I was authorized to accept the football tickets as long as I paid the face value,” Kotz wrote, adding that his children “are very excited.” The Eagles lost, 16-29. Cannella said he obtained Kotz’s tickets from a CBS Radio station, WPHT in Philadelphia, which runs his program. He said he told Kotz to pay $95 apiece because that was the face value of Eagles tickets that Cannella uses in another section of the stadium. Cannella said he endorsed Kotz’s check over to the radio station. Geoffrey Hazard, a professor at the University of California Hastings College of the Law and a legal ethics specialist, said that Kotz probably got “a bargain considering what the market price really is” for the game. “However passionate a fan you might be of the Eagles, it’s just imprudent” to take the tickets, Hazard said. Street Price The SEC’s ethics chief, Shira Pavis Minton, said in an e- mail that she “advised Mr. Kotz that he should pay for any tickets he accepted and to be mindful of optics concerns if the tickets were corporate or box tickets.” She said she told Kotz, “as long they were regular tickets, he should pay what anyone on the street would pay.” Asked about Kotz’s contention that she fully vetted his interview with Cannella, Minton said that as head of the inspector general office Kotz has authority to decide on his own how to handle interview requests. “I was asked by Mr. Kotz about giving a 15-minute radio interview,” she said. “I told Mr. Kotz there was no prohibition to giving such an interview and provided Mr. Kotz with the SEC’s internal guidelines for speaking engagements.” The guidelines say SEC employees should “avoid inadvertently participating in an event that promotes the sponsor’s business interests rather than the public’s interest.” ‘Giving the Impression’ Richard Painter, a securities professor at University of Minnesota Law School who was the White House’s chief ethics lawyer from 2005 to 2007, said Kotz should have never agreed to the interview in the first place. “I can’t imagine anything worse than giving the impression that there is an official SEC endorsement of an investment product,” said Painter, who has written a book on government ethics reform. “The bottom line is nobody at the SEC, in their official capacity, should be doing an infomercial.” Cannella plays the Kotz interview, which he videotaped at the SEC’s Washington headquarters, on his radio show, on his website, www.crashproofretirement.com, and at seminars he holds for retirees at restaurants in the Philadelphia area. The company, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, puts together individual plans for clients and then earns a commission on fixed-index annuities they buy from an insurance company. The investments are “outside of the securities industry” and “many of them have outperformed the markets since their inception with no market risk, no market fees, no upfront commissions or sales costs,” Cannella said. ‘A Situation’ In more than a dozen edited segments of the Kotz interview that are posted online, the inspector general discusses issues ranging from the Bernard Madoff fraud to the difficulties the SEC faces policing Wall Street. A press release issued by Cannella’s company highlighted Kotz’s suggestion that retirees consider cutting their investments in stocks. “Well I wouldn’t presume to tell anyone how to invest their money and I’m not an investment adviser,” Kotz told Cannella. “Now I think we do have a situation today where so much money is in the stock market where people’s lives are so affected by it, that sometimes it may make sense to take things out in turbulent times to ensure that you’re not living and dying, so to speak, by the Dow Jones going up and down.” Robert W. Barton, a special trial counsel at the SEC, asked Cannella in an Oct. 3 letter to put a disclaimer on the videos to clarify that neither the SEC nor Kotz endorsed, sponsored or had agreed to promote the firm. Cannella complied. ‘Unacceptable Risk’ After Bloomberg reported on the interview last month, Barton wrote to Cannella again on Nov. 29, asking him to remove the video segments from his websites and YouTube because their use “is inconsistent with Mr. Kotz’s understanding of the purpose and planned use of the interview, and presents an unacceptable risk that members of the public could misconstrue the interview as endorsing” Cannella’s business. The letter also said that the SEC is “troubled by the fact that Mr. Kotz’s answers have been edited in a way that excludes important information, including caveats and related points.” Kotz, in his statement to Bloomberg, said, “I fully support the SEC’s office of general counsel’s efforts to ensure that Mr. Cannella does not continue to improperly use a version of my interview that edits out my caveats and disclaimers.” ‘Dark Industry’ Cannella