Green Exchange occupies the former Frederick Cooper Lamp Company building, built in 1914, and originally home to the Vassar Swiss Underwear Company. Cooper bought the building in 1967 and in 2005, relocated to China[2]. In 2004, Cooper announced it was closing down the factory in Chicago. In order to keep the building from being turned into condominiums, the Logan Square Neighborhood Association (LSNA), a grass-roots community organization, organized neighbors, veteran Cooper workers, and the U.S. Green Building Council to form the Cooper Lamps Task Force. As Cooper began to lay off workers during the summer of 2005, the Task Force negotiated for severance benefits from the owners and applied for enhanced job-training from the city. With the support of 1st Ward Alderman Manny Flores for a jobs-focused use for the plant, the building was sold to Baum Development, LLC, a commercial developer who agreed to pursue a use for the building that would create jobs[3].
Baum Development worked with the Commission on Chicago Landmarks and the National Park Service to win landmark protection for the building. Ninety-six percent of the original building structure will be rehabilitated and maintained to preserve this landmark structure[4].
Three times larger than the Jean Vollum Natural Capital Center in Portland, OR, Green Exchange is the country’s largest sustainable business community that will only house tenants offering green products and services[5]. According to David Baum, one of the developers, "In order to be a tenant in Green Exchange, you must be doing something to advance the green marketplace.” Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley has described the project as “a great example of the public-private partnerships that are working together to help make Chicago one of the most environmentally friendly cities in the nation.”[6]
[edit] Building
Green Exchange is located on West Diversey Avenue alongside the Kennedy Expressway, from which the building’s iconic four story clock tower can be seen. The tower underwent significant rehabilitation in 2008 to restore the façade’s original architectural ornamentation. The building‘s conversion has been headed by Hartshorne Plunkard Architecture. The first and second floors are intended for retail stores and showrooms while the third and fourth floors are for shared and individual office spaces[6]. About 20 percent of these are work/live units ranging from 700 to 1,500 square feet for business owners who want a kitchenette and bath and for start-up owners who want to live in their workspace. Additional tenant amenities include bike rooms, showers and environmentally-friendly meeting and event space[4].
The 272,000-square-foot, four story building is U-shaped, divided into two wings separated by a courtyard. This layout allows natural light to penetrate from more than 600 windows that surround the building. The courtyard is being converted into a parking structure with priority parking for low-emitting vehicles.
The roof of the parking structure will feature an 8,041-square-foot sky garden that will be accessible from the second floor[5]. Rain is collected in a 41,329-gallon cistern underneath the ground floor and used to irrigate plants and grass on the roof[6].
The building lowers utility costs in part due to a building envelope consisting of highly insulated walls and roofs combined with 600 high performance windows. The escalator slows down when no one is using it, thereby reducing energy usage by as much as 30 percent when compared to standard models[6].
A sophisticated HVAC system allows for individualized control of tenant spaces and increased occupant comfort. Solar thermal panels provide hot water and cooling to the building[5] and non-toxic construction materials and coatings improve the indoor air quality[6].
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Monday, October 20, 2008
McCain Transition Chief Aided Saddam In Lobbying Effort
McCain Transition Chief Aided Saddam In Lobbying Effort
William Timmons, the Washington lobbyist who John McCain has named to head his presidential transition team, aided an influence effort on behalf of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein to ease international sanctions against his regime.
The two lobbyists who Timmons worked closely with over a five year period on the lobbying campaign later either pleaded guilty to or were convicted of federal criminal charges that they had acted as unregistered agents of Saddam Hussein's government.
During the same period beginning in 1992, Timmons worked closely with the two lobbyists, Samir Vincent and Tongsun Park, on a previously unreported prospective deal with the Iraqis in which they hoped to be awarded a contract to purchase and resell Iraqi oil. Timmons, Vincent, and Park stood to share at least $45 million if the business deal went through.
Timmons' activities occurred in the years following the first Gulf War, when Washington considered Iraq to be a rogue enemy state and a sponsor of terrorism. His dealings on behalf of the deceased Iraqi leader stand in stark contrast to the views his current employer held at the time.
John McCain strongly supported the 1991 military action against Iraq, and as recently as Sunday described Saddam Hussein as a one-time menace to the region who had "stated categorically that he would acquire weapons of mass destruction, and he would use them wherever he could."
Timmons declined to comment for this story. An office manager who works for him said that he has made it his practice during his public career to never speak to the press. Timmons previously told investigators that he did not know that either Vincent or Park were acting as unregistered agents of Iraq. He also insisted that he did not fully understand just how closely the two men were tied to Saddam's regime while they collaborated.
But testimony and records made public during Park's criminal trial, as well as other information uncovered during a United Nations investigation, suggest just the opposite. Virtually everything Timmons did while working on the lobbying campaign was within days conveyed by Vincent to either one or both of Saddam Hussein's top aides, Tariq Aziz and Nizar Hamdoon. Vincent also testified that he almost always relayed input from the Iraqi aides back to Timmons.
Talking points that Timmons produced for the lobbyists to help ease the sanctions, for example, were reviewed ahead of time by Aziz, Vincent testified in court. Proposals that Timmons himself circulated to U.S. officials as part of the effort were written with the assistance of the Iraqi officials, and were also sent ahead of time with Timmons' approval to Aziz, other records show.
Moreover, there was a major financial incentive at play for Timmons. The multi-million dollar oil deal that he was pursuing with the two other lobbyists would only be possible if their efforts to ease sanctions against Iraq were successful.
Vincent, an Iraqi-born American citizen with whom Timmons worked most closely, pleaded guilty to federal criminal charges in January 2005 that he had acted as an unregistered agent of Saddam Hussein's regime. Tongsun Park, the second lobbyist who Timmons worked closely with, was convicted by a federal jury in July 2006 on charges that he too violated the Foreign Agent Registration Act.
As part of a plea bargain agreement with the Justice Department, Vincent agreed to testify against Park and others in exchange for a reduced prison sentence. He was the government's chief witness against Park during Park's trial. Park was sentenced to five years in prison after his conviction.
A U.N commission headed by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker conducted an exhaustive investigation of the oil-for-food program, in which various individuals were found to have paid illegal kickbacks to Saddam Hussein. The findings of the Volcker Commission detail the roles of Vincent, Park and Timmons in trying to ease the sanctions.
* * * * *
Timmons testified that he first introduced Vincent to Tongsun Park and encouraged him to hire Park to work on the deal.
At the time Timmons introduced the two men, Park's notorious background was well known:
In the 1970s, Park had admitted to making hundreds of thousands in payments and illegal campaign contributions to U.S. congressmen on behalf of the South Korean government. Park was indicted on 36 counts by a federal grand jury, but fled to South Korea before he could face trial. All of the charges were later dismissed in exchange for Park providing information about which public officials received funds from the South Korean government.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, not long after Timmons suggested that Vincent hire Park to assist their influence, lobbying, and back-channel diplomatic efforts on behalf of Saddam Hussein's government, much of that effort became increasingly bizarre, corrupt, and - on occasion - illegal.
Vincent testified that Park covertly received millions of dollars from Saddam's government that was supposed to be used to bribe then-U.N. Secretary General Boutros Boutros Ghali to ease international sanctions against Iraq. But both men simply pocketed the money, according to Vincent. (There is no evidence that Boutros Ghali even knew of Iraq's intention to bribe him.)
Investigations by the Justice Department and the Volcker commission disclosed that Park also served as the middleman for a million dollar payment that investigators believed was a bribe for another senior United Nations official. That official in fact admitted receiving the money from Park, but said he did not know that the funds originated with Saddam's regime.
Timmons told federal investigators that he was unaware of these particular activities, and investigators were unable to uncover any evidence to contradict that claim.
Timmons also claimed that he was motivated to push forward with the lobbying campaign with Vincent and Park not only to assist Saddam's regime but also because he believed that his actions would serve U.S. interests, that they would help the people of Iraq obtain needed medicine and food being denied them by sanctions, and would serve to facilitate a rapprochement of relations between Hussein and the U.S. that would be beneficial to both countries.
But there was a financial incentive in play as well. During the same period, Vincent was hard at work obtaining contracts with Iraq to purchase and resell Iraqi oil allowed under international sanctions; Timmons would have stood to benefit financially from those contracts.
Timmons claimed to investigators that any contracts offered to him, Vincent, and Park would be awarded solely on merit, and had nothing to do with their lobbying efforts.
But Vincent told investigators that their work clearly gave them an inside track. And in other instances, in which Timmons was not involved, Vincent profited from lucrative oil-for-food contracts awarded by Iraq as compensation for his effort to buy influence in the U.S. and at the U.N. for Saddam's regime.
At Park's trial, Vincent testified that he, Park, and Timmons stood to make as much as $45 million in profits from one particular oil venture with Saddam's regime had it gone forward. Park testified that he was unsure exactly what percentage of the proceeds each of the three men would have personally received. The deal ultimately fell through.
An investigator who worked on the U.N. investigation of the oil-for-food program told me that Timmons clearly should have or did understand that he was the possible recipient of oil contracts from the Iraqi government because of his lobbying and back channel diplomatic efforts on behalf of Saddam: "He would have to be the most naive person in the world to believe that was not the case," the official told me. "I guess William Timmons is just a natural born oilman. He is either deceiving himself to rationalize what he has done or taking the rest of us for fools."
Between 1997 and 2001, according to the Volcker report, Vincent received five such contracts from Saddam's regime.
In his guilty plea agreement with the Justice Department, Vincent admitted: "I received those allocations because of the work I had done on behalf of the Government of Iraq in helping set up the oil-for-food program."
* * * * *
Samir Vincent was well positioned for the task at hand when he began his influence and back channel diplomacy campaign with the Iraqis; he had been boyhood friends of two of Saddam Hussein's closest advisers, Nizaar Hamdoon and Tariq Aziz.
