commentare un testo che non c'è......

armin

* 12:00 - German industrial production (medium)

* 13:45 - minimum bid rate (High)

* 14:30 - ECB Conference Press (High)

* 14:30 - Unemployment Claims (medium)

* 16:00 - Pending Home Sales m/m (High)

EURUSD Daily Supports and Resistances

R1= 1.5510

S1= 1.5395

There seems to be a reversal underway.  Look for long entry points during the London Session ; New York session might be unstable or trading in a range : look for reversals.  If the London Session ends quietly then we might have a trend during the American Session.  Beware : insider trading is necessary for the creation of trends and it takes place before the annoucements (exemple : London last week, Germany's GDP this week, Turkey's court decision last week).

Vibrating mascara wands. Ooh. I'm so surprised and excited. Not like I haven't been hearing about this for months. Not like they don't already have this in Japan. Yaaaaaaawn. Call me old school, call me an "analog girl" or what have you. I know it. I'm rockin' MS Paint and not Photoshop, y'all, there isn't anything you can say about me that I don't already know. I'm resistant to this new flash-in-the-pan technology, not because I think it won't work, I'm sure it can do quite well, but I'm not 'bout it because I just think it's overkill. Putting your lashes on with a vibrating wand (7000 oscillations per minute), to me, is like killing a cockroach with a .9mm. But whatever. I've been known to like me a gadget or gizmo in my day, so if you're yen to try it, don't let me stop you. However, if you're feeling the recession pangs and want to learn how to sculp the same lashes without the pricey torque, I'll show you how after the jump.

How about some mood music?

(I just HAD to)

Anyway, even if you wanted this vibe-scara, you can't have it yet until Fall, because they're already sold out of their TODAY ONLY stock. It's now 8am, kids. Craziness. But anyway, as promised, here's the easy way to build long, lean, clump-free wall-of-sound lashes:

You'll want to focus on the base of your eyelashes, for the most part. This is the area circled in pink. If you mostly coat this area, it'll make your lashes look thicker in a more natural way. Whereas if you focus on coating the length of the lashes in mascara, it'll A.) look like you're wearing lots of makeup and B.) clump your lashes together like groups of tween girls at a junior high dance. So stick with the base, and your lashes will look so lush, you could maybe forego eyeliner. The actual brand or formula of mascara is not important, as long as it's not a special fiber mascara (there's a whole diff method for that) or dried out. I use Maybelline Lash Stylist, or sometimes Full n' Soft, but it's whatever you want.

The method is simple, really: Wipe the excess product off the wand with a tissue, or you can scrape it onto the rim of the mascara tube, then open your eye really wide, and press the wand up and into the base of your lashes. To get the position right, I usually scoot way up close to the mirror- like, uncomfortably close, makeout-with-somebody close, or have-a-conversation-with-a-European close. Then I tilt my head back and open my eyes up, so the underside of the lash is front & center. That way, you don't stab yourself in the eye, trying to cuddle the wand as close to the base as possible. Then, once the wand is in place, you wiggle it back & forth as if you were brushing your teeth. It's best to do this in small sections at a time. I start with the center, then shuffle to the inner corner of the eye, then the outer corner lashes. But! This next part is part of that:

When you've finished shimmying the mascara onto a section of your lashes and want to move on to the next section, you sweep the wand up & out along the length of the lash. This will not coat the length entirely, but that's not the point. Repeat steps 2 and 3 on each new section. Move on to the next eye and do the same. Don't forget your bottom lashes! The method is the same for those little guys. If this looks like enough for you, then move on to step 4. However, I love a good Cher fringe on my eyes, so I repeat the steps and do a second overall coat before step 4. Whatever works for you.

For a young, flirty look, swipe the mascara (usually using the endmost, tapered tip of the wand works best for this) a few more times from base to tip of the outer corner lashes, getting them really thick. This will make your eyes look more open and almond-shaped. This whole deal may take a few tries to get exactly right, and feel free to tweak some stuff to work with your eye shape or dexterity, but if you do this right, I swear your junk will look fake. In the best possible way.

Questions? Suggestions? Beauty conundrums? Leave them in the comments or email biscuitdoughjones at gmail dot com.

Eight people were arrested in dawn raids yesterday by the City watchdog the Financial Services Authority.

Cazenove admitted that one of the arrested worked at its London offices as a sub-contractor.

A 40-strong team from the FSA swooped on addresses in London and the South East with back-up from City of London police.

Read more

Were criminals responsible for the sharp rise in credit card transactions that moved through some computer systems at the WTC shortly before the planes hit the twin towers?

Or was it coincidence that unusually large sums of money, perhaps more than $100 million, were rushed through the computers as the disaster unfolded?

A world leader in retrieving data, German-based firm Convar is trying to answer those questions and help credit card companies, telecommunications firms and accountants in New York recover their records from computer hard drives that have been partially damaged by fire, water or fine dust.
Using a pioneering laser scanning technology to find data on damaged computer hard drives and main frames found in the rubble of the World Trade Centre and other nearby collapsed buildings, Convar has recovered in- formation from 32 computers that support assumptions of dirty doomsday dealings.
“The suspicion is that inside information about the at- tack was used to send financial transaction commands and authorisations in the belief that amid all the chaos the criminals would have, at the very least, a good head start,” said Convar director Peter Henschel.
“Of course it is also possible that there were perfectly legitimate reasons for the unusual rise in business volume,” he told Reuters in an interview.

Profiting from disaster?

“It could turn out that Americans went on an absolute shopping binge on that Tuesday morning. But at this point there are many transactions that cannot be accounted for,” Henschel said.
“Not only the volume but the size of the transactions was far higher than usual for a day like that. There is a suspicion that these were possibly planned to take advantage of the chaos.”
Nearly 3,300 people were killed in the attacks that destroyed the World Trade Centre.

Some 30,000 people in the buildings, symbols of America’s financial might, were able to escape between the time the planes crashed and about an hour later when they collapsed even though many of the unmanned computers continued working.

The United States blames the Al Qaeda group led by Saudi-born Osama bin Laden for the attack and has since waged war on the Taliban regime in Afghanistan that sheltered them.

Advance knowledge of attack?

There are several data retrieval companies in the United States and Europe, but Convar said it has won the lion’s share of the contracts from the World Trade Centre because of its laser scanning technology.
Convar developed the laser scanner two years ago that made it possible to retrieve data from badly damaged computers.
With a staff of 30 in its high-security facility in Pirmasens near the French border, the frm has worked with the US armed forces in Germany as well as German federal police for the last 15 years.
Its offices in Pirmasens, a town of 36,000 still suffering from the departure of some 4,000 American soldiers stationed here during the Cold War, are closely guarded behind high fences and monitored by dozens of security cameras.
Inside the building, an endless series of code-operated door locks keeps unwelcome visitors away. In the centre of the facility is a 120 square metre (1,292 square foot), dust-free “clean room” where the damaged computer drives are coaxed back to life.
Citing client privacy, Henschel declined to say which companies Convar is working for, or provide details about the data retrieved so far. But he said the raw material, up to 40 gigabytes per computer hard drive, is sent immediately by satellite or courier back to New York.

