Great news: Prominent Dem and Obama bundler probably won’t be prosecuted for $1B+ disappearance of customer funds
posted at 11:21 am on August 16, 2012 by Ed Morrissey
One of the relatively few criticisms of the Obama administration from the Left has been the curious lack of prosecutions over the 2008 financial collapse on Wall Street. If, as Barack Obama maintains, the collapse came from the greed and unrestrained abuse of the system (rather than the government intervention in the lending markets that created a housing bubble and the government-endorsed mortgage-backed securities that poisoned the financial sector), why has the Department of Justice failed to hold anyone accountable? The New York Times has a pretty good answer today, but probably not the one the Left wanted to hear:
A criminal investigation into the collapse of the brokerage firm MF Global and the disappearance of about $1 billion in customer money is now heading into its final stage without charges expected against any top executives.
After 10 months of stitching together evidence on the firm’s demise, criminal investigators are concluding that chaos and porous risk controls at the firm, rather than fraud, allowed the money to disappear, according to people involved in the case.
Ahem. What kind of “porous risk controls” allowed MF Global to bet money that wasn’t theirs on Euro-zone debt? That seems to have faded from view as the issue at MF Global. It’s one thing for JP Morgan to bet the $6 billion farm on risky investments, but when a firm raids its customer accounts in an attempt to cover its own bad bets, that’s supposed to be a felony.
Here’s an even better look into the direction of investigators in the Obama-run Department of Justice. Are they trying to get to the top? No, they’re trying to get former Democratic governor and Senator — not to mention big-time Barack Obama bundler — Jon Corzine to rat out his underlings:
In the most telling indication yet that the MF Global investigation is winding down, federal authorities are seeking to interview the former chief of the firm, Jon S. Corzine, next month, according to the people involved in the case. Authorities hope that Mr. Corzine, who is expected to accept the invitation, will shed light on the actions of other employees at MF Global.
Those developments indicate that federal prosecutors do not expect to file criminal charges against the former New Jersey governor. Mr. Corzine has not yet received assurances that he is free from scrutiny, but two rounds of interviews with former employees and a review of thousands of documents have left prosecutors without a case against him, say the people involved in the investigation who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
It’s possible that Corzine had no idea that his own firm had started raiding customer accounts to cover Corzine’s own bad bets on EU debt … but it stretches the imagination to believe it. And if that is the case, then why would prosecutor think that he could provide any good evidence of wrongdoing among his staff? If he knew about it, he’s at least complicit, no?
Jeff Carter at Points and Figures smells a rat:
After speaking with CCC lawyer James Koutoulas, and other pro traders I have no doubt that money was stolen from customer segregated funds. There is just too much smoking gun evidence. Anyone with experience in the industry would be able to sift through the legal machinations and malarky to understand the deception involved. If this were adjudicated in an Arbitration or Probable Cause Committee at an exchange, I am relatively confident that Corzine would be found guilty based on the circumstantial facts that I know.
Jeff notes a passage in the Times’ article that paints Corzine as an “obsessive trader” who “frequently inhabited a desk on the trading floor.” Jeff calls that a “tell” in that a man that connected to the market would know what losses were piling up — and how much of the firm’s money would be available to back his play. The notion that an obsessive trader like Corzine, who micromanaged the firm’s trading on that level, was unaware of the origin of the money that did get used to attempt to recoup the losses is, well, very difficult to believe.
So who will take the fall? Carter bets that it will be MF Treasurer Edith O’Brien, who might have had an interesting tale to tell had prosecutors offered her immunity. Instead, the NYT suspects that federal prosecutors will end up cutting a deal with Corzine that allows him to shift the guilt to his staff.
All of which is, I’m sure, an amazing coincidence. And ZeroHedge notices the best news of all from the Times article:
Mr. Corzine, in a bid to rebuild his image and engage his passion for trading, is weighing whether to start a hedge fund, according to people with knowledge of his plans. He is currently trading with his family’s wealth.
If he is successful as a hedge fund manager, it would be the latest career comeback for a man who was ousted from both the top seat at Goldman Sachs and the New Jersey governor’s mansion.
Who wants to put their money into Corzine’s hands again? Anyone? Anyone?
