Conspiracy Watch: The Wisest Guys in the Room
Did the Mafia kneecap Wall Street?
the conspiracy: In the 1970s the Mafia started laundering its dirty money on Wall Street. With the help of unscrupulous hedge fund managers, the Mob gutted companies whose stock it had sold short, making a killing—the high-finance equivalent of taking out an insurance policy on a grocery store and then torching it. This "financial heist of monstrous proportions" eventually got so big that it triggered last October's stock market collapse.
the conspiracy theorists: In 2007 Patrick Byrne, ceo of Overstock.com, launched DeepCapture.com to expose "a scandal that may make Enron look like an afternoon tea." The site recently posted a nearly 40,000-word treatise exposing the alleged conspirators, who go beyond mafiosi to include former New York governor Eliot Spitzer, Mad Money host Jim Cramer, and Wikipedia, which has rubbed out entries that reveal details of the scheme. DeepCapture readers can support Byrne's "investigative reporting" by shopping on Overstock. And he's offered a whopping $75,000 to those who can "Crack the Wall Street Cover-Up."
meanwhile, back on earth: Byrne is part of multiple lawsuits charging that naked short selling—investors selling stocks they didn't own or intend to buy—cut into Overstock's share price. Naked short selling didn't affect only Overstock, and while it didn't help the ailing economy, it probably didn't kill it. (Regardless, the sec banned it in September. Byrne's response: "There. Was that so hard?") And that stuff about the Mafia whacking the world financial system? Fuhgeddaboudit.
Kookiness Rating: 
(1=maybe they're on to something, 5=break out the tinfoil hat!)
Page 1 of 1 
So, Ms. Gettelmen! Might I ask? What is it about illegal you don't understand? Wacky? Take a look around you. Look at the economy. What is your opinion of what has happened?
Madoff slips by the SEC for 30 years. At Deepcapture, they have emails between reporters and hedge fund managers attacking perfectly good companies.
Maybe I've seen too many film noir movies on TCM, but I do believe these type schemes are handled with illicit bribes. That brings in tax evasion, market manipulation, naked sh.........
Oh, give me five mikes. I'm out there with Dr. Byrne.
Ms. Gettelmen it is nice to see that you have yet to return to your own mother ship.
The US Economy is in total chaos, Wall Street is reeling from one greed induced fraud to another, top executives are falsifying account statements and yet you sit here wanting to discuss Patrick Byrne and tin foil hats.
From what I have seen on his site lately he is closer to this nations reality point that you and so many others in denial.
Rule of Thumb #1: In order to avoid embarrassment, avoid speaking about things about which you know nothing. In your case, that would include market manipulation.
hey Gettle where is the originality. Attack Patrick Byrne - Check. Reference Tin Foil Hats - Check. Dismiss naked Short Sales - Check.
I looked at your more recent blogs and amazingly you do not discuss Wall Street very much so why start now? Clearly you lack the intelligence on this subject matter.
For the record, all the buzz is about Madoff and Russian Mafia but why let details like that get in the way of a direct request for a smear job.
A sorry piece given the clear corruption on Wall St. Byrne has it right and you can ridicule him all you want. The rot on Wall St. is perhaps beyond repair. He tried to warn people - they ridiculed him, as you are....so much for Mother Jones coverage of this issue.
Smart Fearless Journalism.
Is that your motto? This looks like uneducated, follow the crowd, rhetoric to me. Is there anything new here that has been stated by the select band of corrupt journalists working for the hedge funds?
You disregard Byrne's evidence-based journalism and yet you offer nothing concrete to dispute his claims. Given all the scandals on Wall Street you could have at least put in a little effort and used your critical thinking skills to verify DeepCapture's claims and conclusion but, nope, you just ignore the facts and attack Byrne's personality. You have a weak argument and you taint Mother Jones with your garbage opinions.
Ms. Gettelmen,
Did you even read "The Story of Deep Capture"? Or any information on naked short selling and settlement failure for that matter?
I ask this because you are lampooning a MacGuffin from a much larger story/issue. You failed to properly explain "the conspiracy" in the first place, and emphasize the "wacky" parts.
I hold Mother Jones in high esteem, but this is poor work.
Well whatever happened to the Mother Jones of yore? It is now just another wacky mainstream media rag owned lock, stock and barrel by the powers that be. So much for "free press."
Thank goodness for the internet and sites like Deep Capture which now carry the torch of responsible,independent investigative reporting. By the way, Deep Capture is well on its way to winning "Best Business Blog." (http://2008.weblogawards.org/polls/best-business-blog/ )
Let the corporate stalking and net loon frenzy begin.