Money trail

Richard Wagner, a data retrieval expert at the company, said illegal transfers of more than $100 million might have been made immediately before and during the disaster.
“There is a suspicion that some people had advance knowledge of the approximate time of the plane crashes in order to move out amounts exceeding $100 million,” Wagner said. “They thought that the records of their transactions could not be traced after the main frames were destroyed.”
The companies are paying between $20,000 and $30,000 for each computer recovered, Henschel said.
The high recovery costs are one reason why only a limited number of hard drives are being examined. Convar has turned down a request by one British newspaper to try to recover personal last hour e-mails sent by someone trapped in the doomed building.
Henschel said the companies in the United States were working together with the FBI to piece together what happened on September 11 and that he was confident the destination of the dubious transactions would one day be tracked down.
“We have been quite surprised that so many of the hard drives were in good enough shape to retrieve the data,” he said.
“The contamination rate is high. The fine dust that was everywhere in the area got pressed under high pressure into the drives. But we’ve still been able to retrieve 100 percent of the data on most of the drives we’ve received.
“We’re helping them fnd out what happened to the computers on September 11 as quickly as possible. I’m sure that one day they will know what happened to the money.”
Mystery of terror ‘insider dealers’
Chris Blackhurst – The Independent – 14 October 2001 Share speculators have failed to collect $2.5m (£1.7m) in profits made from the fall in the share price of United Airlines after the 11 September World Trade Centre attacks.
The fact that the money is unclaimed more than a month later has reawakened investigators’ interest in a story dismissed as coincidence.
It may be that investors who were able to predict the share price crash so skilfully are reluctant to be seen profiting from tragedy. But investigators now wonder whether there is a more sinister explanation.
The authorities are examining the possibility that if they knew what was coming, traders were intent on taking their profits immediately, before regulators had woken up to any possible scam. But investors failed to foresee that the first response of the US stock markets to the disaster was to suspend all trading for four days, thereby denying them the chance of cashing in their profts.
Further details of the futures trades that netted such huge gains in the wake of the hijackings have been disclosed. To the embarrassment of investigators, it has also emerged that the frm used to buy many of the “put” options – where a trader, in effect, bets on a share price fall – on United Airlines stock was headed until 1998 by “Buzzy” Krongard, now executive director of the CIA.
Until 1997, Mr Krongard was chairman of Alex Brown Inc, America’s oldest investment banking firm. Alex Brown was acquired by Bankers Trust, which in turn was bought by Deutsche Bank. His last post before resigning to take his senior role in the CIA was to head Bankers Trust – Alex Brown’s private client business, dealing with the accounts and investments of wealthy customers around the world.
There is no suggestion that Mr Krongard had advance knowledge of the attacks.
Between 6 and 7 September, the Chicago Board Options Exchange saw purchases of 4,744 “put” option contracts in UAL versus 396 call options – where a speculator bets on a price rising. Holders of the put options would have netted a profit of $5m (£3.3m) once the carrier’s share price dived after 11 September. On 10 September, more trading in Chicago saw the purchase of 4,516 put options in American Airlines, the other airline involved in the hijackings. This compares with a mere 748 call options in American purchased that day. Investigators cannot help but notice that no other airlines saw such trading in their put options.
It was not just airlines that were targeted by remarkably canny investors. One of the biggest occupants of the World Trade Centre was Morgan Stanley, the investment bank. In the first week of September, an average of 27 put option contracts was bought each day in its shares. The total for the three days before the attacks was 2,157. Merrill Lynch, another WTC tenant, saw 12,215 put options bought in the four days before the attacks, when the previous days had seen averages of 252 contracts a day.
Suppressed Details of Criminal
Insider Trading Lead Directly into
the CIA’s Highest Ranks
CIA Executive Director “Buzzy” Krongard man-
aged frm that handled put options on UAL
Michael C. Ruppert – www.copvcia.com – October 2001
Although uniformly ignored by the mainstream U.S.
Media, there is abundant and clear evidence that a
number of transactions in fnancial markets indicated specific (criminal) foreknowledge of the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon. In the case of at least one of these trades – which has left a $2.5 million prize unclaimed – the frm used to place the “put options” on United Airlines stock was, until 1998, managed by the man who is now in the number three Executive Director position at the Central Intelli- gence Agency. Until 1997 A.B. “Buzzy” Krongard had been Chairman of the investment bank A.B. Brown.
A.B. Brown was acquired by Banker’s Trust in 1997.
Krongard then became, as part of the merger, Vice Chairman of Banker’s Trust-AB Brown, one of 20 ma- jor U.S. Banks named by Senator Carl Levin this year as being connected to money laundering. Krongard’s last position at Banker’s Trust (BT) was to oversee “private client relations.” In this capacity he had direct hands-on relations with some of the wealthiest people in the world in a kind of specialised banking operation that has been identified by the U.S. Senate and other investigators as being closely connected to the laundering of drug money.
Krongard (re?) joined the CIA in 1998 as counsel to CIA Director George Tenet. He was promoted to CIA Executive Director by President Bush in March of this year. BT was acquired by Deutsche Bank in 1999. The combined frm is the single largest bank in Europe.
And, as we shall see, Deutsche Bank played several key roles in events connected to the September 11 attacks.
The scope of known insider trading
Before looking further into these relationships it is necessary to look at the insider trading information that is being ignored by Reuters, The New York Times and other mass media. It is well documented that the CIA has long monitored such trades – in real time as potential warnings of terrorist attacks and other economic moves contrary to U.S. Interests. Previous stories in FTW have specifically highlighted the use of Promis software to monitor such trades.
It is necessary to understand only two key financial terms to understand the significance of these trades, “selling short” and “put options”. “Selling Short” is the borrowing of stock, selling it at current market prices, but not being required to actually produce the stock for some time. If the stock falls precipitously after the short contract is entered, the seller can then fulfil the contract by buying the stock after the price has fallen and complete the contract at the pre-crash price. These contracts often have a window of as long as four months.
“Put Options,” are contracts giving the buyer the option to sell stocks at a later date. Purchased at nominal prices of, for example, $1.00 per share, they are sold in blocks of 100 shares. If exercised, they give the holder the option of selling selected stocks at a future date at a price set when the contract is issued. Thus, for an investment of $10,000 it might be possible to tie up 10,000 shares of United or American Airlines at $100 per share, and the seller of the option is then obligated to buy them if the option is executed. If the stock has fallen to $50 when the contract matures, the holder of the option can purchase the shares for $50 and immediately sell them for $100 – regardless of where the market then stands. A call option is the reverse of a put option, which is, in effect, a derivatives bet that the stock price will go up.
A September 21 story by the Israeli Herzliyya International Policy Institute for Counter terrorism, entitled “Black Tuesday: The World’s Largest Insider Trading Scam?” documented the following trades connected to the September 11 attacks:
• Between September 6 and 7, the Chicago Board Options Exchange saw purchases of 4,744 put options on United Airlines, but only 396 call options. Assuming that 4,000 of the options were bought by people with advance knowledge of the imminent attacks, these “insiders” would have profited by almost $5 million.
• On September 10, 4,516 put options on American Air- lines were bought on the Chicago exchange, compared to only 748 calls. Again, there was no news at that point to justify this imbalance; Again, assuming that 4,000 of these options trades represent “insiders,” they would represent a gain of about $4 million.
• [The levels of put options purchased above were more than six times higher than normal.]
• No similar trading in other airlines occurred on the Chicago exchange in the days immediately preceding Black Tuesday.
• Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co., which occupied 22 floors of the World Trade Centre, saw 2,157 of its October $45 put options bought in the three trading days before Black Tuesday; this compares to an average of 27 contracts per day before September 6. Morgan Stanley’s share price fell from $48.90 to $42.50 in the aftermath of the attacks. Assuming that 2,000 of these options contracts were bought based upon knowledge of the approaching attacks, their purchasers could have profited by at least $1.2 million.
• Merrill Lynch & Co., with headquarters near the Twin Towers, saw 12,215 October $45 put options bought in the four trading days before the attacks; the previous average volume in those shares had been 252 contracts per day [a 1200% increase!]. When trading resumed, Merrill’s shares fell from $46.88 to $41.50; assuming that 11,000 option contracts were bought by “insiders,” their proft would have been about $5.5 million.
• European regulators are examining trades in Germany’s Munich Re, Switzerland’s Swiss Re, and AXA of France, all major reinsurers with exposure to the Black Tuesday disaster. [FTW Note: AXA also owns more than 25% of American Airlines stock making the attacks a “double whammy” for them.]
On September 29, 2001 – in a vital story that has gone unnoticed by the major media – the San Francisco Chronicle reported, “Investors have yet to collect more than $2.5 million in profits they made trading options in the stock of United Airlines before the Sept. 11, terrorist attacks, according to a source familiar with the trades and market data.
“The uncollected money raises suspicions that the investors whose identities and nationalities have not been made public had advance knowledge of the strikes.” They don’t dare show up now. The suspension of trading for four days after the attacks made it impossible to cash-out quickly and claim the prize before investigators started looking.
“October series options for UAL Corp. were purchased in highly unusual volumes three trading days before the terrorist attacks for a total outlay of $2,070; investors bought the option contracts, each representing 100 shares, for 90 cents each. [This represents 230,000 shares]. Those options are now selling at more than $12 each. There are still 2,313 so-called “put” options outstanding [valued at $2.77 million and representing 231,300 shares] according to the Options Clearing- house Corp.”
“The source familiar with the United trades identifed Deutsche Bank Alex Brown, the American investment banking arm of German giant Deutsche Bank, as the investment bank used to purchase at least some of these options.” This was the operation managed by Krongard until as recently as 1998.
As reported in other news stories, Deutsche Bank was also the hub of insider trading activity connected to Munich Re. Just before the attacks.
CIA, the banks and the brokers
Understanding the interrelationships between CIA and the banking and brokerage world is critical to grasp- ing the already frightening implications of the above revelations. Let’s look at the history of CIA, Wall Street and the big banks by looking at some of the key players in CIA’s history.
Clark Clifford – The National Security Act of 1947 was written by Clark Clifford, a Democratic Party powerhouse, former Secretary of Defence, and one-time advisor to President Harry Truman. In the 1980s, as Chairman of First American Bancshares, Clifford was instrumental in getting the corrupt CIA drug bank BCCI a license to operate on American shores. His profession: Wall Street lawyer and banker.
John Foster and Allen Dulles – These two brothers “designed” the CIA for Clifford. Both were active in intelligence operations during WW II. Allen Dulles was OSS station chief in Berne, Switzerland, where he met frequently with Nazi leaders and looked after U.S. In-vestments in Germany. John Foster went on to become Secretary of State under Dwight Eisenhower and Allen went on to serve as CIA Director under Eisenhower and was later fired by JFK. Their professions: partners in the most powerful – to this day – Wall Street law firm of Sullivan, Cromwell.
Bill Casey – Ronald Reagan’s CIA Director and OSS veteran who served as chief wrangler during the Iran- Contra years was, under President Richard Nixon,
Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
His profession: Wall Street lawyer and stockbroker.
David Doherty – The current Vice President of the New York Stock Exchange for enforcement is the retired General Counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency.
George Herbert Walker Bush – President from 1989 to January 1993, also served as CIA Director for 13 months from 1976-7. He is now a paid consultant to the Carlyle Group, the 11th largest defence contractor in the nation, which also shares joint investments with the bin Laden family.
A.B. “Buzzy” Krongard – The current Executive Director of the Central Intelligence Agency is the former Chairman of the investment bank A.B. Brown and former Vice Chairman of Banker’s Trust.
John Deutch This retired CIA Director from the Clinton Administration currently sits on the board at Citigroup, the nation’s second largest bank, which has been repeatedly and overtly involved in the documented laundering of drug money. This includes Citigroup’s 2001 purchase of a Mexican bank known to launder drug money, Banamex.
Nora Slatkin – This retired CIA Executive Director also sits on Citibank’s board.
Maurice “Hank” Greenburg – The CEO of AIG insur- ance, manager of the third largest capital investment pool in the world, was fated as a possible CIA Di- rector in 1995. FTW exposed Greenberg’s and AIG’s long connection to CIA drug trafficking and covert
operations in a two-part series that was interrupted just prior to the attacks of September 11. AIG’s stock has bounced back remarkably well since the attacks. To read that story, please go to http://www.fromthewildern ess.com/
free/ciadrugs/part_2.html.
One wonders how much damning evidence is necessary to respond to what is now irrefutable proof that CIA knew about the attacks and did not stop them. Whatever our government is doing, whatever the CIA is doing, it is clearly NOT in the interests of the American people, especially those who died on September 11.
New scrutiny of airlines options deals
Christian Berthelsen – San Francisco Chronicle
19 September 2001
The Chicago Board Options Exchange said yesterday that it is looking into an unusual spike in trading in two airline stocks in advance of last week’s terrorist attacks.
As reported in The Chronicle, options trading in the stocks of the parent companies of American and United airlines was unusually heavy in the three trading days prior to the attack.
That activity is the focus of an international
investigation in the United States and several other countries that is trying to determine whether people with advance knowledge of the attacks sought to proft from the trading.
Four American and United planes, along with their crew and passengers, were hijacked on Sept. 11. Three were used in the terrorist attacks against the twin towers of the World Trade Center and against the Pentagon.
The fourth crashed in rural Pennsylvania.
Both airlines’ stocks fell precipitously when trading resumed on Monday, with shares of UAL, the parent of United, dropping 43 percent, and shares of AMR, the parent of American, dropping 39 percent. Both recovered slightly yesterday, with UAL rising $1.49 to close at $18.99, and AMR rising $2, to close at $20.
The Chicago Exchange, the largest options market in the nation and the board on which United options are offcially listed, experienced volume eight times its normal levels in the trading of UAL Corp. put options on the Friday before the attack.
The purchaser of a put contract is guaranteed the right to sell a specifc amount of shares at a specifed price by a certain date. The purchaser profts from the deal when the share price drops lower than the agreed sale price.
Lynn Howard, the exchange’s chief spokeswoman, said, “As is usual, CBOE is conducting an investigation of trading prior to the news event.” Howard declined to elaborate on the specifc nature of the inquiry. Sources who have agreed to speak on condition of anonymity say government investigators are also looking at the trades.
Exchange offcials and market markers in San
Francisco refused to discuss the inquiry.
On the day before the terrorist attack there was a spike of 25 times the normal levels in the trading ratio of UAL put options, with larger-than- average volume coming through the Pacifc Exchange.
Dale Carlson, a vice president of the Pacifc Exchange, refused to comment on whether an inquiry is taking place there in the trading of put options on UAL or any other security.
A foor broker with TFM Investment Group, the market maker in UAL options at the Pacifc Exchange, also refused to comment.
For more information, please read the article ‘Black Tuesday – The World’s Largest Insider Trading Scam?’ published by the Institute for Counter Terrorism
http://www.ict.org.il/apage/5230.php
911research.WTC7.net
PatriotsQuestion911.com, AE911Truth.org
PrisonPlanet.com, WhatReallyHappened.com
STJ911.org, Journalof911Studies.com
Pilotsfor911Truth, Visibility911.com