Hamdoon, who died in 2003, was Saddam's foreign minister, and Tariq Aziz had variously served as Baghdad's ambassador to the United States, ambassador to the United States, and Iraq's deputy prime minister.
But Vincent also sought to enlist the help of a Washington insider or lobbyist if his efforts were to have any chance of success.
His initial plan to purchase Iraqi oil through the American Red Cross faced opposition from the U.S. government. Vincent's partner at the time, an American businessman named John Venners, suggested that they needed "help from some people that he knew very well" who "used to be high up in the government." Venners recommended William Timmons.
As Time magazine's Michael Scherer recently reported, Timmons is "a Washington institution," having worked as a senior aide to every Republican president since Richard Nixon. He also serves as chairman emeritus of Timmons and Company, "a small but influential lobbying firm he founded in 1975 shortly after leaving the White House."
According to Vincent's testimony, Timmons immediately opened doors for the Iraqi-American lobbyist. He talked to then-Deputy Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger on Vincent's behalf. He also contacted then-Sen. Bob Dole and John Bolton, then-undersecretary of state for international affairs, to discuss Vincent's plan.
In a meeting with U.N. officials, Vincent pressed his case armed with "talking points" that Timmons had written for him. Before using them, Vincent said that he first sent the talking points to Nizaar Hamdoon and Tariq Aziz, with Timmons' approval.
After the meeting, Vincent traveled all the way to Baghdad to report back to Tariq Aziz what had occurred. Later, he had another meeting with Hamdoon and Aziz at the United Nations mission in New York to plan on next steps. Vincent testified he made formal minutes of that meeting, typed them up, and then traveled to Washington to personally give them to Timmons. This was routine practice as Vincent, Timmons, and the Iraqis worked together.
Timmons himself was apparently loathe to meet with Hamdoon or Aziz personally. But virtually the entire time they worked together, Vincent would relay to Timmons what the Iraqis had to say and vice versa.
After Vincent's first meeting with U.N. officials, Aziz and Hamdoon suggested that something called a "non-paper" be presented the next time Vincent met with the same officials. Non-papers are diplomatic communications in which parties can propose positions in writing, but do not have to fear if they leak to the public or press, because they do not officially represent positions of the government.
At the request of Aziz and Hamdoon, Timmons authored the non-paper which Vincent could rely on for that second meeting. Both Aziz and Hamdoon also reviewed the paper before Vincent used it.
On March 15, 1995, Timmons wrote a memo (which is a matter of public record as an exhibit in the case) advocating that they and the Iraqis should enlist the assistance of U.S. oil companies to make their case.
Timmons once again apparently understood that his audience was the Iraqi government. Vincent testified that Timmons gave him the memo knowing that the document was "supposed to solicit the thoughts of the Iraqi government, if this is something they would seriously consider." Vincent dutifully passed Timmons' memo on to Nizaar Hamdoon, he testified.
Weeks later, in April 1995, Vincent was summoned to Iraq to meet with Saddam Hussein in Baghdad.
As to Timmons' claims that he kept his distance from Vincent and Park and did not know much about what they and the Iraqis were up to, this exchange between a federal prosecutor and Vincent once again suggests otherwise:
Q: And when you returned to the United States, did you tell anyone about your visit with Saddam Hussein?
A: I told Bill Timmons and Tongsun Park.
Q: Why did you tell Bill Timmons about your visit with Saddam?
A: To let him know that we were talking to the leader of Iraq, and in essence we have access and assure him that any messages we were relaying between Iraqi and Tariq Aziz and anyone else, it was being transmitted to the president, Saddam Hussein, in Iraq.
* * * * *
Presciently, Time's Scherer noted that McCain's own staffers had early concerns that appointing Timmons could prove detrimental to the Arizona Senator's presidential ambitions:
His [lobbying] registrations include work on a number of issues that have become flashpoints in the presidential campaign. He has registered to work on bills that deal with the regulations of troubled mortgage lenders Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, a bill to provide farm subsidies and bills that regulate domestic oil-drilling.
By tapping Timmons, McCain has turned to one of Washington's steadiest and most senior inside players to guide him in the event of a victory -- but also to someone who represents the antithesis of the kind of outside-of-Washington change he has recently been promising. One Republican familiar with the process said the decision to involve Timmons could become a political liability for the campaign's reformist image, especially in the wake of the controversies over the lobbying backgrounds of other McCain staffers, including campaign manager Rick Davis. "It's one more blind spot for Rick Davis and John McCain," the person said.
Timmons' work to relax international sanctions against Iraq, as well as to benefit financially from Saddam Hussein's regime, may be another such flashpoint.
The Volcker report makes clear that when Timmons first got involved with Vincent and the Iraqis, the lure of millions of dollars was at least one incentive. By early 1992, Timmons and his associates were already "pursu[ing] the purchase of sale of Iraqi oil and the exploration by a consortium of companies of the Manjoon field in Iraq," the report said.
According to the report, the venture was dependent on Vincent's belief "that sanctions against Iraq would be lifted immediately and that the Iraqi government might grant a long-term concession to an American oil company."
Later, when Timmons pressed the case even more aggressively that sanctions against Saddam's regime be eased, he, Vincent and Park hoped to profit as well, according to the Volcker report. "Continuing through 1994 and 1995, Mr. Vincent and Mr. Park, along with Mr. Timmons and others, persisted in their efforts to establish a foothold in the Iraqi oil business," the report stated.
At one point, Timmons even boasted to investigators that it was his ideas that later became the basis for the United Nations' oil-for-food program.
Under that program, the United Nations allowed Iraq to sell its oil under U.N. supervision, with the proceeds placed in U.N. escrow accounts to buy food, medicine, and other humanitarian goods for the Iraqi people.
However, a major flaw in the program was that Saddam Hussein's regime was allowed to play a role in the selection of oil companies awarded contracts. Because of lax oversight of the program, Saddam's government was able to demand that foreign oil companies -- including American ones -- provide more than $1.7 billion in kickbacks to his regime.
One of the most outspoken critics in the U.S. Senate of the oil-for-food program was John McCain:
"We need to have a full and complete cooperation on the part of the U.N. about this whole oil-for-food program, which stinks to high heaven," McCain told Fox News in Dec. 2004. "We're talking about billions and billions of dollars here that were diverted for many wrong purposes. And this is an example of corruption.
"And by the way, it's an argument, maybe a small one, but maybe an argument that justifies our action in Iraq. Because clearly the sanctions and the framework of those sanctions was completely eroded."
Additional reporting by Patrick B. Anderson.
William Timmons, the Washington lobbyist who John McCain has named to head his presidential transition team, aided an influence effort on behalf of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein to ease international sanctions against his regime.
The two lobbyists who Timmons worked closely with over a five year period on the lobbying campaign later either pleaded guilty to or were convicted of federal criminal charges that they had acted as unregistered agents of Saddam Hussein's government.
During the same period beginning in 1992, Timmons worked closely with the two lobbyists, Samir Vincent and Tongsun Park, on a previously unreported prospective deal with the Iraqis in which they hoped to be awarded a contract to purchase and resell Iraqi oil. Timmons, Vincent, and Park stood to share at least $45 million if the business deal went through.
Timmons' activities occurred in the years following the first Gulf War, when Washington considered Iraq to be a rogue enemy state and a sponsor of terrorism. His dealings on behalf of the deceased Iraqi leader stand in stark contrast to the views his current employer held at the time.
John McCain strongly supported the 1991 military action against Iraq, and as recently as Sunday described Saddam Hussein as a one-time menace to the region who had "stated categorically that he would acquire weapons of mass destruction, and he would use them wherever he could."
Timmons declined to comment for this story. An office manager who works for him said that he has made it his practice during his public career to never speak to the press. Timmons previously told investigators that he did not know that either Vincent or Park were acting as unregistered agents of Iraq. He also insisted that he did not fully understand just how closely the two men were tied to Saddam's regime while they collaborated.
But testimony and records made public during Park's criminal trial, as well as other information uncovered during a United Nations investigation, suggest just the opposite. Virtually everything Timmons did while working on the lobbying campaign was within days conveyed by Vincent to either one or both of Saddam Hussein's top aides, Tariq Aziz and Nizar Hamdoon. Vincent also testified that he almost always relayed input from the Iraqi aides back to Timmons.
Talking points that Timmons produced for the lobbyists to help ease the sanctions, for example, were reviewed ahead of time by Aziz, Vincent testified in court. Proposals that Timmons himself circulated to U.S. officials as part of the effort were written with the assistance of the Iraqi officials, and were also sent ahead of time with Timmons' approval to Aziz, other records show.
Moreover, there was a major financial incentive at play for Timmons. The multi-million dollar oil deal that he was pursuing with the two other lobbyists would only be possible if their efforts to ease sanctions against Iraq were successful.
Vincent, an Iraqi-born American citizen with whom Timmons worked most closely, pleaded guilty to federal criminal charges in January 2005 that he had acted as an unregistered agent of Saddam Hussein's regime. Tongsun Park, the second lobbyist who Timmons worked closely with, was convicted by a federal jury in July 2006 on charges that he too violated the Foreign Agent Registration Act.
As part of a plea bargain agreement with the Justice Department, Vincent agreed to testify against Park and others in exchange for a reduced prison sentence. He was the government's chief witness against Park during Park's trial. Park was sentenced to five years in prison after his conviction.
A U.N commission headed by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker conducted an exhaustive investigation of the oil-for-food program, in which various individuals were found to have paid illegal kickbacks to Saddam Hussein. The findings of the Volcker Commission detail the roles of Vincent, Park and Timmons in trying to ease the sanctions.
* * * * *
Timmons testified that he first introduced Vincent to Tongsun Park and encouraged him to hire Park to work on the deal.