Related Posts:
Breaking on Hot Air


Menendez – Looks like we don’t have the votes for that immigration bill after all

America in decline – Bars selling rubbing alcohol as “scotch”






Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Preach it brother. The Founders were no dummies. They understand that leaving things up to man would ultimately lead to disaster. But we have moved so far from the original meaning of the Constitution that we have allowed man to rule over us with the predictable results.
NotCoach on May 24, 2013 at 6:45 PM
Better watch who you call or text or email now, Erika. And, stay off those adult websites, by all means. Big Brother’s awatchin’. ;-)
TXUS on May 24, 2013 at 6:52 PM
Whether he was involved in these scandals from the beginning or not, one thing that is certain: his subsequent behavior in protecting, lying, stalling, etc makes Barack Obama the direct owner of them.
Rich H on May 24, 2013 at 6:54 PM
Your problem, Erika, is that you are a reasonable person looking at the issue in a reasonable way. Unfortunately, there is a critical mass of people who are not reasonable and believe that the problem is that the government is not big enough and is not spending enough money.
catsandbooks on May 24, 2013 at 6:55 PM
I always wondered how Germany fell for Nazism in the 30s. How could they be so stupid?
Ouch.
faraway on May 24, 2013 at 6:55 PM
Bobby, I love ya man! I voted for you when you first ran for Congress. But you’re wrong here. It isn’t a lack of trust in the American people it is contempt for the American people. An attitude that the American public isn’t intelligent enough to know what is good for them.
Happy Nomad on May 24, 2013 at 7:01 PM
The Big Crime Syndicate of Obama should be the biggest loser.
VorDaj on May 24, 2013 at 7:11 PM
Good stuff Bobby. Keep honing that message. Hoping for big things from him in 2016.
can_con on May 24, 2013 at 7:11 PM
Bobby must have been listening to Rush this week, because he said much the same thing: trying to pin it on Obama is not working; instead, it all shows the failure of liberalism and big government writ large.
This is it exactly. Contempt. These government types are those who wouldn’t bat an eye to hustle us all off to “reeducation camps.”
PatriotGal2257 on May 24, 2013 at 7:13 PM
Even small government would be bad if run by criminals. Jindal seems to have tunnel vision.
VorDaj on May 24, 2013 at 7:13 PM
Jindal seems to be implicitly saying that government is so big it got out of Obama’s control. Bull.
VorDaj on May 24, 2013 at 7:17 PM
I’ll take a small government run by criminals any day over the bloated and corrupt mess we have now.
NotCoach on May 24, 2013 at 7:18 PM
Then they are both simply Obama apologists.
VorDaj on May 24, 2013 at 7:20 PM
And take being shot with a .22 over being shot with a 30.06. I prefer neither.
VorDaj on May 24, 2013 at 7:22 PM
Obama is a much bigger target than big government. Only fools can not see this.
VorDaj on May 24, 2013 at 7:24 PM
I thought Jindal was just saying we needed to stop arguing about big government because it was a loser? Pfft.
echosyst on May 24, 2013 at 7:27 PM
We will always have big government. Even under Reagan we had big government. He didn’t/couldn’t even get rid of the Dept of “Education”. Now is not the time to turn all batteries at big government. At least 5 of 6 guns should be aimed and firing at Obama. If Limbaugh and Jindal are not up to the task, they should get the hell out of the way.
VorDaj on May 24, 2013 at 7:29 PM
…you’re not faraway at all!…you’re right on!
KOOLAID2 on May 24, 2013 at 7:30 PM
VorDaj, saying that Rush n Jindal should “step aside” simply becuase they dont go far enough, INHO, isn’t reason enough. Besides who else out there do you think has the platform or the common sense governance to at least get ‘our’ side of the conversation out there, esepcially to those that we’d like to convince? If you got a candidate in mind, im sure we could find a few holes in *thier* Geopolitical theory also.
BlaxPac on May 24, 2013 at 7:46 PM
I won’t go into details about my 44 years Military and Civilian experience with Viet Nam and Vietnamese and Vietnamese-American Society. I do agree that the Democrats, who were responsible for getting into that war and after killing a few million S E Asians and including non combat deaths over 100,000 Americans, betrayed our Vietnamese and Cambodian allies and sabotaged the South Vietnamese War effort insuring the defeat of South Viet Nam in 1974 and 1975. Yes, I was there at that time.