Oggi ho scoperto pure che ha una funzione "insider-trading", guardate che fusione mi ha preannunciato questa mattina:

pdf 

 «Qué raro. Y eso que no se podía mover el precio y se la asignaron igual —a la empresa Tata—, con el precio, más algo. No me vengan con huevás. Yo no vengo recién naciendo. Esta cuestión está arreglada, y en ese momento más o menos tuvieron que agregárselo, tuvieron que agregar el costo de lo que estaban cobrando. Lo que yo no sé es a cuántos representaba este gallo. Porque, a lo mejor, había que repartirlo entre varios. No tengo idea. Pero, de que actuó don Jorge Schaulsohn en representación de alguien, cierto y seguro. ¿Y cómo lo compruebo? Yo creo que tengo que ponerme de acuerdo con todos los personajes. Voy a convocar, en la Asociación Chilena de Empresas de Tecnologías de Información (ACTI), a todos los que tienen buenos contactos».

Andrés Navarro

El comercio de internos o insider trading, es la transacción de información corporativa reservada hecha por miembros de la organización en beneficio propio. Es un acto ilícito porque los insiders lucran con información perteneciente a la empresa o institución de la que son miembros, perjudicando con ello a quienes por carecer de esta información privilegiada, se hallan en desventaja, y hasta podrían ver dañado su patrimonio.

La ley establece que cualquier persona que en razón de su cargo, posición, actividad o relación tenga acceso a información privilegiada, deberá guardar estricta reserva y no podrá utilizarla en beneficio propio o ajeno, ni adquirir para sí o para terceros, directa o indirectamente, los valores sobre los cuales posea información privilegiada. Se entiende por información privilegiada aquella no divulgada en el mercado, y cuyo conocimiento puede influir en la cotización de los valores emitidos.

La frustrada fusión de D&S y Falabella es, hoy por hoy, uno de los casos más emblemáticos de este tipo de ilícito. María Isabel Solari, accionista mayoritaria de Falabella, manejaba información reservada respecto de las negociaciones en curso para la fusión de su firma con la empresa D&S. Con esta información se adelantó a comprar acciones de D&S, previendo que cuando las expectativas de la fusión se consolidaran en el mercado, aumentaría el precio de los instrumentos adquiridos. Fue lo que efectivamente sucedió cuando el mercado se enteró de la noticia. La insider obtuvo una revalorización de sus acciones del 30 por ciento. Iguales dividendos consiguieron Marcel Zarour Atanacio, y las sociedades por las que éste compró acciones.

Otro caso, que pesará fatalmente sobre las pretensiones presidenciales de su protagonista, es el negocio que emprendió Sebastián Piñera con las acciones de LAN. Piñera compró tres millones de acciones de la empresa LAN, por un valor de diez mil millones de pesos. El insider disponía de información privilegiada sobre los estados financieros de la firma. Sabía que cada acción de LAN se transaría en el mercado en $3.390 pesos, pero compró a $3.280 cada acción, obteniendo una ganancia ilícita de 330 millones de pesos en la operación. Finalmente, fue multado y desistió de apelar la sanción, acusando persecución política. Logró sin embargo hacerse del control de la línea aérea. Como afirma un economista, a Piñera le costará dejar su participación en LAN... Y resignarse a una nueva derrota en las urnas.

El insider trading es una práctica habitual en las empresas. Así lo revela una reciente encuesta aplicada a altos ejecutivos, directores, abogados y corredoras de bolsa. Y aunque entraña un relajamiento de la ética que gobierna la competencia entre privados, también se observa en el Estado y en la administración pública. Lo ocurrido en el Servicio de Registro Civil comporta un hecho de tal gravedad, que la fiscal a cargo de la investigación ha llegado a calificarlo de «corrupción pura y dura». El insider, un asesor del Registro Civil y de la empresa india Tata, habría proporcionado información privilegiada sobre la licitación de 300 millones de dólares con que el servicio buscaba renovar su plataforma tecnológica. Paradójicamente, Tata ha expresado su preocupación por la posible filtración de secretos industriales, luego que la fiscal incautara sus computadores. Ignora la multinacional que la ley también obliga a los funcionarios públicos a guardar silencio sobre la información reservada de las empresas.