At the time Timmons introduced the two men, Park's notorious background was well known:
In the 1970s, Park had admitted to making hundreds of thousands in payments and illegal campaign contributions to U.S. congressmen on behalf of the South Korean government. Park was indicted on 36 counts by a federal grand jury, but fled to South Korea before he could face trial. All of the charges were later dismissed in exchange for Park providing information about which public officials received funds from the South Korean government.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, not long after Timmons suggested that Vincent hire Park to assist their influence, lobbying, and back-channel diplomatic efforts on behalf of Saddam Hussein's government, much of that effort became increasingly bizarre, corrupt, and - on occasion - illegal.
Vincent testified that Park covertly received millions of dollars from Saddam's government that was supposed to be used to bribe then-U.N. Secretary General Boutros Boutros Ghali to ease international sanctions against Iraq. But both men simply pocketed the money, according to Vincent. (There is no evidence that Boutros Ghali even knew of Iraq's intention to bribe him.)
Investigations by the Justice Department and the Volcker commission disclosed that Park also served as the middleman for a million dollar payment that investigators believed was a bribe for another senior United Nations official. That official in fact admitted receiving the money from Park, but said he did not know that the funds originated with Saddam's regime.
Timmons told federal investigators that he was unaware of these particular activities, and investigators were unable to uncover any evidence to contradict that claim.
Timmons also claimed that he was motivated to push forward with the lobbying campaign with Vincent and Park not only to assist Saddam's regime but also because he believed that his actions would serve U.S. interests, that they would help the people of Iraq obtain needed medicine and food being denied them by sanctions, and would serve to facilitate a rapprochement of relations between Hussein and the U.S. that would be beneficial to both countries.
But there was a financial incentive in play as well. During the same period, Vincent was hard at work obtaining contracts with Iraq to purchase and resell Iraqi oil allowed under international sanctions; Timmons would have stood to benefit financially from those contracts.
Timmons claimed to investigators that any contracts offered to him, Vincent, and Park would be awarded solely on merit, and had nothing to do with their lobbying efforts.
But Vincent told investigators that their work clearly gave them an inside track. And in other instances, in which Timmons was not involved, Vincent profited from lucrative oil-for-food contracts awarded by Iraq as compensation for his effort to buy influence in the U.S. and at the U.N. for Saddam's regime.
At Park's trial, Vincent testified that he, Park, and Timmons stood to make as much as $45 million in profits from one particular oil venture with Saddam's regime had it gone forward. Park testified that he was unsure exactly what percentage of the proceeds each of the three men would have personally received. The deal ultimately fell through.
An investigator who worked on the U.N. investigation of the oil-for-food program told me that Timmons clearly should have or did understand that he was the possible recipient of oil contracts from the Iraqi government because of his lobbying and back channel diplomatic efforts on behalf of Saddam: "He would have to be the most naive person in the world to believe that was not the case," the official told me. "I guess William Timmons is just a natural born oilman. He is either deceiving himself to rationalize what he has done or taking the rest of us for fools."
Between 1997 and 2001, according to the Volcker report, Vincent received five such contracts from Saddam's regime.
In his guilty plea agreement with the Justice Department, Vincent admitted: "I received those allocations because of the work I had done on behalf of the Government of Iraq in helping set up the oil-for-food program."
* * * * *
Samir Vincent was well positioned for the task at hand when he began his influence and back channel diplomacy campaign with the Iraqis; he had been boyhood friends of two of Saddam Hussein's closest advisers, Nizaar Hamdoon and Tariq Aziz.
Hamdoon, who died in 2003, was Saddam's foreign minister, and Tariq Aziz had variously served as Baghdad's ambassador to the United States, ambassador to the United States, and Iraq's deputy prime minister.
But Vincent also sought to enlist the help of a Washington insider or lobbyist if his efforts were to have any chance of success.
His initial plan to purchase Iraqi oil through the American Red Cross faced opposition from the U.S. government. Vincent's partner at the time, an American businessman named John Venners, suggested that they needed "help from some people that he knew very well" who "used to be high up in the government." Venners recommended William Timmons.
As Time magazine's Michael Scherer recently reported, Timmons is "a Washington institution," having worked as a senior aide to every Republican president since Richard Nixon. He also serves as chairman emeritus of Timmons and Company, "a small but influential lobbying firm he founded in 1975 shortly after leaving the White House."
According to Vincent's testimony, Timmons immediately opened doors for the Iraqi-American lobbyist. He talked to then-Deputy Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger on Vincent's behalf. He also contacted then-Sen. Bob Dole and John Bolton, then-undersecretary of state for international affairs, to discuss Vincent's plan.
In a meeting with U.N. officials, Vincent pressed his case armed with "talking points" that Timmons had written for him. Before using them, Vincent said that he first sent the talking points to Nizaar Hamdoon and Tariq Aziz, with Timmons' approval.
After the meeting, Vincent traveled all the way to Baghdad to report back to Tariq Aziz what had occurred. Later, he had another meeting with Hamdoon and Aziz at the United Nations mission in New York to plan on next steps. Vincent testified he made formal minutes of that meeting, typed them up, and then traveled to Washington to personally give them to Timmons. This was routine practice as Vincent, Timmons, and the Iraqis worked together.
Timmons himself was apparently loathe to meet with Hamdoon or Aziz personally. But virtually the entire time they worked together, Vincent would relay to Timmons what the Iraqis had to say and vice versa.
After Vincent's first meeting with U.N. officials, Aziz and Hamdoon suggested that something called a "non-paper" be presented the next time Vincent met with the same officials. Non-papers are diplomatic communications in which parties can propose positions in writing, but do not have to fear if they leak to the public or press, because they do not officially represent positions of the government.
At the request of Aziz and Hamdoon, Timmons authored the non-paper which Vincent could rely on for that second meeting. Both Aziz and Hamdoon also reviewed the paper before Vincent used it.
On March 15, 1995, Timmons wrote a memo (which is a matter of public record as an exhibit in the case) advocating that they and the Iraqis should enlist the assistance of U.S. oil companies to make their case.
Timmons once again apparently understood that his audience was the Iraqi government. Vincent testified that Timmons gave him the memo knowing that the document was "supposed to solicit the thoughts of the Iraqi government, if this is something they would seriously consider." Vincent dutifully passed Timmons' memo on to Nizaar Hamdoon, he testified.
Weeks later, in April 1995, Vincent was summoned to Iraq to meet with Saddam Hussein in Baghdad.
As to Timmons' claims that he kept his distance from Vincent and Park and did not know much about what they and the Iraqis were up to, this exchange between a federal prosecutor and Vincent once again suggests otherwise:
Q: And when you returned to the United States, did you tell anyone about your visit with Saddam Hussein?
A: I told Bill Timmons and Tongsun Park.
Q: Why did you tell Bill Timmons about your visit with Saddam?
A: To let him know that we were talking to the leader of Iraq, and in essence we have access and assure him that any messages we were relaying between Iraqi and Tariq Aziz and anyone else, it was being transmitted to the president, Saddam Hussein, in Iraq.
* * * * *
Presciently, Time's Scherer noted that McCain's own staffers had early concerns that appointing Timmons could prove detrimental to the Arizona Senator's presidential ambitions:
His [lobbying] registrations include work on a number of issues that have become flashpoints in the presidential campaign. He has registered to work on bills that deal with the regulations of troubled mortgage lenders Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, a bill to provide farm subsidies and bills that regulate domestic oil-drilling.
By tapping Timmons, McCain has turned to one of Washington's steadiest and most senior inside players to guide him in the event of a victory -- but also to someone who represents the antithesis of the kind of outside-of-Washington change he has recently been promising. One Republican familiar with the process said the decision to involve Timmons could become a political liability for the campaign's reformist image, especially in the wake of the controversies over the lobbying backgrounds of other McCain staffers, including campaign manager Rick Davis. "It's one more blind spot for Rick Davis and John McCain," the person said.
Timmons' work to relax international sanctions against Iraq, as well as to benefit financially from Saddam Hussein's regime, may be another such flashpoint.
The Volcker report makes clear that when Timmons first got involved with Vincent and the Iraqis, the lure of millions of dollars was at least one incentive. By early 1992, Timmons and his associates were already "pursu[ing] the purchase of sale of Iraqi oil and the exploration by a consortium of companies of the Manjoon field in Iraq," the report said.
According to the report, the venture was dependent on Vincent's belief "that sanctions against Iraq would be lifted immediately and that the Iraqi government might grant a long-term concession to an American oil company."
Later, when Timmons pressed the case even more aggressively that sanctions against Saddam's regime be eased, he, Vincent and Park hoped to profit as well, according to the Volcker report. "Continuing through 1994 and 1995, Mr. Vincent and Mr. Park, along with Mr. Timmons and others, persisted in their efforts to establish a foothold in the Iraqi oil business," the report stated.
At one point, Timmons even boasted to investigators that it was his ideas that later became the basis for the United Nations' oil-for-food program.
Under that program, the United Nations allowed Iraq to sell its oil under U.N. supervision, with the proceeds placed in U.N. escrow accounts to buy food, medicine, and other humanitarian goods for the Iraqi people.
However, a major flaw in the program was that Saddam Hussein's regime was allowed to play a role in the selection of oil companies awarded contracts. Because of lax oversight of the program, Saddam's government was able to demand that foreign oil companies -- including American ones -- provide more than $1.7 billion in kickbacks to his regime.
One of the most outspoken critics in the U.S. Senate of the oil-for-food program was John McCain:
"We need to have a full and complete cooperation on the part of the U.N. about this whole oil-for-food program, which stinks to high heaven," McCain told Fox News in Dec. 2004. "We're talking about billions and billions of dollars here that were diverted for many wrong purposes. And this is an example of corruption.
"And by the way, it's an argument, maybe a small one, but maybe an argument that justifies our action in Iraq. Because clearly the sanctions and the framework of those sanctions was completely eroded."
Additional reporting by Patrick B. Anderson.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Republicans are pushing the irrational theory ...and the IGNORANT Americans will suck it up!