Top banks accused of laundering money for Iran
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2009/01/10/2009-01-10_ten_of_th...
Ten international banks including British-based Lloyds laundered “billions of dollars” for Iran through New York banks, Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau announced Friday. The scheme helped Iran turn its dirty money into greenbacks, which it could then use to buy goods prohibited by international sanctions.
Some of the money went to fund terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, and to help Iran get materials, including tungsten, for long-range missiles, sources said.
“This is one of the biggest investigations we’ve ever conducted,” said Morgenthau.
Lloyds admitted it laundered $300 million and agreed to pay a $350 million fine and open its books to investigators. If records show that the bank knew it was helping Iran break international law or foster terrorism, Lloyds could face criminal prosecution, authorities said.
None of the other nine banks was identified because they are working out similar agreements with Morgenthau’s investigators. The CIA will also review the bank records.
Revolutionary France
Says:
January 11th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
Time for pitchforks.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=gx8MgZsyUf0
Dr. Jim DeCosta
Says:
January 11th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
I think you’re going to be reading a whole lot more soon in re: the role of abusive naked short selling and money laundering. Remember that the bad guys need to “collateralize” these debts with cash or securities. The investor’s money stays with the purchasing b/d for him to earn interest off of until delivery is achieved. The bad guys doing the selling need to post collateral at their own clearing firm to protect their clearing firm’s caboose. Nothing is theoretically more risky than the naked short selling of penny stocks and the clearing firm knows this. Dirty money works just fine for “collateralization” purposes. As the share price predictably tanks the collateralization necessities also do and this new “clean” money can flow back offshore. Our b/ds are theoretically supposed to be monitoring for money laundering activity by filing “suspicious activity reports” or “SARs” due to the mandates of “the banking secrecy act”. I think it was E-trade just paid a measly 1 million dollar fine last week for not having a mandated anti-money laundering program from 2003 all the way until 2007. Some securities scholars have proffered that a b/d with no anti-money laundering program in effect might be the ideal b/d to use in abusive naked short selling crimes. We’ll see. How in the heck can you “forget” to have a mandated anti-money laundering for 5 straight years? I think I tried to make this point either today or yesteday: where do you think that b/ds charging $7 per trade are making their money? Some are making it through the interest “earned” during that period in which the NSCC will pay you to “wait” for the delivery of the failed to be delivered shares instead of opting for a buy-in.
Leave a Comment
What part of fraud don't you understand? You have misrepresented Patrick Byrne and what he's been trying to do.. Most people who enter with an open mind can actually understand that trading on non-public information is illegal.. but don't be surprised if the SEC changes the rules so that the biggies SAC etal don't have to give the money back... it wouldn't be the first time.
What was the extent of your research? Cut'n paste from from an e-mail that was forwarded to you?
I want to respond but I hardly know where to begin. Patrick Byrne didn`t come up with this conspiracy "theory". It was fairly well documented long before he was made aware of it and began his "jihad". I remember reading an article at least 4 years earlier written by a market maker with 20 years in the business recounting "the day the bad guys showed up". This was around the time the proposed "BBX" exchange was tossed. Byrne is actually a johnny-come-lately to us real "nuts" who smelled something starting to rot long before.
Ms. Gettleman I find it most interesting that Jim Cramer pops up un your stories. In furure versions would you be quoting Gary Weiss or Sam Antar as they speak volumes of the same smoke and mirrors you are looking for to print. I suggest that you might dig a little deeper into FBI info that has been uncovered.
And your conclusion is based on what??
Wake up you clueless fools, oh wait your probably on the take too. Patrick speaks the truth & the SEC pockets the bribes, We have the best government wall st. can buy.
After all that has transpired and brought to light about the thievery on wall street in the last year, you are either a bought and paid for blogger or dumber than a box of rocks.
I wonder how much the hedge funds paid you .
The word slut comes to mind
A Mother Jones piece which appears to have gone out of its way to violate every tenet & guiding principle which MJ has always espoused....gotta wonder why....
>
Thank goodness! Gary Weis, Jeff Matthews, and Herb Greenberg have all but disappeared from the scene as the evidence unfolds, and I was afraid there was no one left to hit on Whacky Patty. Do it again, Ms Gettelman!
Thanks, Mother. Check's in the mail.
after reading Deep Capture, I'm in favor of waterboarding on wall street.