Para una sociedad que busca vivir con arreglo a valores, para un país que aspira a legitimar el rol del Estado, para un emprendedor que quisiera ver en el mercado la libertad de crear y prosperar; los insiders sólo representan la lucha salvaje de los fuertes contra los débiles en una época de riesgos e incertidumbres.

Enlaces

La deslenguada declaración de Andrés Navarro

El golpe a Hans Eben 

Compañía Chilena de Fósforos 

The operation is part of the FSA’s ongoing investigation into market abuse, which began in 2006 after the regulator said almost a third of large takeover deals showed signs of possible insider trading.

Its most recent success was the prosecution of John Shevlin, a Body Shop IT technician, who claimed he had shorted Body Shop because he thought the stock looked expensive. It turned out he had in fact hacked into the company's computer system where he discovered that a profits warning was about to be issued.

Earlier this year, former FSA chief executive John Tiner warned the City's investment banks that they have been too complacent about stopping price-sensitive information leaking into the market.

I agree there was a real estate bubble. It did bust. However, it busted because loans were given that shouldn't have been given.

I got a $200K mortgage on a home when I didn't even have a job. I eventually bankrupted on it because I couldn't sell it for a profit and couldn't even sell it because of a long story. It involves an ex-wife and the nature of my career's job instability.

If you understand our currency, you understand that mortgages are the printing of money. And printing of money has everything to do with dollar devaluation if there is lack of economic growth to support it.

Fed kept rates too low. Perhaps the Fed were looking for profits driven by volume rather than margin? I doubt it. They are rich beyond comprehension, and they definitely aren't that stupid. I think it was by design to usher in further centralization of the currency monopoly and consolidate wealth through it's consequences. It is partly insider trader fraud on the latter.

Housing prices are dropping because domestic demand has been reduced and dollar value has been reduced. Housing is largely a domestic commodity of strict supply. Oil is largely a global commodity of strict supply. The global and domestic nature send the prices of each in different directions.

International demand for domestic property is minor. They are only buying it in increased demand because supply is increasing and because their currency is gaining strength against our currency.

It would be nice to see Alan Greenspan and the federal reserve sitting in a prison for insider trading fraud of a massive scale. They knew what was coming. They invested accordingly in oil, gold, and other commodities. Considering the federal reserves wealth, I doubt that will ever happen. We can't even get the mainstream Democrats to impeach Bush.

--jeepndesert

Luis Nassiif on the return of banker Salvatore Alberto Cacciola to Brazil, extradited from Monaco, after (appropriately enough) he slipped away from the safety of Italy -- which refused to extradite him -- for a bit of fun and gaming.

See also

• “I, Cacciola”: The Interview
• On First Looking Into “I, Cacciola”

No Brasil, cada declaração de Salvatore Cacciola receberá a mesma repercussão de Denise Abreu ou dos sócios da VarigLog. Fatos banais serão transformados em escândalos e indícios de escândalos provavelmente não serão percebidos.

Back in Brazil, everything Cacciola says will get the same play in the media as Denise Abreu or the Brazilian partners in VarigLog. Trivial points will morph into scandals, while clues to what may be genuinely scandalous facts will probably not register.

Algumas dicas para tratar do tema:

Some tips on covering the topic:

1. Todas as ações de Chico Lopes, amparando os bancos Marka e Fonte Cindam, embora desastradas, obedeciam a uma justificativa concreta: havia risco de crise sistêmica, sim.

1. Everything Central Bank president Chico Lopes did in bailing out Marka and FonteCindam, however disastrous the results, obeyed a concrete rationale: There really was a systemic risk.

2. Para quebrarem, é evidente que os insiders do Marka e do Fonte Cindam não eram ligados a Chico Lopes. Se fossem, teriam saído antes do estouro do câmbio. Mas provavelmente havia insiders, sim, só que na ponta errada. Ninguém apostaria a vida na manutenção do câmbio se não tivesse, na ponta, com o insider errado - alguém com acesso às informações sobre câmbio mas que não conseguiu informaçõs sobre a derradeira: a decisão de abrir porteira.

2. From the get-go, it was obvious that the inside traders at Marka and Fonte Cindam had no relationship with Chico Lopes. If they had, they would have gotten out before the currency crashed. There very likely were insiders, but they acted [on bad information]. No one would bet the farm on the proposition that the currency would continue to be pegged to the dollar if they did not have a misinformed insider -- someone with access to information on currency exchange rates who missed out on the end-game: The decision to let the currency float.

3. Quem quiser pegar Cacciola e seus insiders, o aperte em relação à política de juros do Banco Central. Todos os seus ganhos, nos anos que antecederam sua quebra, se deram nesse campo.

3. If you want to catch Cacciola and his inside man, press him about the Central Bank's interest-rate policy. All of his profits in the years before Marka went under came from this area.

Entrevistei Cacciola pouco antes do estouro. Um assessor de imprensa me falou do banqueiro que estava crescendo mais do que todos.

I interviewed the banker shortly before the devaluation of the Brazilian real. A press aide described him as the up and coming Brazilian banker.

Não aproveitei nada da entrevista porque era de um sujeito deslumbrado, que não dava uma informação ou análise relevante. Apenas uma coisa me chamou a atenção: foi quando falou que tinha um departamento econômico que lhe permitia acertar todas as taxas de juros, inclusive nas casas decimais. Isso não existe.

I did nothing with the interview because Cacciola struck me as nothing more than a bedazzled guy who had no worthwhile news or analysis to offer. One thing did catch my attention: When he said that he had an economics department that enabled him to correctly predict interest rates down to the least decimal point.

É evidente que seu banco estava em um circuito de vazamento de informações sobre taxas de juros. O próprio Chico Lopes - que, se não em engano, era diretor de política monetária antes de ser guindado à presidência do BC - deveria ser inquirido sobre isso. Mas, antes, é importante que se avaliem as operações do Marka com taxas de juros.

It was obvious that his bank was part of a circle that received leaks about interest rates. Chico Lopes himself -- who, if I am not mistaken, was director of monetary policy before being promoted to the presidency of the Central Bank -- ought to have looked into this. But it is more important to look first at Marka's interest-rate transactions.

Quando foi criado o Copom (Comitê de Política Monetária) uma das justificativas que correu o mercado é que visaria dividir o poder de definir taxas de juros, devido a suspeitas de vazamento.

When the monetary policy committee (Copom) was created, one of the rumors that ran through the market that it was being set up to decentralize the power to set rates, due to suspected leaks.

This is a 9/11 doc for the advanced class. It starts off with the defeat of the official story as point of departure, then examines specific anomalies and advances a theory to explain their presence. Much of this material is not discussed in other films. The film supports a particular conclusion which you are invited to discuss at annarbor911truth dot com. The first part talks about insider trading which is rather dry since there is no video footage to go with it, but stay with it--by the end you will be amazed!" --- covers israeli involvement, bush's nonrespond and the medias preannouncement of the wtc7 "collapse" ---

www.annarbor911truth.com more...

It's an eight-part documentary. Go to the original URL YouTube page where you'll see the playlist on the righthand side.

The Florida lawsuit claims that Countrywide put borrowers into mortgages they couldn't afford or loans with rates and penalties that were misleading.

As in the Illinois and California actions, Countrywide CEO Executive Angelo Mozilo was also named as a defendant.

Here you can read the complaint filed Broward County Circuit Court in Attorney General, Department of Legal Affairs, State of Florida v. Countywide Financial Corp., Countrywide Home Loans Inc., and Angelo Mozilo.

Here you can read our earlier reports on the Illinois and California lawsuits against Countrywide.

In filing the lawsuit, Florida Attorney General William "Bill" McCollum said that “It is unthinkable that a company would try to take advantage of someone’s dream of homeownership. Florida homeowners who are trying to protect their homes from foreclosures shouldn’t have to worry about their mortgage brokers or lenders unfairly profiting at their expense.”

"Similar to other mortgage lenders, Countrywide attempted to generate large numbers of mortgage loans for resale on the secondary mortgage market. In doing so, the company purportedly originated loans with little concern about whether the borrower could afford and maintain payments on these loans. In the process, the company allegedly eased or ignored its own underwriting standards and encouraged borrowers to enter into “teaser” rates while concealing or misrepresenting that much larger payments would become due."

According to Marc Taps of Legal Services of North Florida, "Our legal services programs throughout the state have seen a large number of clients who are now in default on mortgages written by Countrywide. It appears to us Countrywide did no due diligence and accepted applications which were patently fraudulent and reflected no ability on the part of the borrowers to make the required payments. We cannot help but conclude that the most financially unsophisticated segment of the population was targeted by the brokers who knew Countrywide would write these mortgages.”