Republicans are pushing the irrational theory that Democrats are "cheating" their way to the White House because for them, the real reason for a possible Republican defeat would be irrational.
"We could lose, I suppose, if they cheat us out of it" and Other Tales of Republican Delusion
by georgia10
Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 06:31:13 AM PDT
The black guy can't win. The black guy with the middle name "Hussein" can't win. The black guy with the middle name "Hussein" who has "most liberal voting record" in the Senate just can't win. So if and when the terrorist-loving, radical ideology-embracing, "he doesn't see America like you and I see America" skinny black guy from Chicago wins the presidency, the only logical explanation is that he stole it.
So goes the perverted "logic" of the panicked right these days, as the entire right-wing noise machine roars up into another faux frenzy this week regarding alleged "voter fraud."
As McCain's numbers having nose-dived in the last week, some Republicans have dived head-first into the realm of conspiracy theories in order to sow the seeds of speculation that Democrats are going to "steal" this election. This week has provided some news items which they are using as kinder for their tinfoil bonfire.
ACORN (the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), is an organization which has been registering voters in low-income areas. Volunteers at some chapters (who are paid per registration) have been found guilty of submitting to ACORN fake voter registrations. That, obviously, is a crime.
ACORN is obligated by law to turn over all voter registration forms, even the fake ones, but it flags those it believes are suspicious (Mickey Mouse, John Q. Public, etc.) While the why of the situation remains unclear, ACORN's Nevada office was raided this week in connection with a voter registration fraud probe.
Ben Smith at Politico, like many others across the blogosphere, puts the ACORN story into perspective:
The key distinction here is between voter fraud and voter registration fraud, one of which is truly dangerous, the other a petty crime.
The former would be, say, voting the cemeteries or stuffing the ballot boxes. This has happened occasionally in American history, though I can think of recent instances only in rare local races. Practically speaking, this can most easily be done by whoever is actually administering the election, which is why partisan observers carefully oversee the vote-counting process.
The latter is putting the names of fake voters on the rolls, something that happens primarily when organizations, like Acorn, pay contractors for new voter registrations. That can be a crime, and it messes up the voter files, but there's virtually no evidence these imaginary people then vote in November. The current stories about Acorn don't even allege a plan to affect the November vote.
In other words, what is occurring (and what isn't unique to this election) is isolated incidents of voter registration fraud. Fraud is also being committed on ACORN, an organization that is being tricked into paying volunteers for these fake registrations (clarification: ACORN pays its volunteers by the hour, not per registration). Voter fraud has not occurred. Mickey Mouse isn't show up to vote, even if he did "fill out" a registration form. And if someone registered more than once? They can only vote once at the polling booth once their name is checked off.
But pesky facts like that mean little to certain Republicans who see McCain's plunging numbers and who are looking for any reason--other than the failure of conservatism--to blame for a possible crushing electoral defeat.
FOX "News" has graced the nation with almost wall-to-wall coverage of ACORN's "voter fraud", even dragging out former Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell (yes, that Kenneth Blackwell, of Ohio voter suppression fame) to cast the outcome of the Ohio election into doubt. Republicans have released ads linking Obama to ACORN's alleged misconduct. And even John McCain's top surrogate has entered the fray, proclaiming that if Obama wins Indiana, the only explanation for such a victory would be cheating:
WASHINGTON - The only way Barack Obama can win in Indiana is to cheat, one of John McCain's stand-ins said Thursday.
He said votes have already been cast by "people who don't exist" and that a national voter-registration effort is "trying to steal the election in Indiana."
In an interview before headlining the Indiana Republican Party's fund-raising dinner in Indianapolis Thursday night, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said Hoosiers are too smart to vote for Obama.
Democrats, he said, "can't win fairly out here."
Asked if Democrats could win without cheating, Graham said, "No. They can't win fairly out here 'cause their agenda is so far removed from the average Hoosier.
"We could lose, I suppose, if they cheat us out of it," Graham said of Indiana's 11 electoral votes. "I think the only way we lose a state like North Carolina or Indiana is to get cheated out of it."
When the reporter calls him out on the distinction between "voter registration fraud" and "voter fraud," Graham palinizes his response:
Asked to identify non-existent people who have voted in the presidential election, Graham said: "Have you been following the ACORN investigation out there? They're registering people who don't exist." He said there are multiple registrations going on. "One lady registered 11 times. I'm saying that the dynamic out here of voter fraud is something we're concerned about."
News Hounds brings us the Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill's rational take on the matter:
"There has been no fraudulent voting...The people who claim this is a huge problem can never produce any instances where anyone voted fraudulently. They have registered fraudulently.
"Anyone who is registering someone who is not a real person should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law," McCaskill said, but she did not accept the accusation that the apparently bogus registrations were "clogging" the system.
Meanwhile, in the real world, the New York Times reports that thousands of voters are being cheated out of their votes because of bureaucratic bungling:
Tens of thousands of eligible voters in at least six swing states have been removed from the rolls or have been blocked from registering in ways that appear to violate federal law, according to a review of state records and Social Security data by The New York Times.
The actions do not seem to be coordinated by one party or the other, nor do they appear to be the result of election officials intentionally breaking rules, but are apparently the result of mistakes in the handling of the registrations and voter files as the states tried to comply with a 2002 federal law, intended to overhaul the way elections are run.
Still, because Democrats have been more aggressive at registering new voters this year, according to state election officials, any heightened screening of new applications may affect their party’s supporters disproportionately.
Republicans are pushing the irrational theory that Democrats are "cheating" their way to the White House because for them, the real reason for a possible Republican defeat would be irrational.
This was, after all, supposed to be the age of the "permanent Republican majority." America is a "conservative country" we've been told. Indeed, as this screencap from John McCain's "Strategy Briefing" demonstrates, the entire McCain campaign was premised on the idea that voters do not think Obama is "one of them":
But that screencap is from many months ago, before the full brunt of the failure of conservative policies has come to the foreground with the resounding "thud" of a stock market collapse. In this atmosphere, maybe having a "liberal" president who favors reasonable regulation and stringent oversight isn't a bad thing after all. And maybe, when voters are worried about how to pay for health care, voting for the Republican who touts the ability of the "market" to deal with the problem doesn't seem that appealing anymore.
The middle class is being cheated. And they know--as much as Republicans would like for them to forget--which party has been in power for the last eight years. And as they flock to a candidate who promises them change from failed Republican policies, panicked Republicans flock to conspiracy theories.
Blaming a possible Democratic victory on "voter fraud" is much easier than acknowledging that a resounding Democratic victory would be a wholesale rejection of Republican governance. And it's easier than admitting that voters--yes, Senator Graham, maybe even voters in Indiana and North Carolia--like what the liberal black guy from Chicago is saying about the middle class.
So let them wrap themselves in tin foil. Let them revel in nuttery now. They can use that tin foil to wipe their eyes if and when--as the polls suggest--they will be wallowing in defeat in November.
::
"We could lose, I suppose, if they cheat us out of it" and Other Tales of Republican Delusion
by georgia10
Sun Oct 12, 2008 at 06:31:13 AM PDT
The black guy can't win. The black guy with the middle name "Hussein" can't win. The black guy with the middle name "Hussein" who has "most liberal voting record" in the Senate just can't win. So if and when the terrorist-loving, radical ideology-embracing, "he doesn't see America like you and I see America" skinny black guy from Chicago wins the presidency, the only logical explanation is that he stole it.
So goes the perverted "logic" of the panicked right these days, as the entire right-wing noise machine roars up into another faux frenzy this week regarding alleged "voter fraud."
As McCain's numbers having nose-dived in the last week, some Republicans have dived head-first into the realm of conspiracy theories in order to sow the seeds of speculation that Democrats are going to "steal" this election. This week has provided some news items which they are using as kinder for their tinfoil bonfire.
ACORN (the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), is an organization which has been registering voters in low-income areas. Volunteers at some chapters (who are paid per registration) have been found guilty of submitting to ACORN fake voter registrations. That, obviously, is a crime.
ACORN is obligated by law to turn over all voter registration forms, even the fake ones, but it flags those it believes are suspicious (Mickey Mouse, John Q. Public, etc.) While the why of the situation remains unclear, ACORN's Nevada office was raided this week in connection with a voter registration fraud probe.
Ben Smith at Politico, like many others across the blogosphere, puts the ACORN story into perspective:
The key distinction here is between voter fraud and voter registration fraud, one of which is truly dangerous, the other a petty crime.
The former would be, say, voting the cemeteries or stuffing the ballot boxes. This has happened occasionally in American history, though I can think of recent instances only in rare local races. Practically speaking, this can most easily be done by whoever is actually administering the election, which is why partisan observers carefully oversee the vote-counting process.
The latter is putting the names of fake voters on the rolls, something that happens primarily when organizations, like Acorn, pay contractors for new voter registrations. That can be a crime, and it messes up the voter files, but there's virtually no evidence these imaginary people then vote in November. The current stories about Acorn don't even allege a plan to affect the November vote.
In other words, what is occurring (and what isn't unique to this election) is isolated incidents of voter registration fraud. Fraud is also being committed on ACORN, an organization that is being tricked into paying volunteers for these fake registrations (clarification: ACORN pays its volunteers by the hour, not per registration). Voter fraud has not occurred. Mickey Mouse isn't show up to vote, even if he did "fill out" a registration form. And if someone registered more than once? They can only vote once at the polling booth once their name is checked off.
But pesky facts like that mean little to certain Republicans who see McCain's plunging numbers and who are looking for any reason--other than the failure of conservatism--to blame for a possible crushing electoral defeat.