They have accomplished a level of terror in the US that has never been seen before and have been paid obscene wages for doing it.
At least your consistent with the other lockstep 'captured' journalists.
I see that the stock market conspiracy nuts have been unleashed on this article by their leader, Patrick "Sith Lord" Byrne.
http://www.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=3532&mn=29538&pt=msg&mid=6447...
I urge readers to check out deepcapture.com and decide for themselves whether the reports found there--based on emails obtained through legal discovery--support Patrick Byrne's case for corruption on Wall Street. This Mother Jones editorial does not begin to address in any depth the many disturbing issues Byrne and his team have uncovered. I find the burden of proof is now on those who would attempt to discredit him. Repeated invocation of childish epithets are insufficient.
Well,
I guess you apply here the principle:
Better be wrong with the crowd than be right alone.
But do it quick, the truth becomes more and more difficult to hide, very soon you will be wrong alone.
Dear Ms. Gettelman,
I had almost managed to forget the Left's technique of Argument from Imperious Tone of Voice. Thanks for reminding me so ably. Just on the off-chance that any of your readers are still interested in being connected to reality, however, I'll touch upon a few of your gems.
"The site recently posted a nearly 40,000-word treatise exposing the alleged conspirators, who go beyond mafiosi to include former New York governor Eliot Spitzer, Mad Money host Jim Cramer, and Wikipedia, which has rubbed out entries that reveal details of the scheme." Actually the piece to which you refer (http://www.deepcapture.com/the-story-of-deep-capture-by-mark-mitchell/), explaining SEC capture, hedge fund chicanery, and the coming implosion of our financial system, was posted last May, picking up on smaller pieces that had been posted for about three years.
"Meanwhile, back on earth: ...Naked short selling didn't affect only Overstock, and while it didn't help the ailing economy, it probably didn't kill it." Really? Show me the data to support this statement. Until you do, all we know is:
* We know that in July, when the meltdown began, the SEC imposed an unprecedented 30 day emergency restriction on naked short selling in 19 financial stocks at the heart of our financial system.
* We know that when the ban was lifted several of the firms promptly imploded.
* We know that Senators Clinton, Obama, and McCain, the current and head of the SEC, and the Secretary of the Treasury all came out and said that naked short selling was illegal and playing a role in the implosion. (Here is Hillary's statement: http://clinton.senate.gov/news/statements/details.cfm?id=303208 )
* We know that several CEOs of major Wall Steet banks came out and said that their firms were being destroyed by naked short selling.
* We know that the foirmer head of the SEC, Harvey Pitt, said publicly, "here’s a very simple solution and the SEC has it and they know what is. It’s very simply this. If you want to sell a stock short you have to have a legally and forcible right to produce that stock on settlement day. That’s all it takes. If the SEC does that people will not be able to sell short unless they have actually first located and gotten their stock.
Interviewer2: In other words that would do away with naked shorting right?
Harvey Pitt: Absolutely, and naked shorting is what’s causing a lot of the problems in the market."
* We know that in November the SEC called an emergency congress of regulators from the G-20 over a weekend to discuss how to stop naked short selling:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/51fb73ba-b761-11dd-8e01-0000779fd18c.html
"Regulators to discuss short selling rules
By Joanna Chung in New York
Published: November 21 2008 01:04 | Last updated: November 21 2008 01:04
Global securities regulators will gather on Monday to discuss rules on short selling and disclosure of credit derivatives, the head of the US Securities and Exchange Commission said on Thursday.
Christopher Cox, SEC chairman, said the meeting, to be held via teleconference, would address “urgent regulatory issues in the ongoing credit crisis.”
The announcement came during yet another tumultuous day of trading in global stock markets.
“In addressing turbulent market conditions, it is essential not only that regulators act against securities law violations, including abusive short selling, but also that there be close coordination among international markets to avoid regulatory gaps and unintended consequences,” Mr Cox said in a statement on Thursday.
The International Organization of Securities Commissions, which includes securities regulators from around the globe, will consider the effectiveness of their recent actions to reduce abusive short selling, without hurting legitimate shorting...
Mr Cox said regulators will explore “possible coordination” on rules relating to naked short sales – when shares are sold without being borrowed first– in particular with regard to position reporting and delivery and pre-borrowing requirements.
So, in sum: all three presidential candidates contradict you, as do current and former Treasury Secretaries and SEC Chairmen, as do the CEOs of major Wall Street banks, as do the actions of the SEC. You have the regulators of the largest 20 countries in the world calling an unprecedented next-day congress to address this "urgent regulatory issue" in an attempt to stem the crisis.