The lawsuit also claims that Countrywide hid any potentially negative effects of “teaser” loans, including rising rates, prepayment penalties and negative amortization, which borrowers would inevitably face if they were making minimum payments or trying to refinance.

Traditionally, lenders require borrowers to document income and assets, but investigators with the Attorney General’s Office believe Countrywide offered reduced or no documentation loan programs to increase its loan sales. Countrywide also allegedly paid greater compensation to brokers for loans with higher interest rates and prepayment penalties because it could sell those loans for higher prices on the secondary market.

The Florida Attorney General's Office also asserts that "[Countrywide's] deceptive marketing practices were supposedly designed to sell costly loans while hiding or misrepresenting the terms and dangers. Countrywide’s deceptive sales practices resulted in a large number of loans ending in default and foreclosure, with the company reporting earlier this year that more than 25 percent of its subprime loans were delinquent. The Attorney General’s Office received more than 150 complaints about Countrywide, prompting a subpoena in February and ultimately leading to today’s lawsuit."

In a sign that the growing state legal assault on Countrywide is a bipartisan project, McCollum is the first Republican state attorney general to sue Countrywide.

As we've observed before, Countrywide's expanding legal troubles do not bode well for Bank of America, which plans to acquire Countrywide.

Adding to the pressure on Bank of America to abandon the Countrywide deal, McCollum vowed that he would go after Bank of America's assets to pay for the damages owed by Countrwide if the sale goes through.

Florida asks consumers who believe they have been victimized by Countrywide to call the Attorney General’s fraud hotline at 1-866-966-7226 or  file a complaint online at: http://myfloridalegal.com.

 UPDATE:

The state of Washington is expected to file a lawsuit against Countrywide soon, accusing Countrywide of discriminating against minority borrowers. The state wants to fine the mortgage lender and revoke its license to conduct business in the state.

In a lawsuit filed this morning in Los Angeles Superior Court, California Attorney General Jerry Brown sued Countrywide Financial, its chief executive Angelo Mozilo, and president David Sambol, for engaging in deceptive advertising and unfair competition by pushing homeowners into mass-produced, risky loans for the sole purpose of reselling the mortgages on the secondary market.

The lawsuit alleges that Countrywide Financial used deceptive tactics to push homeowners into complicated, risky, and expensive loans so that the company could sell as many loans as possible to third-party investors. 

The complaint also alleges that the company marketed complex and difficult to understand loans with very low initial or “teaser” interest rates or payments. Countrywide employees, including loan officers, underwriters, and branch managers--who were under intense pressure to process a constantly increasing number of loans--misrepresented or obfuscated the fact that borrowers who obtained certain types of loans would experience dramatic increases in monthly payments.

Here you can read the complaint filed in California v. Countrywide Financial Corp, Full Spectrum Lending, Angelo Mozilo, and David Sabol.

According to the Calfornia Attorney General's Office, "In the past, lenders like Countrywide sold home loans to customers and held the loans in their own portfolio, an incentive to maintain strong underwriting standards. Countrywide, however, sold its loans to third-parties in the form of securities or whole loans, often earning more profit for riskier loans. The business model generated windfall profits for Countrywide."

"The company pushed these loans by emphasizing a low “teaser” or initial rate, often as low as 1 percent for pay option ARMs. Countrywide obscured the negative effects--including rising rates, prepayment penalties and negative amortization--which would inevitably result from making minimum payments or trying to refinance. The company misrepresented or hid the fact that borrowers who obtained its home loans--including exploding adjustable rates and negatively amortizing loans--would experience dramatic increases in monthly payments."

"In an effort to rope in as many customers as possible, Countrywide greatly relaxed and liberally granted exceptions to its mortgage lending standards. Traditionally, lenders required borrowers to document income and assets but Countrywide offered reduced or no documentation loan programs to increase its loan sales. Angelo Mozilo and David Sambol actively pushed for easing underwriting standards and granting exceptions to documentation requirements."

"In Countrywide’s 2006 annual report, the company touted the massive growth of its loan production from $62 billion in 2000 to $463 billion in 2006--three times the increase of the U.S. residential loan production market, which tripled from $1.0 trillion in 2000 to $2.9 trillion in 2006. 26 percent of Countywide loans were for California properties. The company sold an ever-increasing number of loans in an effort to gain a 30 percent market share of loan originations and then sell its loans on the secondary market, as mortgage-backed securities or pools of whole loans. Countrywide’s securities trading volume increased from $647 billion in 2000 to $3.8 trillion in 2006."

"Countrywide routinely sold loans based upon a borrower’s stated income and without verifying the information. Loan officers memorized scripts that marketed low payments by focusing on the potential customer’s dissatisfaction, saying, for example, 'Which would you rather have, a long-term fixed payment, or a short-term one that may allow you to realize several hundred dollars a month in savings?' The loan officer did not state that the payment on this new loan would exceed the payment on the current loan.

"Countrywide paid greater compensation to brokers for loans with a higher interest rates, as well as prepayment penalties, because it could sell those loans for higher prices on the secondary market. Countrywide also paid rebates to brokers who originated loans with prepayment penalties, adjustable rates and high margins."

"Countrywide operated an extensive telemarketing operation in which it touted its expertise and claimed to find the best financial options for customers. Customer Service representatives at Countrywide call centers were required to complete calls within three minutes, often processing sixty-five to eight-five calls per day. Employees who did not meet quotas were terminated. The company’s deceptive marketing practices, designed to sell costly loans while hiding or misrepresenting the terms and dangers, included:

• Encouraging borrowers to refinance or obtain financing with complicated mortgage instruments like hybrid adjustable rate mortgages or payment option adjustable mortgages;
• Marketing complex loan products by emphasizing a very low “teaser” rate while misrepresenting the steep monthly payments, increased interest rates and risk of negative amortization;
• Dramatically easing underwriting standards to qualify more people for loans;
• Using low or no-documentation loans which allowed no verification of stated income;
• Hiding total monthly payment obligations by selling homeowners a second mortgage in the form of a home equity line of credit;
• Making borrowers sign a large stack of documents without provider time to read the paperwork; and
• Misrepresenting or hiding the fact that loans had prepayment penalties."

"As the secondary market’s appetite for loans increased, Countrywide further relaxed its standards to finance borrowers with ever-decreasing credit scores. Countrywide employees routinely overrode the company’s computerized underwriting system, known as CLUES, which issued loan analysis reports recommending or discouraging loans based on factors such as a consumer’s credit rating. As the pressure to produce loans increased, Countrywide set up an entire department in Plano, Texas, at the direction of Mozilo and Sambol, where employees could submit requests for underwriting exceptions. In 2006, 15,000 to 20,000 loans a month were processed through this exception process.>

"Countrywide’s deceptive sales practices resulted in a large number of loans ending in default and foreclosure. According to Countrywide’s February 2008 records, a staggering 27 percent of its subprime mortgages were delinquent. Overall, approximately 20,000 Californians lost their homes to foreclosure in May 2008 and 72,000 California homes were in default, roughly 1 out of 183 homes."

"Despite receiving numerous complaints from borrowers claiming that they did not understand their loan terms, Countrywide ignored loan officer’s deceptive practices and loose underwriting standards. Countrywide also pushed its borrowers to serially refinance, repeatedly urging borrowers to obtain home loans to pay off their current debt."

The California Attorney General's Office asks that consumers who believe they have been victimized by Countrywide Consumers should file a complaint by contact the Attorney General’s Public Inquiry Unit in writing at Attorney General's Office California Department of Justice Attn: Public Inquiry Unit P.O. Box 944255, Sacramento, California or through an online complaint form available at http://ag.ca.gov/contact/complaint_form.php?cmplt=CL

Can't see why. All she did was take some good decisions about buying and selling shares. In the meantime, real ones get in. About 15 years ago, I had a Moroccan lodger, called "Toby". "Toby" was an agreeable, funny, and rather flaky guy. He'd had a run-in with the French authorities (he had somehow acquired a French passport, possibly by "Marriage") He finally disappeared in Brixton in mysterious circumstances in 1995, but it turned out that he'd got "previous" in France for buying video machines from their equivalent of Dixons on credit, and then not paying for them...and that he'd been doing the same thing here too. It took me months to sort out the credit rating on my address.

Is this worse than "insider trading" - a state-manufactured-crime if it's anything? Discuss.

Oh, i know - I forgot - silly me! We have to make room for all those convicted terrorists!

Here you can read the complaint in Illinois v. Countrywide Financial Corp., Countywide Home Loans Inc., Full Spectrum Lending, Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP, and Angelo R. Mozilo. 

The lawsuit, which will be filed on Wednesday in Cook County, accuses Countrywide and Mozilo of improper underwriting standards, structuring loans with risky features, and misleading consumers with hidden fees and fake marketing claims, including its still heavily advertised “no closing costs loan.” 

The complaint also alleges that Countrywide created incentives for its employees and brokers to sell questionable loans by paying them more on such sales.