FOX "News" has graced the nation with almost wall-to-wall coverage of ACORN's "voter fraud", even dragging out former Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell (yes, that Kenneth Blackwell, of Ohio voter suppression fame) to cast the outcome of the Ohio election into doubt. Republicans have released ads linking Obama to ACORN's alleged misconduct. And even John McCain's top surrogate has entered the fray, proclaiming that if Obama wins Indiana, the only explanation for such a victory would be cheating:
WASHINGTON - The only way Barack Obama can win in Indiana is to cheat, one of John McCain's stand-ins said Thursday.
He said votes have already been cast by "people who don't exist" and that a national voter-registration effort is "trying to steal the election in Indiana."
In an interview before headlining the Indiana Republican Party's fund-raising dinner in Indianapolis Thursday night, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said Hoosiers are too smart to vote for Obama.
Democrats, he said, "can't win fairly out here."
Asked if Democrats could win without cheating, Graham said, "No. They can't win fairly out here 'cause their agenda is so far removed from the average Hoosier.
"We could lose, I suppose, if they cheat us out of it," Graham said of Indiana's 11 electoral votes. "I think the only way we lose a state like North Carolina or Indiana is to get cheated out of it."
When the reporter calls him out on the distinction between "voter registration fraud" and "voter fraud," Graham palinizes his response:
Asked to identify non-existent people who have voted in the presidential election, Graham said: "Have you been following the ACORN investigation out there? They're registering people who don't exist." He said there are multiple registrations going on. "One lady registered 11 times. I'm saying that the dynamic out here of voter fraud is something we're concerned about."
News Hounds brings us the Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill's rational take on the matter:
"There has been no fraudulent voting...The people who claim this is a huge problem can never produce any instances where anyone voted fraudulently. They have registered fraudulently.
"Anyone who is registering someone who is not a real person should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law," McCaskill said, but she did not accept the accusation that the apparently bogus registrations were "clogging" the system.
Meanwhile, in the real world, the New York Times reports that thousands of voters are being cheated out of their votes because of bureaucratic bungling:
Tens of thousands of eligible voters in at least six swing states have been removed from the rolls or have been blocked from registering in ways that appear to violate federal law, according to a review of state records and Social Security data by The New York Times.
The actions do not seem to be coordinated by one party or the other, nor do they appear to be the result of election officials intentionally breaking rules, but are apparently the result of mistakes in the handling of the registrations and voter files as the states tried to comply with a 2002 federal law, intended to overhaul the way elections are run.
Still, because Democrats have been more aggressive at registering new voters this year, according to state election officials, any heightened screening of new applications may affect their party’s supporters disproportionately.
Republicans are pushing the irrational theory that Democrats are "cheating" their way to the White House because for them, the real reason for a possible Republican defeat would be irrational.
This was, after all, supposed to be the age of the "permanent Republican majority." America is a "conservative country" we've been told. Indeed, as this screencap from John McCain's "Strategy Briefing" demonstrates, the entire McCain campaign was premised on the idea that voters do not think Obama is "one of them":
But that screencap is from many months ago, before the full brunt of the failure of conservative policies has come to the foreground with the resounding "thud" of a stock market collapse. In this atmosphere, maybe having a "liberal" president who favors reasonable regulation and stringent oversight isn't a bad thing after all. And maybe, when voters are worried about how to pay for health care, voting for the Republican who touts the ability of the "market" to deal with the problem doesn't seem that appealing anymore.
The middle class is being cheated. And they know--as much as Republicans would like for them to forget--which party has been in power for the last eight years. And as they flock to a candidate who promises them change from failed Republican policies, panicked Republicans flock to conspiracy theories.
Blaming a possible Democratic victory on "voter fraud" is much easier than acknowledging that a resounding Democratic victory would be a wholesale rejection of Republican governance. And it's easier than admitting that voters--yes, Senator Graham, maybe even voters in Indiana and North Carolia--like what the liberal black guy from Chicago is saying about the middle class.
So let them wrap themselves in tin foil. Let them revel in nuttery now. They can use that tin foil to wipe their eyes if and when--as the polls suggest--they will be wallowing in defeat in November.
::
Accounting Fraud...Really? look at all thePublicCompnaies that dumped their losers into private NCFE...BIGGER THAN ENRON!!
The push to credit 'mortgage-back securities' as the causal effect of our financial crisis is very troubling and misleading.
Yes,the home mortgage crisis is a huge contribution, however do you honestly believe Iceland, a Country, has gone bankrupt because of 'low income'or 'mortgage backed securitues'?
We cannot continue to allow the false rhetoric to soar and the truth to be buried. If we continue to blame 'mortgage-backed securites" as the root of the problem, justice will never be ceased.
We need to get to the root of this Global Financial Crisis, whatever the outcome.
Remember, Corporate Bankruptcy,Debtor in Possession Financing,(Darla Moore's invention-Richard Rainwater's wife), Healthcare Fraud and REIT's would be a great start.
I believe we should go back to 1997. The year Healthcare Reform was passed.
In 1997, the largest healthcare company in the nation was the "Frist Family" and friends' Hospital Corporation of America , HCA, or any one of their affiliates...There are many players here so try to keep up!
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
THURSDAY, JUNE 26, 2003
WWW.USDOJ.GOV
LARGEST HEALTH CARE FRAUD CASE IN U.S. HISTORY SETTLED
HCA INVESTIGATION NETS RECORD TOTAL OF $1.7 BILLION
WASHINGTON, D.C. - HCA Inc. (formerly known as Columbia/HCA and HCA - The Healthcare Company) has agreed to pay the United States $631 million in civil penalties and damages arising from false claims the government alleged it submitted to Medicare and other federal health programs, the Justice Department announced today.
One must wonder about the mortgage-related securities JPMorgan is taking onto its books. The following are not the only questionable liabilities JPMorgan has taken on that Richard Rainwater was directly involved with and I am not referring to oil.
JPMorgan is taking on about $176 billion of WaMu home loans, and marking down almost $31 billion of that right off the bat.
Just before the Real Estate crash in 2007, JPMorgan Chase financed Richard Rainwater’s REIT, Crescent (CEI) sale. (Many investors wondered about this move)
Jul 28, 2003
2003-87
SEC Settles Enforcement Proceedings against J.P. Morgan Chase and Citigroup
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
J.P. Morgan Chase Agrees to Pay $135 Million to Settle SEC Allegations that It Helped Enron Commit Fraud
Citigroup Agrees to Pay $120 Million to Settle SEC Allegations that It Helped Enron and Dynegy Commit Fraud
The following is an excerpt from a 10-K SEC Filing, filed by J P MORGAN CHASE & CO on 3/9/2006: Enron litigation. JPMorgan Chase and certain of its officers and directors are involved in a number of lawsuits arising out of its banking relationships with Enron Corp.
The three current or former Firm employees are sued in their roles as former
members of NCFE's board of directors
National Century Financial Enterprises litigation. JPMorgan Chase, JPMorgan
Chase Bank, JPMorgan Partners, Beacon Group, LLC and three current or former
Firm employees have been named as defendants in more than a dozen actions filed in or transferred to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio (the "MDL Litigation"). In the majority of these actions, Bank One, Bank One, N.A., and Banc One Capital Markets, Inc. are also named as defendants.
JPMorgan Chase Bank and Bank One, N.A. are also defendants in an action brought by The Unencumbered Assets Trust ("UAT"), a trust created for the benefit of the creditors of National Century Financial Enterprises, Inc. ("NCFE") as a result
of NCFE's Plan of Liquidation in bankruptcy.
"...the Order finds that JPMorgan Chase was a cause of NCFE's violations of Section 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act, requires JPMorgan Chase to cease and desist from committing or causing any violations and any future violations of Section 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act, and orders JPMorgan Chase to pay disgorgement of $1,286,808.82 and prejudgment interest of $711,335.76. JPMorgan Chase consented to the issuance of the Order without admitting or denying any of the findings therein."
JP Morgan Settles SEC Proceeding Relating to Activities as Trustee to National Century Financial Enterprises
The SEC settled administrative proceedings against JPMorgan Chase & Co relating to its activities as an asset-backed indenture trustee for certain special-purpose subsidiary programs (programs) of National Century Financial Enterprises, Inc. (NCFE), formerly a Dublin, Ohio healthcare financing company, during the approximate period 1999-2002. According to the SEC's Order, JPMorgan Chase and Bank One Corporation, which merged into JPMorgan Chase in 2004, at the instruction of NCFE, made transfers between reserve accounts in the programs that contradicted NCFE's representations to investors about how the reserve accounts would be used and contravened the requirements of the indentures governing the programs. In addition, the Order finds that pursuant to NCFE's instructions, JPMorgan Chase and Bank One made month-end transfers of huge amounts of reserve account funds and that these transfers helped NCFE mask substantial and growing reserve account shortfalls. Based on the above, the Order finds that JPMorgan Chase was a cause of NCFE's violations of Section 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act, requires JPMorgan Chase to cease and desist from committing or causing any violations and any future violations of Section 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act, and orders JPMorgan Chase to pay disgorgement of $1,286,808.82 and prejudgment interest of $711,335.76. JPMorgan Chase consented to the issuance of the Order without admitting or denying any of the findings therein. In the Matter of JPMorgan Chase & Co.
A little history of National Century Financial Enterprises (NCFE):
Prior to bankruptcy, NCFE provided financing to various healthcare providers through wholly-owned special-purpose vehicles,including NPF VI and NPF XII, which purchased discounted accounts receivable to be paid under third-party insurance programs. NPF VI and NPF XII financed the purchases of such receivables, primarily through private placements of notes.
TUESDAY, JULY 10, 2007
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/ohsn
SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT CHARGES FORMER EXECUTIVES OF HEALTH CARE FINANCING COMPANY WITH CONSPIRACY, FRAUD, MONEY LAUNDERING
COLUMBUS – A federal grand jury here today returned a superseding indictment charging eight former executives of National Century Financial Enterprises (NCFE) with conspiring to defraud investors by diverting millions of dollars in investors’ funds, fabricating data in investor reports, and moving money back and forth between accounts in order to conceal investor fund shortfalls. NCFE, based in Dublin, Ohio, was one of the largest healthcare finance companies in the United States until it filed for bankruptcy in November, 2002.