Yet you blithely dismiss it, with no argument. So surely you must have some data or facts that support such a bold claim (because surely Mother Jones would not simply be regurgitating hedge fund apologetics, right?) So please, please share with us, because the Argument from Imperious Tone of Voice is not quite cutting it for me.
"And that stuff about the Mafia whacking the world financial system? Fuhgeddaboudit."
Once again, returning to the real world, there are two things you should know about this:
1) There is a loophole in the nation's settlement system, a loophole through which, we have been claiming, hundreds of billions have been stolen. According to this Reuters article, that loophole has a cute name: "the Madoff exception." http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE4BG6US20081217
“Madoff's name was so well known around the SEC's offices that his efforts to give market-makers a broad reprieve from short selling restrictions led SEC officials to call the measure the 'Madoff Exemption.'"
2) Here is CNBC reporting, at last, how Madoff is in bed with the Russian Mob (just as we have been saying): http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=987308800&play=1
Mother Jones has a fine history of investigative reporting driven by critical thought. Yet suddenly, you are acting as a lapdog for power, glossing over facts, ignoring data, and just parroting a see-no-evil party line that was hackneyed two years ago. How odd.
Patrick Byrne
MS. Gettelman ... unbelievably poor journalism ... wait, that can't be call journalism ... make that poor writing.
""Smart, Fearless Journalism!?!?""
Hah! Let me guess, did you just get a new source of funds from an entity with ties to Wall Street?
We'll be watching..
Maybe this particular theory is way out there, but not the very real possibility that even progressive politicians we admire may be complicit in covering up abuses of our financial system and supporting de-regulation of the biggest casino in the world -- Wall Street.
maybe we out to vote for opening another street in las vegas by the name of wall street.
This Mafia scheme from the 1970's. Tell us more about that. These guys have their hands in everything, everywhere. No piece of U.S. real estate is NOT in their domain, no citizen not paying a little extra to pay their extortion every time we buy food, clothing, shelter, medicine, gasoline, cars, whatever. They're represented in our government better than the citizenry. It's their government; not the peoples'. So this may not be such a whacky story after all.
And even if the gangsters aren't involved, the banksters are. This could not be an accident. It is too widespread. Someone decided they could make a killing by loaning money to people who couldn't pay it back. Only a fool would make such loans, in such quantities, knowing the borrower could not pay it back. And don't hand me the "Bill-Clinton-made-me-do-it" excuse. These professional lenders set up these amateur borrowers, knowing they would end up owning those assets in the end. And 'their' government jumped up, not to bail out the amateur borrowers, putting out the fire on Main Street, which would take the heat off Wall Street, but to give the professional lenders $350 billion (so far) of the taxes paid by those amateur borrowers, to do with whatever they wish, maybe more of what they've been doing to get the world into this crisis, no questions asked. And anybody who don' like it, fuhgedaboudit! Get your own government!
This is too big to be an accident no one saw coming. It's been going on for several years, filling newspapers with pages of 'Sheriff's sale of real estate' ads. This is a 'robber-baron' 'set 'em up; knock 'em down.'
Before we break out the kooky scale, maybe we need to investigate. But watch your back if you do.
I have read that there is something like $3 trillion in credit default swaps written on GM, including speculative bets that they will fail. It is no secret that little hot [deleted] traders on the Street have been gunning for GM since the 1990s.
Of course, the failure of GM would take down so many legitimate insurance companies on the losing end of the trade, that the domino effects of a GM failure may well have insured it in perpetuity, lest it take down the entire government.
Someone may be on to something.
That thugs and scum are part of the financial industry is hardly news---I've been swindled for years as has everyone who invests or has a pension (har, har) knows full well. Always was a scam but with the Republicans aiding and abetting it's turned into a giant Ponzi Scam!
Ms Gettelman has it all wrong its Rome and the free masons that thats cause the world reccession.
Is it my imagination, or have a bunch of comments been disappeared? I'm sure I'm wrong. Please, tell me I'm wrong.
Patrick Byrne
I was in this fight long before Patrick Byrne, so I've seen a few things. I could never understand why the left, who clamor for all things pure and innocent, never helped us. I saw your article, posted a comment, and it's gone. What gives? Where's the Pepsi generation when you need them? Do you have a Goldman Sachs bumper sticker? Paulson for PREZ campaign?
Everyday, pensions are disappearing. Upstate NY Unions are wiped out. Charities in Florida go begging, and taxpayers get to bail out the bank of the month. And this is what you come up with?
