Posted on 03/06/2009 1:54:28 PM PST by Diogenez
Ever notice how the media always protects certain individuals who were responsible for the Bernard Madoff debacle?
Frank Zarb, former Chairman of NASDAQ, has not even been mentioned in any article; yet Zarb surely protected Madoff. Both attended Hofstra University. Madoff was a donor to Hofstra. Zarb even has the Frank G. Zarb School of Business at Hofstra University named after him.
Zarb was a partner in the Wall Street firm, Carter Berlind Weill & Levitt; the Levitt being Arthur Levitt, former Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and former Chairman of the American Stock Exchange.
In a previous article, "Why Madoff Smiles," I had stated that in 1998 Gene Weissman, a former member of the American Stock Exchange and at that time a principal in Lieber and Weissman, asserted that Levitt was protecting Madoff when Madoff's firm front ran public orders.
Zarb was Levitt's retriever- Zarb always did what Levitt suggested. This included the disastrous purchase by NASDAQ of the American Stock Exchange. Thus, when the article, "Scandal On Wall Street," appeared in April 1999 Zarb and Mary Schapiro, then President of NASD Regulation, limited the scope of the investigation into violations of federal securities laws at the American Stock Exchange- especially into violations of securities laws by Joseph Giamanco and his firm, GHM. (This will be explored in a future article.)
It is now readily apparent that Levitt and Zarb had conspired to limit the scope of NASD's investigation into Madoff- just as the investigation into Giamanco's violations of federal securities laws was limited.
There is no way that an investigation into alleged front running by Madoff and the statement by Harry Markopolos that Madoff's fund was a Ponzi scheme could not have revealed that Madoff was violating federal securities laws--unless a cover up had been arranged. That’s a possible reason for Madoff being permitted to be out on bail- Madoff is covering up for his friends in NASDAQ and the SEC.
It is here that I must add a note. It has been my direct experience that the Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern District is endemically corrupt. Let me provide one example.
When Mary Jo White, then United States Attorney for the Southern District indicted the principals of Oakford Corp. and several members of the New York Stock Exchange for illegal trading- not only did White cover up the extent of the illegal trading, but White refused to investigate illegal trading by Goldman Sachs.
White also refused to investigate Spear Leeds and Kellogg's involvement in the illegal trading of Oakford- including lending tens of millions of dollars overnight to meet net capital requirements.
Madoff in a tape made years ago, brags about being "very close to the regulators". Who were these? WHO, who who?
Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr., it should be remembered put together the pardon-for-pay (1 million bucks plus to the Clinton "library").
BTW, the Madoff connection with Levitt went back to their days together on the AMEX and Madoff's co-founding of the notorious Amex firm Cohmad.
Anybody out there paying attrention to this?
Yes, the deal is no doubt something along the lines of Eric Holder accompanying Bernie Madoff on a multi-year search through dozens of countries around the wrold looking for a series of secret bank lockboxes where Bernie left $50 billion.
But what really frosts me is the concept of a ‘Deal’. In order to have a Deal each party to it has to provide something of value to it. What the Hell does Maddoff bring to the table. Why is whatever he says of any value and, dear God, I hope his wife and children are driven to complete, abject poverty with their ill-gotten gains going towards some kind of restitution.
I won't hold my breath.
Meanwhile, Martha Stewart did jail time. I guess she just wasn’t friends with the right people.
White also refused to investigate Spear Leeds and Kellogg's involvement in the illegal trading of Oakford- including lending tens of millions of dollars overnight to meet net capital requirements.
Nor should we forget that it was Mary Jo White that let linger the investigation into a Bill Clinton's pardon of a rabbi who was incarcerated after bilking HUD out of millions. The resulting release of the rabbi then caused his community to vote almost 100% for Hillary Clinton for Senator. No quid pro quo there. Yeah, right!
Are you saying that Zarb, Levitt, and Holder all had prior knowledge that Madoff violated laws?
Hell yes! This guy is all over it. If this guy gets a deal without a public perp walk + 20 years hard time upstate, the fix is in! Post everything you come across.
OH my. The RAT party is league with the two biggest crooks (Rich and Madoff) in our country’s history.
We know that Holder is an expert at getting them off.
And Martha Stewart didn’t steel from anyone.
I’m raising a serious question as to who if anyone is pushing for this deal. It smells already. The investigative reporter of the piece quoted lays out the facts as he finds them, not me - though I have heard something like this from friends on Wall Street.
Madoff (Cohmad) was not vetted at the Amex where Levitt was running things, first of all. There should have been red flags decking the place! Then, look at the sponsorship Bernie had to his top position at NASDAQ. Levitt, Sharpiro (Shapiro - now head of SEC, for God sakes!)and Zarb fronted for and apparently offered cover for Bernie’s key deals.
Now apparently, Atty Gen. Holder looms in the background as his Feds angle for a “deal”.
Makes me wonder. Not you?
Minnery wrong to attack Judge Christen (Palin Court appointment)
Alaska Dispatch | Mar 5, 2009 | Wev Shea
Posted on 03/06/2009 1:42:05 PM PST by SolidWood
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2200968/posts
It was the 2nd time around for her on insider trading. She also ignored the prime directive for crime.
1. Defraud/steal from as many people as possible.
2. Maximize the amount stolen.
3. Steal small = Jail time large
4. Steal large = Jail time small
My bet is that they do a deal like this one:
http://www.citypaper.net/articles/2002-10-10/cb2.shtml
They’ll try to get everyone in the family but Bernie off.
fits with the Bravo Sierra that was spun about the sons turning him in.
Madoff deal stinks.
She was not convicted of insider trading. They had no case on that. They got her on perjury because she said she did not remember. She got a very raw deal.
The Democrats have become one of the most corrupt political parties in American history.
I want this guy....and every single one of his bribed congress-critters and bribed -regulators in the public stockades on Wall St....and if not...why not....and what does he have on Holder....
Yes, it seems impossible for someone to run such a gigantic Ponzi scheme without flags going up over the years. It seems likely that at various points in time at least a few people must have asked themselves, “isn’t this too good to be true” or “something smells”. It also seems certain that he had various accomplices, people who aided and abetted his crimes over several years. Whether high level, high profile people, and/or people in the government had knowledge seems like speculation at this time. But Nothing would surprise me.
I wonder why there is a need to cut any deal with Madoff. What is the purpose? To save time? In exchange for him ratting on others? To reward him for silence about certain people who were involved or helped him along the way? It would be naive to simply trust those who hold, or used to hold, public offices.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.