That said, over the last 30 years the current Vietnamese has been struggling to dismantle what was a very authoritarian Communist Government. From my first post War visit in 1995 till now(I’ve retired here), Viet Nam has made astonishing progress in dismantling the old regime. Except for Reagan, we Americans have mostly gone the other way.
Think about it.
Linh_My on May 24, 2013 at 7:53 PM
False equivalency. A better one is a million .22s vs. 1 30.06. I’ll take my chances with the single 30.06. Not only that we can better respond to and destroy the single 30.06.
NotCoach on May 24, 2013 at 7:54 PM
and that was before it really got entrenched—5-6 years into it.
arnold ziffel on May 24, 2013 at 7:55 PM
test
RickB on May 24, 2013 at 8:43 PM
F. Hayak wrote in his book “The Road To Serfdom” that Hitler was voted into power by large numbers of “docile and gullible” people who believed the lies (propaganda)told by Hitler and his elites.
Sound familiar? History repeats.
nofreelunch on May 24, 2013 at 11:02 PM
Lord have mercy, here I am defending or explaining Germans.
Adolph Hitler never got a clear majority in an election. He sorta grabbed power by exploiting deals, tricks, vacuums and technicalities. That aspect may now in replay before us.
Howover, I never heard of any elite behind him.
He was a thug, soldier and street fighter.
Unless OFA takes to the streets and Obama starts looking to build a vengeful, word dominating America, the two have little in common except a love of government power.
IlikedAUH2O on May 25, 2013 at 12:03 AM
Well that in itself, and there are other things, is an awful lot.
VorDaj on May 25, 2013 at 1:33 AM
You know. My maid understands this may be one of the most dangerous, egregious, undermining of The Constitution since the Japanese internment. But neither Congress, The Senate, nor Obama seem to get it. This can destroy the nation.
pat on May 25, 2013 at 2:16 AM
Well, they did vote for Øbama – twice. Maybe there’s something to that. :)
The last I checked, Øbama is not up for reelection. We certainly need to pound him but also those who think like him (you know, big govt types).
Odysseus on May 25, 2013 at 7:46 AM
Lots of blah, blah, blah…because in the back of the Republican’s mind is that some day they will be back in the White House and they will do everything Obama is doing. Any criticism will be met with “Obama did the same thing and no one cared, so we can do it, too.”
albill on May 25, 2013 at 8:58 AM
Beyond that, Obama has benefited from a lot of unethical behavior by liberals in general (and in government specifically). He is more post turtle than mastermind. His culpability is probably mostly in implicitly endorsing this kind of behavior in his speeches. He has a history of turning a blind eye to what others do to win his elections for him.
Count to 10 on May 25, 2013 at 9:07 AM
Bobby “BJ” Jindal: blah, blah, blah, big government is bad, blah, blah, blah, American flag, blah, blah, blah, Obama sucks, blah, blah, blah, the people, blah, blah, blah. This guy NEVER says anything new. Suck it, BJ.
HiJack on May 25, 2013 at 9:43 AM
Absolutely, positively. We can bank on it.
HiJack on May 25, 2013 at 9:45 AM
You’re missing the point Erika Johnsen: Takers gotta take. They don’t need no ‘compelling reason’ – as long as they’re on the receiving end. It’s why they vote democrat.
locomotivebreath1901 on May 25, 2013 at 9:51 AM
People are so afraid of calling Obama Cheat, liar, crook or whatever name that’s appropriate. If people had been this kind to Richard Nixon his face would be on Mt. Rushmore by now.
Herb on May 25, 2013 at 9:53 AM
Calling this government paternalistic is cowardly. This government is authoritarian and moving toward tyrannical.
The media are not in bed with the left; they are the left. They are the same people.
InterestedObserver on May 25, 2013 at 10:15 AM
We’ve killed 55,000,000 of our children.
We’re not much better than the Nazis.
itsnotaboutme on May 25, 2013 at 3:59 PM