I'll think I'll take my private jet out of moth balls, and do a one man globe trot, just to generate some CO2. Maybe that would get your attention.
I guess Mother Jones didn't much care to retain loony rants that attacked the integrity of its managing editor.
That's odd. My original comment is gone. Must be an oversight. So, I'll repeat it now. Rule of Thumb #1: Avoid acting like an authority on subjects you know nothing about. In this case, Ms. Gettleman, that would include market manipulation.
Rule of Thumb #2: Don't delete en masse comments pointing out that you've violated Rule #1.
Sure looks like MJ is practicing censorship. Appears the comments were right on target and correct in their analysis. A humiliated Mama Jones off crying in a corner. Next thing you know they'll just delete their "story."
Your a dope, Hope your family gets cancer and cannot get treatment due to a naked short seller. Or if you have a son fighting for thje army maybe his legs cant get blown off thanks to a naked short seller. Please let me know if any of these happen to you I need a laugh... Your a disgrace
Wonderful. The home of the left of the left fruitcake liberal agenda that must find fault with everyone but themselves for their financial difficulties want to blame the "mob" rather than the leftist congress that caused the nations financial breakdown.
Don't you know it's PC incorrect to blame a minority of the Italian-American community. They are as protected as any other group.
The stock market conspiracy knuckleheads do this with every person who gets wise to their game. They inundate the offending website with personal attacks and other clear violations of website TOS policies, and then cry "censorship" when their remarks are deleted.
Byrne likes to post looooooooooooong bullying messages, with unverifiable (and usually false) claims. For example, if you go to the link about Madoff and the Russian mob, you can see that the article contains *pure speculation.*
So, Ms. Gettelmen! Might I ask? What is it about illegal you don't understand? Wacky? Take a look around you. Look at the economy. What is your opinion of what has happened?
Madoff slips by the SEC for 30 years. At Deepcapture, they have emails between reporters and hedge fund managers attacking perfectly good companies.
Maybe I've seen too many film noir movies on TCM, but I do believe these type schemes are handled with illicit bribes. That brings in tax evasion, market manipulation, naked sh.........
Oh, give me five mikes. I'm out there with Dr. Byrne.
Posted by:lenofusJanuary 7, 2009 4:20:25 PMRespond ^
Ms. Gettelmen it is nice to see that you have yet to return to your own mother ship.
The US Economy is in total chaos, Wall Street is reeling from one greed induced fraud to another, top executives are falsifying account statements and yet you sit here wanting to discuss Patrick Byrne and tin foil hats.
From what I have seen on his site lately he is closer to this nations reality point that you and so many others in denial.
Posted by:Mother TreasonJanuary 7, 2009 4:49:15 PMRespond ^
Rule of Thumb #1: In order to avoid embarrassment, avoid speaking about things about which you know nothing. In your case, that would include market manipulation.
Posted by:Tom ThumbJanuary 7, 2009 5:20:25 PMRespond ^
hey Gettle where is the originality. Attack Patrick Byrne - Check. Reference Tin Foil Hats - Check. Dismiss naked Short Sales - Check.
I looked at your more recent blogs and amazingly you do not discuss Wall Street very much so why start now? Clearly you lack the intelligence on this subject matter.
For the record, all the buzz is about Madoff and Russian Mafia but why let details like that get in the way of a direct request for a smear job.
Posted by:Originality QuestJanuary 7, 2009 6:08:10 PMRespond ^
A sorry piece given the clear corruption on Wall St. Byrne has it right and you can ridicule him all you want. The rot on Wall St. is perhaps beyond repair. He tried to warn people - they ridiculed him, as you are....so much for Mother Jones coverage of this issue.
Posted by:rezurchJanuary 7, 2009 6:49:47 PMRespond ^
Smart Fearless Journalism.
Is that your motto? This looks like uneducated, follow the crowd, rhetoric to me. Is there anything new here that has been stated by the select band of corrupt journalists working for the hedge funds?
Posted by:what you sayJanuary 8, 2009 3:32:09 AMRespond ^
You disregard Byrne's evidence-based journalism and yet you offer nothing concrete to dispute his claims. Given all the scandals on Wall Street you could have at least put in a little effort and used your critical thinking skills to verify DeepCapture's claims and conclusion but, nope, you just ignore the facts and attack Byrne's personality. You have a weak argument and you taint Mother Jones with your garbage opinions.