All defendants, except for James K Happ, were initially indicted in May, 2006. United States District Judge Algenon L. Marbley will preside over the case which is scheduled for trial on November 5, 2007.
“All defendants, except for Happ...”
Who is James K Happ?
James K Happ has an interesting employment history.
SEPTEMBER 9, 2003
Source: ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS-SEPTEMBER 9, 2003-Med Diversified Inc.
JAMES K. HAPP has served as chief executive officer of our subsidiary,
Tender Loving Care Health Care Services, Inc., since October 2002.
Previously, Mr. Happ served for three years as executive vice president of NCFE,
during which time he restructured the servicer department to improve operational
Performance and accelerated the utilization of technology to increase operational
efficiency. Mr. Happ also served as chief financial officer of the
Dallas-based Columbia Homecare Group, Inc., a home care company with more than 500 locations nationwide and more than $1 billion in revenue in 1997.
In this role, he directed the company through the challenging reimbursement climate, known as the interim payment system, and participated in the divestiture of all of Columbia/HCA's home care operations. (All of which are in the Bankruptcy case in Tennessee) Who owned Columbia Homecare Group, Inc.?
Yes,the home mortgage crisis is a huge contribution, however do you honestly believe Iceland, a Country, has gone bankrupt because of 'low income'or 'mortgage backed securitues'?
We cannot continue to allow the false rhetoric to soar and the truth to be buried. If we continue to blame 'mortgage-backed securites" as the root of the problem, justice will never be ceased.
We need to get to the root of this Global Financial Crisis, whatever the outcome.
Remember, Corporate Bankruptcy,Debtor in Possession Financing,(Darla Moore's invention-Richard Rainwater's wife), Healthcare Fraud and REIT's would be a great start.
I believe we should go back to 1997. The year Healthcare Reform was passed.
In 1997, the largest healthcare company in the nation was the "Frist Family" and friends' Hospital Corporation of America , HCA, or any one of their affiliates...There are many players here so try to keep up!
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
THURSDAY, JUNE 26, 2003
WWW.USDOJ.GOV
LARGEST HEALTH CARE FRAUD CASE IN U.S. HISTORY SETTLED
HCA INVESTIGATION NETS RECORD TOTAL OF $1.7 BILLION
WASHINGTON, D.C. - HCA Inc. (formerly known as Columbia/HCA and HCA - The Healthcare Company) has agreed to pay the United States $631 million in civil penalties and damages arising from false claims the government alleged it submitted to Medicare and other federal health programs, the Justice Department announced today.
One must wonder about the mortgage-related securities JPMorgan is taking onto its books. The following are not the only questionable liabilities JPMorgan has taken on that Richard Rainwater was directly involved with and I am not referring to oil.
JPMorgan is taking on about $176 billion of WaMu home loans, and marking down almost $31 billion of that right off the bat.
Just before the Real Estate crash in 2007, JPMorgan Chase financed Richard Rainwater’s REIT, Crescent (CEI) sale. (Many investors wondered about this move)
Jul 28, 2003
2003-87
SEC Settles Enforcement Proceedings against J.P. Morgan Chase and Citigroup
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
J.P. Morgan Chase Agrees to Pay $135 Million to Settle SEC Allegations that It Helped Enron Commit Fraud
Citigroup Agrees to Pay $120 Million to Settle SEC Allegations that It Helped Enron and Dynegy Commit Fraud
The following is an excerpt from a 10-K SEC Filing, filed by J P MORGAN CHASE & CO on 3/9/2006: Enron litigation. JPMorgan Chase and certain of its officers and directors are involved in a number of lawsuits arising out of its banking relationships with Enron Corp.
The three current or former Firm employees are sued in their roles as former
members of NCFE's board of directors
National Century Financial Enterprises litigation. JPMorgan Chase, JPMorgan
Chase Bank, JPMorgan Partners, Beacon Group, LLC and three current or former
Firm employees have been named as defendants in more than a dozen actions filed in or transferred to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio (the "MDL Litigation"). In the majority of these actions, Bank One, Bank One, N.A., and Banc One Capital Markets, Inc. are also named as defendants.
JPMorgan Chase Bank and Bank One, N.A. are also defendants in an action brought by The Unencumbered Assets Trust ("UAT"), a trust created for the benefit of the creditors of National Century Financial Enterprises, Inc. ("NCFE") as a result
of NCFE's Plan of Liquidation in bankruptcy.
"...the Order finds that JPMorgan Chase was a cause of NCFE's violations of Section 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act, requires JPMorgan Chase to cease and desist from committing or causing any violations and any future violations of Section 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act, and orders JPMorgan Chase to pay disgorgement of $1,286,808.82 and prejudgment interest of $711,335.76. JPMorgan Chase consented to the issuance of the Order without admitting or denying any of the findings therein."
JP Morgan Settles SEC Proceeding Relating to Activities as Trustee to National Century Financial Enterprises
The SEC settled administrative proceedings against JPMorgan Chase & Co relating to its activities as an asset-backed indenture trustee for certain special-purpose subsidiary programs (programs) of National Century Financial Enterprises, Inc. (NCFE), formerly a Dublin, Ohio healthcare financing company, during the approximate period 1999-2002. According to the SEC's Order, JPMorgan Chase and Bank One Corporation, which merged into JPMorgan Chase in 2004, at the instruction of NCFE, made transfers between reserve accounts in the programs that contradicted NCFE's representations to investors about how the reserve accounts would be used and contravened the requirements of the indentures governing the programs. In addition, the Order finds that pursuant to NCFE's instructions, JPMorgan Chase and Bank One made month-end transfers of huge amounts of reserve account funds and that these transfers helped NCFE mask substantial and growing reserve account shortfalls. Based on the above, the Order finds that JPMorgan Chase was a cause of NCFE's violations of Section 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act, requires JPMorgan Chase to cease and desist from committing or causing any violations and any future violations of Section 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act, and orders JPMorgan Chase to pay disgorgement of $1,286,808.82 and prejudgment interest of $711,335.76. JPMorgan Chase consented to the issuance of the Order without admitting or denying any of the findings therein. In the Matter of JPMorgan Chase & Co.
A little history of National Century Financial Enterprises (NCFE):
Prior to bankruptcy, NCFE provided financing to various healthcare providers through wholly-owned special-purpose vehicles,including NPF VI and NPF XII, which purchased discounted accounts receivable to be paid under third-party insurance programs. NPF VI and NPF XII financed the purchases of such receivables, primarily through private placements of notes.
TUESDAY, JULY 10, 2007
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/ohsn
SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT CHARGES FORMER EXECUTIVES OF HEALTH CARE FINANCING COMPANY WITH CONSPIRACY, FRAUD, MONEY LAUNDERING
COLUMBUS – A federal grand jury here today returned a superseding indictment charging eight former executives of National Century Financial Enterprises (NCFE) with conspiring to defraud investors by diverting millions of dollars in investors’ funds, fabricating data in investor reports, and moving money back and forth between accounts in order to conceal investor fund shortfalls. NCFE, based in Dublin, Ohio, was one of the largest healthcare finance companies in the United States until it filed for bankruptcy in November, 2002.
All defendants, except for James K Happ, were initially indicted in May, 2006. United States District Judge Algenon L. Marbley will preside over the case which is scheduled for trial on November 5, 2007.
“All defendants, except for Happ...”
Who is James K Happ?
James K Happ has an interesting employment history.
SEPTEMBER 9, 2003
Source: ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS-SEPTEMBER 9, 2003-Med Diversified Inc.
JAMES K. HAPP has served as chief executive officer of our subsidiary,
Tender Loving Care Health Care Services, Inc., since October 2002.
Previously, Mr. Happ served for three years as executive vice president of NCFE,
during which time he restructured the servicer department to improve operational
Performance and accelerated the utilization of technology to increase operational
efficiency. Mr. Happ also served as chief financial officer of the
Dallas-based Columbia Homecare Group, Inc., a home care company with more than 500 locations nationwide and more than $1 billion in revenue in 1997.
In this role, he directed the company through the challenging reimbursement climate, known as the interim payment system, and participated in the divestiture of all of Columbia/HCA's home care operations. (All of which are in the Bankruptcy case in Tennessee) Who owned Columbia Homecare Group, Inc.?
Iceland First?
"...Japan is ready to take leadership in contributing to support countries by providing funds."
"...died a quick death in the face of U.S. opposition..."
"The loans would be funded by 200 billion yen ($2 billion) contributed by IMF member countries plus loans from the foreign currency reserves of Middle Eastern oil exporters as well as the likes of Japan and China, the paper said.
China, which has pledged to cooperate with other countries to tackle the current crisis, has been repeatedly urged by Washington to play a greater role in international financial policy-making commensurate with its economic power..."
Japan stands ready to help the International Monetary Fund ride to the rescue of countries struck down by the global credit crisis, Finance Minister Shoichi Nakagawa said "If there's something the IMF can do, I want them to do it flexibly. Japan will cooperate with that, including providing funds for it," Nakagawa told reporters in Washington on Thursday.
He was speaking on the eve of a meeting of finance ministers and central bank chiefs from the Group of Seven (G7) rich nations, whose support will be crucial if the plan is to work.
"The impact of the credit crisis is spreading to the world. To minimize the chain-reaction, Japan is ready to take leadership in contributing to support countries by providing funds. And I will call for other countries' cooperation at the G7 meeting tomorrow," Nakagawa said.
"Japan alone has $995 billion in official foreign currency reserves. China has $2 trillion, the world's largest stockpile."
The Nikkei newspaper reported that Japan would propose making trillions of dollars in currency reserves held by Asian and Middle Eastern governments available to support IMF-led bailouts.