The lawsuit asks for an unspecified amount of monetary damages and requests that the court require Countrywide to rescind or reform all the questionable loans it sold from 2004 through the present. 

In addition, the lawsuit asks the Court to require that Mozilo personally contribute to paying the damages.

Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan also asks the court for 90 days to review any loans currently in foreclosure or moving toward foreclosure.

The complaint states that Countrywide was the largest lender in Illionis from 2004 through 2006, selling about 94,000 loans to consumers in the state. The company operated about 100 retail branch offices in Illinois and its loans were also offered by Illinois mortgage brokers. Countrywide also purchased loans through a network of 2,100 correspondent lenders in the state.

The complaint also describes dubious practices in Countrywide’s huge servicing arm, which oversees $1.5 trillion in loans. 

For example, the complaint alleges that an Illinois consumer whose Countrywide mortgage was in foreclosure came home to find that the company had changed her locks and boarded up her home, although no judgment had been entered and no foreclosure sale conducted, and that It took a week for the homeowner to regain access to her home.

Attorney General Madigan claims that “People were put into loans they did not understand, could not afford and could not get out of. This mounting disaster has had an impact on individual homeowners statewide and is having an impact on the global economy. It is all from the greed of people like Angelo Mozilo.”

The lawsuit is being filed on the same day that Countrywide's shareholders will meet to decide whether to agree to a sale of the company to Bank of America.

We've written before about why we think that Bank of America will ultimately pull out of the deal. 

Adding to the arguments that we earlier made against Bank of America's purchase of Countrywide, the New York Times notes that "The lawsuit adds to the considerable legal risks facing Bank of America as it prepares to absorb Countrywide in a takeover announced in January. Countrywide and its executives have been named as defendants in shareholder lawsuits, and the company’s practices are the subject of investigations by the Securities and Exchange Commission, the F.B.I. and the Federal Trade Commission, which oversees loan servicing companies."

In addition to the Illinois lawsuit, at least three lawsuits against Countrywide have been filed by offices of the U. S. Trustee, part of the Department of Justice that monitors the bankruptcy system,  contending that Countrywide's loan servicing practices were an abuse of the bankruptcy system.

Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozilo also has troubles of his own. 

Mozilo is the subject of a Securities and Exchanges Commission investigation into his sales of Countrywide stock before the price imploded; from 2005 to 2007 Angelo R. Mozilo sold much of his Countrywide stock realizing $291.5 million in profits.

And, as we've reported, Mozilo is at the center of the new controversy regarding recent revelations that politically connected "Friends of Angelo," including  U.S. Senators Christopher Dodd (D- Conn.) and Kent Conrad (D-N. Dak.), as well as members of both the current Bush and previous Clinton administrations, got special "V.I.P." loans with extremely favorable terms from Countrywide.

In the last three quarters, Countrywide reported $2.5 billion in losses, and in the first quarter of 2008, total nonperforming assets reached $6 billion, almost five times that of the same period last year.

UPDATE:

California has also sued Countrywide for deceptive practices. 

You can read the story here.

You can also read the complaint in California v. Countrywide Financial Corp, Full Spectrum Lending, Angelo Mozilo, and David Sabol.

1. FBI "Malitious Mortgage" has arrested 70 brokers yesterday, for frauds in subcrime\subprime. SHOCK at Wall Street. This adds up to 1400 ongoing FBI cases under that operation; since March '08: 406 people under  inquiry in 144 cases, 283 people arrested and 173 already condemned.

2. Former Bear Stearns hedge funds managers Ralph Cioffi and Matthew Tannin, are federal guests from yesterday morning, due to be arraigned in a Brooklyn court.

Morale: the US institutions surprise us again, as they did already in the Enron scandal years ago (ASHAME ON BERLUSCONI's ITALY, where at the same time budget lying was de-penalised, and still is).

Shall we revise our evaluation, taking also Obama and the alive Primaries into account?

Are the US, one of the liberal Biopolitical régimes with the highest level of democracy?

For sure, putting subcriminals in jail, the people that broke so many LIVES, makes democracy alive.

Details:

1. Since March 2008, the FBI is dealing with 3 types of subcrime frauds, in "Malitious Mortgage", in coop. with the SEC and Justice Dept. They  already discovered frauds adding to more than $1 billion.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/182b2ede-3e42-11dd-b16d-0000779fd2ac.html

Financial Times oL (yesterday June 19, 22:09): FBI eyes big business in mortgage fraud probe

By Stephanie Kirchgaessner in Washington and Hal Weitzman in Chicago

(The FT missed to put in on paper this morning, while the news took the 1st page of Italian newspapers)

Federal investigators are homing in on 19 “large corporations” – including investment banks, credit rating agencies, accounting firms and hedge funds – as part of a broad probe into mortgage fraud.

Robert Mueller, director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, did not identify the companies on Thursday, but said the majority of the large corporate cases involved accounting fraud, insider trading and failures to disclose – with criminal intent – the proper evaluation of securitised loans and derivatives

Marco Onado, at radio 24 broadcast "Focus Economia", tells that PREDATORY LENDING is now considered, since the victimes of subcrimes and foreclosures were literally forced and stolen; the US justice has adandoned a previous attitude of considering such practices just as private affairs beween "consenting adults".

2. paper FT today, p. 15 (frot page of Companies and Markets)

Former Bear fund duo charged

By Joanna Chung in NY

Two former Bear Stearns hedge fund managers were yesterday indicted on federal charges that they intentionally misled investors about the financial condition of the investment vehicles that collapsed last year.

WSJ

Bear Fund Managers Indicted

Two former Bear Stearns hedge-fund managers were arrested and charged with securities, wire and mail fraud, among other counts.

It's about High-Grade Structured Credit, and Enhanced Leverage funds: investors lost $1.6 billion, while the two executives were saying in their private emails the crack was forthcoming, and Mr Cioffi secretly retired his money, $2 million, from one fund before the crisis. ENJOY THIS PAGE FROM THE PROSECUTION doc (Tannin: "believe it or not, I've been able to convince people to add more money").

I hope my grab picture is ALMOST readable: otherwise go to the official document http://www.docstoc.com/docs/801755/Bear-Stearns-Indictment

Those arrested run the gamut of players in the mortgage industry, including lenders, real estate developers, brokers, agents, lawyers, appraisers, and so-called straw buyers.

The Department of Justice's name for the crackdown is "Operation Malicious Mortgage," which it describes as "a massive multiagency takedown of mortgage fraud schemes."

According to the FBI, the on-going "Operation Malicious Mortgage" focuses primarily on three types of mortgage fraud — lending fraud, foreclosure rescue schemes, and mortgage-related bankruptcy schemes.

“To persons who are involved in such schemes, we will find you, you will be investigated, and you will be prosecuted,” said Federal Bureau of Investigation Director Robert Mueller. “To those who would contemplate misleading, engaging in such schemes, you will spend time in jail.”

In its statement, the FBI said that "Among the 400-plus subjects of Operation Malicious Mortgage, there have been 173 convictions and 81 sentencings so far for crimes that have accounted for more than $1 billion in estimated losses. Forty-six of our 56 field offices around the country took part in the operation, which has secured more than $60 million in assets."

While most of those indicted so far are relatively small players in the industry-wide fraud crisis, Mueller today repeated his earlier promise that federal authorities are not ignoring the major players in the mortgage industry, but are investigating some "relatively large corporations" as part of its sweeping mortgage-fraud probe, including some 19 large companies, including mortgage lenders, investment banks, hedge funds, credit-rating agencies and accounting firms.

Most of these corporate fraud investigations, said Mueller, deal with accounting fraud, insider trading, and the intentional failure to disclose the proper valuations of securitized loans and derivatives.

The FBI's announcement of Operation Malicious Mortgage coincided with the indictment and arrest in New York on Thursday of two former Bear Stearns managers, Ralph R. Cioffi and Matthew Tannin, who are charged with nine counts of securities, mail and wire fraud resulting in $1.4 billion in losses on mortgage-related assets.

According to the New York Times,  Cioffi and Tannin "are the first senior executives from Wall Street investment banks to face criminal charges, and the investigation by federal prosecutors based in Brooklyn is likely to become a test case of the government’s ability to make successful prosecutions of arcane financial transactions."

"This is not about mismanagement of a hedge fund investment strategy," said Mark J. Mershon, the head of the New York office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation at a news conference Thursday afternoon. "It's about premeditated lies to investors and lenders. Its about the defendants prostituting their client's trust in order to salvage their personal wealth."

An earlier article by this author (“The Secret Bailout of JP Morgan”) summarized evidence presented by John Olagues, an expert in options trading, suggesting that JPMorgan, far from “rescuing” Bear Stearns, was actually its nemesis.¹ The faltering investment bank was brought down, not by “rumors,” but by insider trading based on a plan drawn up much earlier. The deal was a lucrative one for JPM, handing the Wall Street megabank $55 billion in loans from the Federal Reserve (meaning ultimately the U.S. taxpayer). So how did JPM get away with it? Olagues notes the highly suspicious fact that JPM’s CEO James Dimon sits on the Board of the New York Federal Reserve.