Posted by:PaulJanuary 8, 2009 10:39:37 AMRespond ^
Ms. Gettelmen,
Did you even read "The Story of Deep Capture"? Or any information on naked short selling and settlement failure for that matter?
I ask this because you are lampooning a MacGuffin from a much larger story/issue. You failed to properly explain "the conspiracy" in the first place, and emphasize the "wacky" parts.
I hold Mother Jones in high esteem, but this is poor work.
Posted by:TripJanuary 8, 2009 4:22:25 PMRespond ^
Well whatever happened to the Mother Jones of yore? It is now just another wacky mainstream media rag owned lock, stock and barrel by the powers that be. So much for "free press."
Thank goodness for the internet and sites like Deep Capture which now carry the torch of responsible,independent investigative reporting. By the way, Deep Capture is well on its way to winning "Best Business Blog." (http://2008.weblogawards.org/polls/best-business-blog/ )
Posted by:PaladinJanuary 11, 2009 5:10:20 PMRespond ^
Let the corporate stalking and net loon frenzy begin.
Posted by:Ding Ding DingJanuary 11, 2009 5:54:04 PMRespond ^
Top banks accused of laundering money for Iran
http://www.nydailynews.com/new s/us_world/2009/01/10/2009-01- 10_ten_of_the_worlds_top_banks_accused_of_l-2.html
Ten international banks including British-based Lloyds laundered “billions of dollars” for Iran through New York banks, Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau announced Friday. The scheme helped Iran turn its dirty money into greenbacks, which it could then use to buy goods prohibited by international sanctions.
Some of the money went to fund terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, and to help Iran get materials, including tungsten, for long-range missiles, sources said.
“This is one of the biggest investigations we’ve ever conducted,” said Morgenthau.
Lloyds admitted it laundered $300 million and agreed to pay a $350 million fine and open its books to investigators. If records show that the bank knew it was helping Iran break international law or foster terrorism, Lloyds could face criminal prosecution, authorities said.
None of the other nine banks was identified because they are working out similar agreements with Morgenthau’s investigators. The CIA will also review the bank records.
Revolutionary France
Says:
January 11th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
Time for pitchforks.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=gx8MgZsyUf0
Dr. Jim DeCosta
Says:
January 11th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
I think you’re going to be reading a whole lot more soon in re: the role of abusive naked short selling and money laundering. Remember that the bad guys need to “collateralize” these debts with cash or securities. The investor’s money stays with the purchasing b/d for him to earn interest off of until delivery is achieved. The bad guys doing the selling need to post collateral at their own clearing firm to protect their clearing firm’s caboose. Nothing is theoretically more risky than the naked short selling of penny stocks and the clearing firm knows this. Dirty money works just fine for “collateralization” purposes. As the share price predictably tanks the collateralization necessities also do and this new “clean” money can flow back offshore. Our b/ds are theoretically supposed to be monitoring for money laundering activity by filing “suspicious activity reports” or “SARs” due to the mandates of “the banking secrecy act”. I think it was E-trade just paid a measly 1 million dollar fine last week for not having a mandated anti-money laundering program from 2003 all the way until 2007. Some securities scholars have proffered that a b/d with no anti-money laundering program in effect might be the ideal b/d to use in abusive naked short selling crimes. We’ll see. How in the heck can you “forget” to have a mandated anti-money laundering for 5 straight years? I think I tried to make this point either today or yesteday: where do you think that b/ds charging $7 per trade are making their money? Some are making it through the interest “earned” during that period in which the NSCC will pay you to “wait” for the delivery of the failed to be delivered shares instead of opting for a buy-in.
Leave a Comment
Posted by:Get a clue... January 11, 2009 6:02:14 PMRespond ^
What part of fraud don't you understand? You have misrepresented Patrick Byrne and what he's been trying to do.. Most people who enter with an open mind can actually understand that trading on non-public information is illegal.. but don't be surprised if the SEC changes the rules so that the biggies SAC etal don't have to give the money back... it wouldn't be the first time.
Posted by:DeepCapture is top notchJanuary 11, 2009 6:11:23 PMRespond ^
What was the extent of your research? Cut'n paste from from an e-mail that was forwarded to you?
Posted by:rickJanuary 11, 2009 6:42:22 PMRespond ^
I want to respond but I hardly know where to begin. Patrick Byrne didn`t come up with this conspiracy "theory". It was fairly well documented long before he was made aware of it and began his "jihad". I remember reading an article at least 4 years earlier written by a market maker with 20 years in the business recounting "the day the bad guys showed up". This was around the time the proposed "BBX" exchange was tossed. Byrne is actually a johnny-come-lately to us real "nuts" who smelled something starting to rot long before.