Japan alone has $995 billion in official foreign currency reserves. China has $2 trillion, the world's largest stockpile. The Nikkei said the IMF program would be available to smaller emerging countries but not to members of the G7 -- the United States, Japan, Britain, France, Germany, Canada and Italy -- or to other large nations.
"What the IMF should think about is not G7 or G8 countries, but about contingencies that may arise in newly emerging economies and other areas at this time of financial crisis, credit crunch and the dollar's exchange rate," Economics Minister Kaoru Yosano said in Tokyo.
The G8 is made up of the Group of Seven plus Russia.
Japan also took the diplomatic initiative during the 1997/98 Asian financial crisis, proposing the creation of an Asian Monetary Fund to help the region recover from a meltdown that plunged several countries into a deep recession.
The plan died a quick death in the face of U.S. opposition.
Iceland First?
Prime Minister Taro Aso, speaking in Tokyo, said Japan would propose at Friday's G7 meeting that Iceland be helped via the IMF -- an idea that the north Atlantic island has so far resisted.
However, Prime Minister Geir Haarde warned this week that Iceland faced the risk of national bankruptcy because of the crisis, which has forced the government to seize control of the country's three biggest banks.
Under the Japanese plan, the IMF would ask the borrowing country to draw up a plan to revitalise its financial sector including writing off its bad assets, the Nikkei said.
It was not clear how -- or if -- this would differ from the conditions the IMF usually sets in return for an emergency loan.
The loans would be funded by 200 billion yen ($2 billion) contributed by IMF member countries plus loans from the foreign currency reserves of Middle Eastern oil exporters as well as the likes of Japan and China, the paper said.
China, which has pledged to cooperate with other countries to tackle the current crisis, has been repeatedly urged by Washington to play a greater role in international financial policy-making commensurate with its economic power.
But Beijing has given no indication that it is willing to mobilize its reserves in the way that Japan -- its big regional political rival -- is suggesting.
The Group of 20 countries, which brings together key rich and developing economies, will meet in Washington on Saturday during the IMF/World Bank annual meetings and could provide a forum to air the Japanese proposal.
The IMF said it was ready to lend to countries hit by the global credit crunch and had activated an emergency financing mechanism first during the Asian financial crisis a decade ago.
IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn told a news conference it would provide financial assistance not only to emerging and developing nations, but also to Western countries.
"Nobody knows if some ... advanced economies will not also be in need of some help by the IMF," he said, adding that funds would be made available quickly to countries in need. "Very quickly means two weeks at most," he added.
The Fund already sent a mission to Iceland.
Copyright 2008 Reuters. Click for restrictions
"...died a quick death in the face of U.S. opposition..."
"The loans would be funded by 200 billion yen ($2 billion) contributed by IMF member countries plus loans from the foreign currency reserves of Middle Eastern oil exporters as well as the likes of Japan and China, the paper said.
China, which has pledged to cooperate with other countries to tackle the current crisis, has been repeatedly urged by Washington to play a greater role in international financial policy-making commensurate with its economic power..."
Japan stands ready to help the International Monetary Fund ride to the rescue of countries struck down by the global credit crisis, Finance Minister Shoichi Nakagawa said "If there's something the IMF can do, I want them to do it flexibly. Japan will cooperate with that, including providing funds for it," Nakagawa told reporters in Washington on Thursday.
He was speaking on the eve of a meeting of finance ministers and central bank chiefs from the Group of Seven (G7) rich nations, whose support will be crucial if the plan is to work.
"The impact of the credit crisis is spreading to the world. To minimize the chain-reaction, Japan is ready to take leadership in contributing to support countries by providing funds. And I will call for other countries' cooperation at the G7 meeting tomorrow," Nakagawa said.
"Japan alone has $995 billion in official foreign currency reserves. China has $2 trillion, the world's largest stockpile."
The Nikkei newspaper reported that Japan would propose making trillions of dollars in currency reserves held by Asian and Middle Eastern governments available to support IMF-led bailouts.
Japan alone has $995 billion in official foreign currency reserves. China has $2 trillion, the world's largest stockpile. The Nikkei said the IMF program would be available to smaller emerging countries but not to members of the G7 -- the United States, Japan, Britain, France, Germany, Canada and Italy -- or to other large nations.
"What the IMF should think about is not G7 or G8 countries, but about contingencies that may arise in newly emerging economies and other areas at this time of financial crisis, credit crunch and the dollar's exchange rate," Economics Minister Kaoru Yosano said in Tokyo.
The G8 is made up of the Group of Seven plus Russia.
Japan also took the diplomatic initiative during the 1997/98 Asian financial crisis, proposing the creation of an Asian Monetary Fund to help the region recover from a meltdown that plunged several countries into a deep recession.
The plan died a quick death in the face of U.S. opposition.
Iceland First?
Prime Minister Taro Aso, speaking in Tokyo, said Japan would propose at Friday's G7 meeting that Iceland be helped via the IMF -- an idea that the north Atlantic island has so far resisted.
However, Prime Minister Geir Haarde warned this week that Iceland faced the risk of national bankruptcy because of the crisis, which has forced the government to seize control of the country's three biggest banks.
Under the Japanese plan, the IMF would ask the borrowing country to draw up a plan to revitalise its financial sector including writing off its bad assets, the Nikkei said.
It was not clear how -- or if -- this would differ from the conditions the IMF usually sets in return for an emergency loan.
The loans would be funded by 200 billion yen ($2 billion) contributed by IMF member countries plus loans from the foreign currency reserves of Middle Eastern oil exporters as well as the likes of Japan and China, the paper said.
China, which has pledged to cooperate with other countries to tackle the current crisis, has been repeatedly urged by Washington to play a greater role in international financial policy-making commensurate with its economic power.
But Beijing has given no indication that it is willing to mobilize its reserves in the way that Japan -- its big regional political rival -- is suggesting.
The Group of 20 countries, which brings together key rich and developing economies, will meet in Washington on Saturday during the IMF/World Bank annual meetings and could provide a forum to air the Japanese proposal.
The IMF said it was ready to lend to countries hit by the global credit crunch and had activated an emergency financing mechanism first during the Asian financial crisis a decade ago.
IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn told a news conference it would provide financial assistance not only to emerging and developing nations, but also to Western countries.
"Nobody knows if some ... advanced economies will not also be in need of some help by the IMF," he said, adding that funds would be made available quickly to countries in need. "Very quickly means two weeks at most," he added.
The Fund already sent a mission to Iceland.
Copyright 2008 Reuters. Click for restrictions
Sunday, October 12, 2008
'all available tools' ??? Scary...just like 2003!!!
G7 pledges to use 'all available tools' to stabilize markets, but gives no specifics
G7 outlines broad but vague plan to combat crisis
By Greg Robb, MarketWatch
Last update: 8:28 p.m. EDT Oct. 10, 2008Comments: 942WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson laid out more details of his radical plans to buy equity in banks Friday, while the Group of Seven finance ministers and central bank governors urged its members to take whatever steps are necessary to restore market confidence.
After their closed-door meeting Friday, the G7 set out a broad "plan of action" to stabilize global financial markets, in a one-page plan that was sweeping in scope but short on specifics.
The plan calls for banks to be recapitalized with public and private funds, but makes no specific mention of another common suggestion: Guaranteeing all interbank debt worldwide.
The G7 meeting came as global stock markets endured another volatile day. Investors around the world scrambled to move their funds into the safest and most liquid investments, such as cash and government bonds, fearing that the seizing up of credit markets could lead to a major recession and the failure of large corporations.
In a press conference, Paulson gave some new details of the emerging plans by the U.S. federal government to inject capital directly into a "broad array" of financial firms.
Paulson said that officials are working on a "standardized program that is open to a broad array of financial institutions."
Paulson said the Treasury is working as quickly as possible to nail down the details and get the recapitalization plan running. He said the government wants to "do it right."
The plan is to attract private capital to complement the government's funds, he said.
Paulson went out of his way to say existing shareholders would be protected, and that the government would only make the purchases through a "broadly available equity program" without any voting power, "except with the market standard terms to protect our rights as investors."
The G7 said that "urgent and exceptional action" is needed to stabilize financial markets.
We will continue to act in line with this solid anchoring of inflation expectations and the necessity, again, to deliver price stability."
The financial and monetary leaders vowed to use all available tools to support systemically important financial institutions and prevent them from failing.
Also on the G7 to-do list were unfreezing credit and money markets, ensuring banks can raise capital from the private sector, ensuring that deposit insurance regimes were robust, and repairing secondary mortgage markets where appropriate.
The actions should be taken in ways that would protect taxpayers and avoid damaging other countries.
Interest rate policy should be used "as necessary and appropriate," the G7 plan said.
It is unclear whether the plan will go far enough to satisfy financial markets, which are suffering from a profound loss of confidence.
Jean-Claude Trichet, the president of the European Central Bank, said that markets needed time to digest the G7 stance.
"My experience of markets is that it takes always a little time for markets to capture all the elements that are associated with the decisions that we are taking, and also with the principles that we are displaying," Trichet said.
"It's normal that there is a maturing process."
At first blush, some analysts were not too impressed.
Robert Brusca, chief economist at FAO Economics, called the statement "fluff - good fluff but fluff."
Vincent Reinhart, a former top staffer at the Federal Reserve Board, said markets had no interest in pledges but wanted to know exactly what the G7 would do before trading resumes Monday.
Reinhart said the financial markets are moving quickly, which makes the gears of international economic policymakers seem to move more slowly.
"I think the finance ministers just failed a test, or at best got a C minus," said Paul Krugman, a Princeton University economics professor and New York Times columnist.
But Sherry Cooper, chief economist at BMO Capital Markets, said she thought the principles expressed by the G7 would reassure markets.
Economists have said they wanted the G7 to agree on measures including sweeping guarantees of bank deposits and interbank lending, as well as direct injections of taxpayer money to recapitalize ailing banks.