responded to Barton in a letter last week, saying he wouldn’t take the videos down. The SEC is trying to quash “newsworthy interviews that bring light to a dark industry that obviously won’t stop bilking investors,” he wrote. Cannella also disputed the SEC’s claims that Kotz had a different understanding of the interview or that the video clips were edited in a misleading way. The letter, reviewed by Bloomberg News, included copies of e-mails between Kotz and executives at Cannella’s firm. The e-mails show that the inspector general was told that Cannella’s show was paid programming and that the videos would be streamed on the Web. The e-mails also included the Sept. 2 message from Kotz asking for the football tickets and saying he was “pleased” with the way the interview came out. The e- mail’s subject line was “groundbreaking interview.” In his letter to the SEC, Cannella wrote, “I think you know in your heart that all the clips that we have uploaded to our site and elsewhere accurately represent Inspector General Kotz’s assessment of the SEC.” www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-14/sec-watchdog-bought-radio-host-s-eagles-tickets-after-interview.html
|
|
|
Post by siriusnews on Dec 20, 2011 23:01:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by siriusnews on Dec 30, 2011 18:45:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by siriusnews on Dec 31, 2011 22:23:05 GMT -5
Hodges and Associates 12/31/11
My associate Dennis Smith recently advised that I would have some information for all on this date. Let me start by conveying to all my very best wishes for a happy and joyous holiday season. The coming year will, IMHO, bring life-changing conclusion to this extremely arduous journey we have been forced to endure.
Although you may not be happy with what has been going on, I can assure you that there was simply no other way to accomplish what will become the new foundation of this great country, and establish the agenda for its rebirth in form and fashion as originally set forth in the US Constitution. As I have previously stated, we have confronted, with added pressure from the “lien-holders,” the vilest, most contemptible, well financed forces for evil on the planet – and we have won! I know, some eleven months later, that must seem to have been an idle boast. However, it merely reflects the mighty struggle that has been raging in the shadows.
While I had hoped to be able to advise you this afternoon that we had finally achieved Economic Receipt, which in turn would authorize release and delivery of the CMKM pay-outs, I cannot do so at this moment. Having said that, please remember my prior advice regarding the Iraqi Dinar re-valuation, which has been much anticipated and discussed. Funding of the IQD re-val is part of the World Global Settlement scheme; and release of the re-val will essentially be coincident with release and distribution of all WGS program pay-outs. I am very pleased to be able to report that not only is Iraq now a sovereign country, but will have an internationally recognized and tradable currency by January 1, 2012. This indicates to me that distribution of the CMKM pay-outs is truly imminent – with-in hours/days.
Again, I wish each of you happiness and joy at this seasonal juncture. Please keep in mind that most of this information is not “legal” by definition, not directly related to our Federal Court action and certainly not something I originally ‘signed on’ to accomplish. In the event that additional delays are encountered, I believe they will be de minimus in both time and substance. We have in fact won the war and proof of that is forthcoming.
I ask that you read and consider carefully the entire contents of this letter, prior to adding your own interpretations, prognostications and conclusions hereon, or any similar interpretations, prognostications or conclusions offered to you by others. Accordingly, and please note that the following is repetitious, and is meant to be: I am very pleased to be able to report that not only is Iraq now a sovereign country, but will have an internationally recognized and tradable currency by January 1, 2012. This indicates to me that distribution of the CMKM pay-outs is truly imminent - within hours/days.
Sincerely,
A. Clifton Hodges (CSBN 046803) HODGES AND ASSOCIATES 4 East Holly Street, Suite 202 Pasadena, CA 91103-3900 Tel: (626) 564-9797 Fax: (626) 564-9111 E-Mail: al@hodgesandassociates.com
|
|
|
Post by siriusnews on Jan 1, 2012 11:16:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by siriusnews on Jan 4, 2012 14:18:54 GMT -5
Finally the day has come
Wall Street Conspiracy is complete and out. Jan 2012 movie 1 hr 40 minutes
Radio Wars is complete Jan 2012 movie 1 hr 37 minutes.
Now hopefully combined these two movies will force the news media to cover the story.
Richard
|
|