Posted by:mother sans bonesJanuary 11, 2009 7:00:24 PMRespond ^
Ms. Gettleman I find it most interesting that Jim Cramer pops up un your stories. In furure versions would you be quoting Gary Weiss or Sam Antar as they speak volumes of the same smoke and mirrors you are looking for to print. I suggest that you might dig a little deeper into FBI info that has been uncovered.
Posted by:rtwayJanuary 11, 2009 7:01:49 PMRespond ^
And your conclusion is based on what??
Posted by:mhat.mccaneJanuary 11, 2009 8:10:09 PMRespond ^
Wake up you clueless fools, oh wait your probably on the take too. Patrick speaks the truth & the SEC pockets the bribes, We have the best government wall st. can buy.
Posted by:tatsJanuary 11, 2009 9:12:19 PMRespond ^
After all that has transpired and brought to light about the thievery on wall street in the last year, you are either a bought and paid for blogger or dumber than a box of rocks.
Posted by:archerlaneJanuary 11, 2009 9:34:06 PMRespond ^
I wonder how much the hedge funds paid you .
The word slut comes to mind
Posted by:tkalantzisJanuary 11, 2009 10:54:44 PMRespond ^
A Mother Jones piece which appears to have gone out of its way to violate every tenet & guiding principle which MJ has always espoused....gotta wonder why....
>
Posted by:lucasJanuary 12, 2009 3:37:27 AMRespond ^
Thank goodness! Gary Weis, Jeff Matthews, and Herb Greenberg have all but disappeared from the scene as the evidence unfolds, and I was afraid there was no one left to hit on Whacky Patty. Do it again, Ms Gettelman!
Posted by:ethbertJanuary 12, 2009 3:56:55 AMRespond ^
Thanks, Mother. Check's in the mail.
Posted by:Gary WeissJanuary 12, 2009 4:54:31 AMRespond ^
after reading Deep Capture, I'm in favor of waterboarding on wall street.
They have accomplished a level of terror in the US that has never been seen before and have been paid obscene wages for doing it.
Posted by:doc hollidayJanuary 12, 2009 4:58:16 AMRespond ^
At least your consistent with the other lockstep 'captured' journalists.
Posted by:jtlJanuary 12, 2009 6:09:57 AMRespond ^
I see that the stock market conspiracy nuts have been unleashed on this article by their leader, Patrick "Sith Lord" Byrne.
http://www.investorvillage.com/smbd .asp?mb=3532&mn=29538&pt=msg&mid=6447099
Posted by:Lou HemmerJanuary 12, 2009 6:29:18 AMRespond ^
I urge readers to check out deepcapture.com and decide for themselves whether the reports found there--based on emails obtained through legal discovery--support Patrick Byrne's case for corruption on Wall Street. This Mother Jones editorial does not begin to address in any depth the many disturbing issues Byrne and his team have uncovered. I find the burden of proof is now on those who would attempt to discredit him. Repeated invocation of childish epithets are insufficient.
Posted by:Dispassionate professorJanuary 12, 2009 7:33:50 AMRespond ^
Well,
I guess you apply here the principle:
Better be wrong with the crowd than be right alone.
But do it quick, the truth becomes more and more difficult to hide, very soon you will be wrong alone.
Posted by:cuttyJanuary 12, 2009 11:37:08 AMRespond ^
Dear Ms. Gettelman,
I had almost managed to forget the Left's technique of Argument from Imperious Tone of Voice. Thanks for reminding me so ably. Just on the off-chance that any of your readers are still interested in being connected to reality, however, I'll touch upon a few of your gems.
"The site recently posted a nearly 40,000-word treatise exposing the alleged conspirators, who go beyond mafiosi to include former New York governor Eliot Spitzer, Mad Money host Jim Cramer, and Wikipedia, which has rubbed out entries that reveal details of the scheme." Actually the piece to which you refer (http://www.deepcapture.com/the-sto ry-of-deep-capture-by-mark-mitchell/), explaining SEC capture, hedge fund chicanery, and the coming implosion of our financial system, was posted last May, picking up on smaller pieces that had been posted for about three years.
"Meanwhile, back on earth: ...Naked short selling didn't affect only Overstock, and while it didn't help the ailing economy, it probably didn't kill it." Really? Show me the data to support this statement. Until you do, all we know is:
* We know that in July, when the meltdown began, the SEC imposed an unprecedented 30 day emergency restriction on naked short selling in 19 financial stocks at the heart of our financial system.