In his latest post, Olagues discusses the fate of Lehman Brothers, the nation’s fourth-largest investment bank and the next faltering bank expected to fail.² Unlike Bear Stearns, which got decimated by the JPM buyout using Federal Reserve money, Lehman Brothers is probably in line for a massive bailout from the Fed. At least, that’s what its CEO Richard Fuld seems to believe. The June 4, 2008 Financial Times of London quoted him as stating, “The Federal Reserve’s decision earlier this year to lend directly to investment banks should take questions about Lehman’s liquidity off the table.” Whether Lehman can come up with the “liquidity” to meet its debts is no longer an issue, because it expects to be feeding at the trough of the Federal Reserve, just as JPM did when it bought Bear Stearns at bargain-basement prices. The difference between the two “bailouts” is that Lehman Brothers, unlike Bear Stearns, will actually get the money. Why is Fuld so confident of this rescue operation? Olagues notes that Fuld, like Dimon (and unlike Bear CEO Alan Schwartz), sits on the Board of the New York Federal Reserve.

A conflict of interest? It certainly looks like it. Indeed, Olagues points to a statute defining this sort of self-dealing as a criminal offense. 18 U.S.C. Chapter 11, Section 208, makes it a felony punishable by up to 5 five years in prison for members of the Board of Directors of a Federal Reserve Bank to make decisions that benefit their own financial interests. That would undoubtedly apply here:

“Fuld, at last count, owns 1.9 million shares of Lehman, 600,000 restricted stock units and 900,000 executive stock options . . . . Although Mr. Fuld sold over $320,000,000 worth of stock at near all time highs in 2006 and 2007, received through the premature exercise of his stock options, he still has value in his present holdings of approximately $100,000,000.”

Likewise, says Olagues, “James Dimon holds almost 3 million shares of J.P. Morgan stock worth over $120 million with taxes already paid and executive stock options equal in my estimate of another $70 million. His dispositions of stock equaled $140 million over the past few years.” Olagues adds:

“Fuld, like Jamie Dimon, was at the luncheon on March 11, 2008 with Bernanke, Rubin, CEO of Citigroup, Geithner, President of the New York FED, Thain of Merrill Lynch, and Schwarzman. Some claim that the meeting was about Bear Stearns and how to handle the situation.”

Needless to say, Bear CEO Schwartz was not invited to the luncheon. “Lehman Bros. is one of the original stock holders of the New York Federal Reserve Bank,” Olagues observes. “Bear Stears does not now have any ownership in the FED banks.”

The luncheon was held two days before the April 14 collapse of Bear Stearns stock that led to the bank’s demise. If the luncheon attendees were indeed discussing the Bear problem on April 11, testimony before the Senate Banking Committee in which the principals said they first heard of the problem on the evening of the thirteenth, says Olagues, was “less than truthful.”

The evidence at least warrants an investigation, but who is going to hold these self-dealing Federal Reserve Board members to account? In a March 27 radio broadcast noted in The New York Post of the same day, Senator Christopher Dodd pointed out the conflict of interest and said it needed to be examined; but no mention was made of it at the April 4 Senate hearings. Why not? Olagues suggests he had gotten his marching orders by then from a major campaign contributor. New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, the former thorn in the side of the Wall Street bankers, has been summarily disposed of; and under the latest proposal of U.S. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, the Federal Reserve itself will soon become the chief overseer and regulator of the banks. The Federal Reserve will regulate the Federal Reserve Boards with their litany of private bank CEOs, a clear case of the fox guarding the henhouse.

So who is left to bring the banks to task? That question will be addressed in my next article. Stay tuned . . . .

Post and Read Comments Here

___________________

Source: Aleeka.com

The Timeline

2007

A JANUARY 03 Former Chariman & CEO Alan "Ace" Greenberg exercises options to buy 150,000+ shares at $73.75 and he immediately sells all of those shares at the market price of $163.11. He realizes an immediate profit of $13 million.
B JUNE 22 Bear Stearns commits $3.2bn in secured loans to bail out one of its hedge funds. It says its troubles are 'relatively contained'.
C JULY 17 Bear Stearns reveals that one of its hedge funds has lost all of its value. Another worth 9 per cent of its value at the end of April.
D OCTOBER 22 Bears Stearns secures a share-swap deal with Citic, China's largest securities firm. Citic pays $1bn for about 6 per cent stake in Bear Stearns. The US bank agrees to eventually pay the same for about 2 per cent of Citic.
E NOVEMBER 1 Newspaper suggests that CEO Cayne was out of touch during the collapse of the two hedge funds. He dismisses the media concerns as "noise".
F DECEMBER 7 Joe Lewis, Bahamas-based billionaire, up his stake to 8 per cent, showing that he believes the Bear Stearns shares are undervalued.(He went on to realize a $1 Billion loss in Bear Stearns)
G DECEMBER 20 The bank reports its first-ever quarterly loss. The loss is nearly four times analysts' forecasts, and includes a $1.9bn writedown on its holdings of mortgage assets.
H DECEMBER 21 Company Insiders sell almost $50 million in stock. Insiders included CEO James Cayne (Who personally dumped $15 million of the stock), former CEO Alan Greenberg (Sold $8 million) and Future CEO Alan Schwartz ($6 million sold).

2008

JANUARY 7 2008 CEO Cayne retires under pressure, but stays on as non-executive chairman. Alan Schwartz becomes president and chief executive.

FEBRUARY 14 In reaction to the fall in the bank's share price since the share-swap deal, it emerges that Citic has been renegotiating the agreement.

FEBRUARY 28 Rebel investors in Bear Stearns seize two of the bank's failed hedge funds in an attempt to regain some of the $1.6bn lost in the previous summer's collapse.

MARCH 7 Carlyle Capital Corporation sees its shares suspended in Amsterdam.
The $22bn hedge fund suffered exposure to mortgage backed securities, and had received substantial additional margin calls and default notices from its lenders.Bear Stearns is seen as heavily exposed to Carlyle Group, founder and 15 per cent owner of CCC. *Carlyle Capital Corp. (CCC) was formed in August 2006 by the Carlyle Group for the purpose of making investments in U.S. mortgage-backed securities. In March 2008, only 19 months after being formed, CCC defaulted on about US$ 16.6 billion of debt. Previous and Current board members of the Carlyle Group include
George H.W. Bush, former United States President George W. Bush, current United States President Shafig Bin Laden, brother of Osama Bin Laden James Baker, former US Secretary of State Arthur Levitt, former Chairman of The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Donald Rumsfeld, former Secretary of Defense

March 10, 2008

Alan "Ace" Greenberg, responding to the price liquidity runors which caused shares of Bear to drop 10% in early trading, told CNBC that the liquidity rumors surrounding the company are "totally ridiculous." Shares responded and initially jumped on the news, only to lose more ground later in the day.

March 11, 2008

Noon: Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke attends a lunch meeting with the "Who's Who on Wall St." Attendees JPMorgan Chase 's Jamie Dimon, Goldman Sachs’s CEO Lloyd Blankfein, Lehman Brothers boss Richard Fuld, Morgan Stanley President James Gorman, Citigroup’s Robert Rubin, Blackstone Group’s Stephen Schwarzman and Merrill Lynch’s John Thain. Who's noticeably absent? Bear Stearns! Every major financial institution in the United States, except Bear Stearns, had a meeting about bank liquidity. There were rumors of liquidity problems at Bear Stearns since that Monday! What do you think they were talking about???
Evening: Jim Cramer, when asked his view of selling Bear Stearns, responds "NO, NO, NO! ...Bear Stearns is FINE...Bear Stearns is not in trouble..Don't move your money from Bear...That's just silly, don't be silly!"
MARCH 13 CCC collapses. Bear Stearns shares fall 17 per cent as investors grow anxious about its exposure to CCC. Schwartz comments: "Our balance sheet is not weakened at all."

Obvious Insider Trading

The following chart proves that there was insider trading during the Bear Stearns collapse. Look at the major jump in stock price AFTER the deal was announced that Bear would be sold for $2/share but BEFORE any news that JP Morgan would increase their offer to $10/share. The price exceeded $7/share before the news of an increased offer. Would you be willing to pay $7 for a company which is to be sold for $2? Would you even be willing to pay $2.01 for a company to be sold for $2? Somebody new something!!
What about Jimmy Cayne? The former CEO was largest employee stock holder. He didn't sell his remaining 5.6 million shares at $2. He sold his shares on March 25th, the day after the SECOND offer price of $10!