"They have to deliver the goods because the markets are just not going to stabilize unless they do," said Brian Hilliard, head of economic research at Societe Generale. "And the goods are government guarantees of deposits."
Ahead of the meeting, Ken Rogoff, a Harvard University professor and former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, said there needed to be an "overwhelming" G7 statement.
"I think the worst thing to do would be to come out with a very tepid response," he said. "It would be the end of the G7."
"This is really the mother of all financial crises since World War II, and if the G7 leaders can't ... get it together and come out with a very effective statement, it is going to be a sad day indeed," Rogoff said.
With global equity markets plunging, the odds of coordinated action "are increasing by the hour," Hilliard said. "The gravity of the situation is just obvious to everybody."
Greg Robb is a senior reporter for MarketWatch in Washington
G7 outlines broad but vague plan to combat crisis
By Greg Robb, MarketWatch
Last update: 8:28 p.m. EDT Oct. 10, 2008Comments: 942WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson laid out more details of his radical plans to buy equity in banks Friday, while the Group of Seven finance ministers and central bank governors urged its members to take whatever steps are necessary to restore market confidence.
After their closed-door meeting Friday, the G7 set out a broad "plan of action" to stabilize global financial markets, in a one-page plan that was sweeping in scope but short on specifics.
The plan calls for banks to be recapitalized with public and private funds, but makes no specific mention of another common suggestion: Guaranteeing all interbank debt worldwide.
The G7 meeting came as global stock markets endured another volatile day. Investors around the world scrambled to move their funds into the safest and most liquid investments, such as cash and government bonds, fearing that the seizing up of credit markets could lead to a major recession and the failure of large corporations.
In a press conference, Paulson gave some new details of the emerging plans by the U.S. federal government to inject capital directly into a "broad array" of financial firms.
Paulson said that officials are working on a "standardized program that is open to a broad array of financial institutions."
Paulson said the Treasury is working as quickly as possible to nail down the details and get the recapitalization plan running. He said the government wants to "do it right."
The plan is to attract private capital to complement the government's funds, he said.
Paulson went out of his way to say existing shareholders would be protected, and that the government would only make the purchases through a "broadly available equity program" without any voting power, "except with the market standard terms to protect our rights as investors."
The G7 said that "urgent and exceptional action" is needed to stabilize financial markets.
We will continue to act in line with this solid anchoring of inflation expectations and the necessity, again, to deliver price stability."
The financial and monetary leaders vowed to use all available tools to support systemically important financial institutions and prevent them from failing.
Also on the G7 to-do list were unfreezing credit and money markets, ensuring banks can raise capital from the private sector, ensuring that deposit insurance regimes were robust, and repairing secondary mortgage markets where appropriate.
The actions should be taken in ways that would protect taxpayers and avoid damaging other countries.
Interest rate policy should be used "as necessary and appropriate," the G7 plan said.
It is unclear whether the plan will go far enough to satisfy financial markets, which are suffering from a profound loss of confidence.
Jean-Claude Trichet, the president of the European Central Bank, said that markets needed time to digest the G7 stance.
"My experience of markets is that it takes always a little time for markets to capture all the elements that are associated with the decisions that we are taking, and also with the principles that we are displaying," Trichet said.
"It's normal that there is a maturing process."
At first blush, some analysts were not too impressed.
Robert Brusca, chief economist at FAO Economics, called the statement "fluff - good fluff but fluff."
Vincent Reinhart, a former top staffer at the Federal Reserve Board, said markets had no interest in pledges but wanted to know exactly what the G7 would do before trading resumes Monday.
Reinhart said the financial markets are moving quickly, which makes the gears of international economic policymakers seem to move more slowly.
"I think the finance ministers just failed a test, or at best got a C minus," said Paul Krugman, a Princeton University economics professor and New York Times columnist.
But Sherry Cooper, chief economist at BMO Capital Markets, said she thought the principles expressed by the G7 would reassure markets.
Economists have said they wanted the G7 to agree on measures including sweeping guarantees of bank deposits and interbank lending, as well as direct injections of taxpayer money to recapitalize ailing banks.
"They have to deliver the goods because the markets are just not going to stabilize unless they do," said Brian Hilliard, head of economic research at Societe Generale. "And the goods are government guarantees of deposits."
Ahead of the meeting, Ken Rogoff, a Harvard University professor and former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, said there needed to be an "overwhelming" G7 statement.
"I think the worst thing to do would be to come out with a very tepid response," he said. "It would be the end of the G7."
"This is really the mother of all financial crises since World War II, and if the G7 leaders can't ... get it together and come out with a very effective statement, it is going to be a sad day indeed," Rogoff said.
With global equity markets plunging, the odds of coordinated action "are increasing by the hour," Hilliard said. "The gravity of the situation is just obvious to everybody."
Greg Robb is a senior reporter for MarketWatch in Washington
More 'new tools and resources' ? Just like in 2003?
G7 outlines broad but vague plan to combat crisis
By Greg Robb, MarketWatch
Last update: 8:28 p.m. EDT Oct. 10, 2008Comments: 942WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson laid out more details of his radical plans to buy equity in banks Friday, while the Group of Seven finance ministers and central bank governors urged its members to take whatever steps are necessary to restore market confidence.
After their closed-door meeting Friday, the G7 set out a broad "plan of action" to stabilize global financial markets, in a one-page plan that was sweeping in scope but short on specifics. G7 outlines broad but vague plan to combat crisis
By Greg Robb, MarketWatch
Last update: 8:28 p.m. EDT Oct. 10, 2008
Comments: 942
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) --
Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson laid out more details of his radical plans to buy equity in banks Friday, while the Group of Seven finance ministers and central bank governors urged its members to take whatever steps are necessary to restore market confidence.
After their closed-door meeting Friday, the G7 set out a broad "plan of action" to stabilize global financial markets, in a one-page plan that was sweeping in scope but short on specifics.
Robert Brusca, chief economist at FAO Economics, called the statement "fluff - good fluff but fluff."
Vincent Reinhart, a former top staffer at the Federal Reserve Board, said markets had no interest in pledges but wanted to know exactly what the G7 would do before trading resumes Monday.
Reinhart said the financial markets are moving quickly, which makes the gears of international economic policymakers seem to move more slowly.
"I think the finance ministers just failed a test, or at best got a C minus," said Paul Krugman, a Princeton University economics professor and New York Times columnist.
But Sherry Cooper, chief economist at BMO Capital Markets, said she thought the principles expressed by the G7 would reassure markets.
Economists have said they wanted the G7 to agree on measures including sweeping guarantees of bank deposits and interbank lending, as well as direct injections of taxpayer money to recapitalize ailing banks.
"They have to deliver the goods because the markets are just not going to stabilize unless they do," said Brian Hilliard, head of economic research at Societe Generale. "And the goods are government guarantees of deposits."
Ahead of the meeting, Ken Rogoff, a Harvard University professor and former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, said there needed to be an "overwhelming" G7 statement.
"I think the worst thing to do would be to come out with a very tepid response," he said. "It would be the end of the G7."
"This is really the mother of all financial crises since World War II, and if the G7 leaders can't ... get it together and come out with a very effective statement, it is going to be a sad day indeed," Rogoff said.
With global equity markets plunging, the odds of coordinated action "are increasing by the hour," Hilliard said. "The gravity of the situation is just obvious to everybody."
Greg Robb is a senior reporter for MarketWatch in Washington.
By Greg Robb, MarketWatch
Last update: 8:28 p.m. EDT Oct. 10, 2008Comments: 942WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson laid out more details of his radical plans to buy equity in banks Friday, while the Group of Seven finance ministers and central bank governors urged its members to take whatever steps are necessary to restore market confidence.
After their closed-door meeting Friday, the G7 set out a broad "plan of action" to stabilize global financial markets, in a one-page plan that was sweeping in scope but short on specifics. G7 outlines broad but vague plan to combat crisis
By Greg Robb, MarketWatch
Last update: 8:28 p.m. EDT Oct. 10, 2008
Comments: 942
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) --
Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson laid out more details of his radical plans to buy equity in banks Friday, while the Group of Seven finance ministers and central bank governors urged its members to take whatever steps are necessary to restore market confidence.
After their closed-door meeting Friday, the G7 set out a broad "plan of action" to stabilize global financial markets, in a one-page plan that was sweeping in scope but short on specifics.
Robert Brusca, chief economist at FAO Economics, called the statement "fluff - good fluff but fluff."
Vincent Reinhart, a former top staffer at the Federal Reserve Board, said markets had no interest in pledges but wanted to know exactly what the G7 would do before trading resumes Monday.
Reinhart said the financial markets are moving quickly, which makes the gears of international economic policymakers seem to move more slowly.
"I think the finance ministers just failed a test, or at best got a C minus," said Paul Krugman, a Princeton University economics professor and New York Times columnist.
But Sherry Cooper, chief economist at BMO Capital Markets, said she thought the principles expressed by the G7 would reassure markets.
Economists have said they wanted the G7 to agree on measures including sweeping guarantees of bank deposits and interbank lending, as well as direct injections of taxpayer money to recapitalize ailing banks.
"They have to deliver the goods because the markets are just not going to stabilize unless they do," said Brian Hilliard, head of economic research at Societe Generale. "And the goods are government guarantees of deposits."
Ahead of the meeting, Ken Rogoff, a Harvard University professor and former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, said there needed to be an "overwhelming" G7 statement.
"I think the worst thing to do would be to come out with a very tepid response," he said. "It would be the end of the G7."
"This is really the mother of all financial crises since World War II, and if the G7 leaders can't ... get it together and come out with a very effective statement, it is going to be a sad day indeed," Rogoff said.
With global equity markets plunging, the odds of coordinated action "are increasing by the hour," Hilliard said. "The gravity of the situation is just obvious to everybody."
Greg Robb is a senior reporter for MarketWatch in Washington.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)