* We know that when the ban was lifted several of the firms promptly imploded.
* We know that Senators Clinton, Obama, and McCain, the current and head of the SEC, and the Secretary of the Treasury all came out and said that naked short selling was illegal and playing a role in the implosion. (Here is Hillary's statement: http://clinton.senate.gov/news/statements/details.cfm?id=303208 )
* We know that several CEOs of major Wall Steet banks came out and said that their firms were being destroyed by naked short selling.
* We know that the foirmer head of the SEC, Harvey Pitt, said publicly, "here’s a very simple solution and the SEC has it and they know what is. It’s very simply this. If you want to sell a stock short you have to have a legally and forcible right to produce that stock on settlement day. That’s all it takes. If the SEC does that people will not be able to sell short unless they have actually first located and gotten their stock.
Interviewer2: In other words that would do away with naked shorting right?
Harvey Pitt: Absolutely, and naked shorting is what’s causing a lot of the problems in the market."
* We know that in November the SEC called an emergency congress of regulators from the G-20 over a weekend to discuss how to stop naked short selling:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/51fb73ba- b761-11dd-8e01-0000779fd18c.html
"Regulators to discuss short selling rules
By Joanna Chung in New York
Published: November 21 2008 01:04 | Last updated: November 21 2008 01:04
Global securities regulators will gather on Monday to discuss rules on short selling and disclosure of credit derivatives, the head of the US Securities and Exchange Commission said on Thursday.
Christopher Cox, SEC chairman, said the meeting, to be held via teleconference, would address “urgent regulatory issues in the ongoing credit crisis.”
The announcement came during yet another tumultuous day of trading in global stock markets.
“In addressing turbulent market conditions, it is essential not only that regulators act against securities law violations, including abusive short selling, but also that there be close coordination among international markets to avoid regulatory gaps and unintended consequences,” Mr Cox said in a statement on Thursday.
The International Organization of Securities Commissions, which includes securities regulators from around the globe, will consider the effectiveness of their recent actions to reduce abusive short selling, without hurting legitimate shorting...
Mr Cox said regulators will explore “possible coordination” on rules relating to naked short sales – when shares are sold without being borrowed first– in particular with regard to position reporting and delivery and pre-borrowing requirements.
So, in sum: all three presidential candidates contradict you, as do current and former Treasury Secretaries and SEC Chairmen, as do the CEOs of major Wall Street banks, as do the actions of the SEC. You have the regulators of the largest 20 countries in the world calling an unprecedented next-day congress to address this "urgent regulatory issue" in an attempt to stem the crisis.
Yet you blithely dismiss it, with no argument. So surely you must have some data or facts that support such a bold claim (because surely Mother Jones would not simply be regurgitating hedge fund apologetics, right?) So please, please share with us, because the Argument from Imperious Tone of Voice is not quite cutting it for me.
"And that stuff about the Mafia whacking the world financial system? Fuhgeddaboudit."
Once again, returning to the real world, there are two things you should know about this:
1) There is a loophole in the nation's settlement system, a loophole through which, we have been claiming, hundreds of billions have been stolen. According to this Reuters article, that loophole has a cute name: "the Madoff exception." http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE4BG6US20081217
“Madoff's name was so well known around the SEC's offices that his efforts to give market-makers a broad reprieve from short selling restrictions led SEC officials to call the measure the 'Madoff Exemption.'"
2) Here is CNBC reporting, at last, how Madoff is in bed with the Russian Mob (just as we have been saying): http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=987308800&play=1
Mother Jones has a fine history of investigative reporting driven by critical thought. Yet suddenly, you are acting as a lapdog for power, glossing over facts, ignoring data, and just parroting a see-no-evil party line that was hackneyed two years ago. How odd.
Patrick Byrne
Posted by:Patrick ByrneJanuary 12, 2009 1:11:12 PMRespond ^
MS. Gettelman ... unbelievably poor journalism ... wait, that can't be call journalism ... make that poor writing.
Posted by:bfeuzJanuary 12, 2009 3:22:18 PMRespond ^
""Smart, Fearless Journalism!?!?""
Hah! Let me guess, did you just get a new source of funds from an entity with ties to Wall Street?
We'll be watching..
Posted by:BoneStormJanuary 12, 2009 3:50:16 PMRespond ^
You've shat the bed on this one. The vast consequences of naked short selling is documented. Not "loose change" documented. But "case against Enron" documented.
This was a very silly article.