MARCH 14 JP Morgan and the New York Federal Reserve rush to the rescue of Bear Stearns. Shares crash almost 50 per cent.
MARCH 16 JP Morgan agrees to buy Bear Stearns in a deal that values the stricken bank's shares at $2 each, with JP Morgan exchanging 0.05473 of each of its shares for one Bear share.
MARCH 22 A powerful group of shareholders including British billionaire Joe Lewis plot a legal challenge against the $2 a share, cut-price offer.
MARCH 23 It emerges that JP Morgan is in talks with the US Federal Reserve and Treasury Department about a possible increased offer for Bear Stearns.
MARCH 24 JP Morgan raises its offer for Bear Stearns to $10 a share

MARCH 25 Jimmy Cayne, Bear Stearns’ chairman and former chief executive, sells his 5pc stake.
People's life savings were wiped out and many sold at $2 on the news of the offer but someone was buying, and buying heavily! Someone made a FORTUNE because they had non-public information.
The criminals can easily be identified if the SEC did its job and investigated this. There hasn't been ANY inquiries to date! ]]> http://1031netex.wordpress.com/?p=113 Sun, 08 Jun 2008 02:38:08 +0000 Fox http://1031netex.wordpress.com/?p=113 The New York Times reports today that Bank of America is still firmly committed to acquiring crippled mortgage giant Countrywide Financial. 

After reading the article, we're convinced that the deal isn't going to happen.

According to the Times, Bank of America's chief executive Kenneth D. Lewis "confirmed his commitment to the Countrywide buyout, which is expected to close by the end of September. When asked about the fact that home prices have plummeted and loan defaults have soared since the deal was announced, Mr. Lewis defended it as 'compelling', with a 'pretty nice' upside. 'We don’t have our heads in the sand,' he said."

But the facts are that Countrywide has lost $2.5 billion in just the last three quarters. As the Times noted, in the first quarter of 2008, Countrywide's total nonperforming assets hit $6 billion, almost five times that of the same period last year.

Countrywide has more than $95 billion in loans held for investments on its books, many of them adjustable-rate mortgages written on properties in California and Florida, where prices are still falling. Moreover, $34 billion of these loans are home equity lines of credit and second liens, which are riskier because they are more likely to generate losses when home values fall.

In addition, the Times said, "Countrywide has $15.6 billion in mortgages and related securities that it hopes to sell. Of these, $10.4 billion are so-called Level 2, and hard to value because the market for them is inactive. An additional $5.1 billion are valued on internal company models, not market prices."

The Times quoted several analysts who think that the Countrywide deal is a bad move.

Paul J. Miller, managing director at the securities firm Friedman, Billings, Ramsey, which has published a report analysing the acquisition, called the purchase of Countrywide by Bank of America "a horrible deal." 

Miller estimates that the deal will cost Bank of America an additional $10 billion to $15 billion above the $4 billion purchase price when a final accounting of losses is made.  Miller also said that Bank of America could face write-downs of up to $30 billion if goes ahead with buying Countrywide.

Instead, Miller think that Bank of America should  "completely walk away" from the deal.

Bloomberg News also points out the potential disaster awaiting Bank of America if it goes ahead with the Countrywide deal. 

Bloomberg observes that Bank of America stock has dropped 17 points since the deal was announced, and quotes Christopher Whalen of Institutional Risk Analytics as saying that "If Ken Lewis pulls the trigger on Countrywide, he’s going to lose his job. It’s so early in the cycle of this housing downturn, you almost know that they are going to go wrong."

Further, as the subprime mortgage industry collapsed and took much of the national economy with it, Countrywide and its executives have been hit with a barrage of criticism, investigations, and lawsuits, and could even face criminal charges. 

Even with its decision last week to jettison Countrywide COO David Sambol (who it had onced pledged to keep on board), Bank of America is likely to come under sharp criticism for its association with the Countrywide, which has become the poster-child for the greed, mismanagement, false advertising and outright fraud that led to the subprime meltdown.

As law professor Carl Tobias is quoted as saying, "there ought to be concern on Bank of America’s part as to reputation and what these bankruptcy trustees and judges are saying.”

There are some signs that the deal is falling apart even as the Federal Reserve gave the deal its blessing. Last month, Bank of America  said in a filing that it’s not promising to guarantee the debt of Countrywide.

Our guess is that the Times article is, in fact, part of an exit strategy by Bank of America, and that it will soon find a compelling reason to back out of the deal.

 UPDATE:

We were wrong here -- Bank of America purchased Countrywide on July 1. 

According to Bank of America CEO Kenneth D. Lewis, "This purchase significantly increases Bank of America's market share in consumer real estate, and as our companies combine, we believe Bank of America will benefit from excellent systems and a broad distribution network that will offer more ways to meet our customers' credit needs."

In a press release, Bank of America vowed to make changes in the way Countrywide operates its mortgage business and stressed a new approach meant to change the company's image:

"Bank of America will pursue a new goal to lend and invest $1.5 trillion for community development over the next 10 years beginning in 2009. The goal will focus on affordable housing, economic development and consumer and small business lending and replace existing community development goals of both companies. Bank of America also previously announced a $35 million neighborhood preservation and foreclosure prevention package by both companies focusing on grants and low-cost loans to help local and national nonprofit organizations engaged in foreclosure prevention, and to purchase vacant single-family homes for neighborhood preservation. The combined company will modify or workout about $40 billion in troubled mortgage loans in the next two years and these efforts will keep an estimated 265,000 customers in their homes. The combined loss mitigation staffs will be maintained at the level of more than 3,900 for at least one year."

But most analysts -- and some major Bank of America shareholders -- are still wondering what Lewis could be thinking in taking on Countrywide's horrendous public image, its debt, and its expanding liability in numerous lawsuits.

Insider Trading... This is when a person has non-public information on which he bases a trade in a public securities market. It is illegal. Insider trading in public securities can lead to imprisonment. Insider trading in real estate and private investments can lead to extraordinary profits.

Arbitrage... This is the act of profiting from the mispricing of assets. When an ounce of gold costs $900 in New York and $895 in Japan, "arb" traders will buy lots of gold in Japan and immediately sell it in New York... theoretically risk free. When dealing with transaction costs, arb trading typically requires very large amounts of money to be carried out feasibly. For the Joe who has $150,000 in an IRA, arb trading probably isn't feasible.

Big Fish... Investing in the stock market is a different story when you can afford to buy HUGE pieces of companies. Warren Buffett, often called the World's Greatest Investor, invests on such a large scale that he recently commented that the Korean stock market is a great buy, but he won't be investing in it... because most Korean stocks aren't large enough to have a significant impact on his portfolio! You can't follow Warren's strategy because he reads all day in order to make trades in the several hundred million dollar range. What he does won't exactly work when making $10,000 trades.

Geniuses... This may be you; it's not me.

What I'm not saying

I don't avoid the stock market like the plague. I do generally avoid mutual funds like the plague because it is surrendering - you don't know where your money went. Picking stocks for your portfolio can make sense when you are honest with yourself in that it is speculative and high risk in nature. Accordingly, it should only be done with a small portion of an overall portfolio. What do you do with rest of your portfolio?

First, a federal court refused to dismiss a shareholder suit against Sambol and other executives and directors of Countrywide.

The lawsuit that alleges that Sambol and the other defendants violated their fiduciary duties by lack of good faith and lack of oversight of Countrywide's lending practices, improper financial reporting and internal controls, and the unlawful sale of over $848 million of Countrywide stock between 2004 and 2008 at inflated prices based on material inside information.

In refusing to dismiss the case, the judge said that the evidence presented by the plaintiffs "create[s] a cogent and compelling inference that the Individual Defendants misled the public with regard to the rigor of Countrywide’s loan origination process, the quality of its loans, and the Company’s financial situation – even as they realized that Countrywide had virtually abandoned its own loan underwriting practices."

The plaintiffs are seeking millions of dollars in damages.

Second, Sambol was given the heave-ho by Bank of America, the new boss at Countrywide.

When Bank of America announced plans to take over Countrywide in January, CEO Ken Lewis said Sambol would continue to lead the entire mortgage business for B of A once the merger was complete. Sambol was even given a retention bonus of $1.9 million and 335,126 restricted stock units. 

Then in March, Bank of America agreed to set up a $20 million retention account for Sambol, plus $8 million in restricted stock.

But that was then. 

This is now:  

Bank of America announced this week that Sambol is being replaced by Barbara Desoer, B of A's chief technology and operations officer.

One of the allegations in the shareholder suit is that Bank of America "bought" Sambol's support for its takeover of Countrywide with extravagant remuneration offers and the promise that he would run the combined company's consumer mortgage business.

Now it appears that Sambol, along with Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozilo, are too tied to the subprime mortgage debacle and the foreclosure crisis  -- and perhaps unlawful stock sales and other breaches of fiduciary duties -- for Bank of America to keep around.