NOW - THIS IS HUGE!!I am about to believe THAT
THEY ALL WILL COME OUT!! Finally – as Jermaine is reassured us early!.
That Info about Gupta under investigation is tied up ALL piece of Michael Jackson blackmailing and threat of assassination, FBI involving, LaToya murder shouts and VforVanquish latest video and poster in front of Murray court in LA as well as Occupy Wall Street Anonymous connection!!
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
LoginOct. 25 (Bloomberg) -- Rajat Gupta, the former Goldman Sachs Group Inc. director once accused of feeding Galleon Group LLC co-founder Raj Rajaratnam inside information, will surrender to the FBI on criminal charges tomorrow, a person familiar with the matter said.
Gupta, 62, was charged following a four-year securities fraud investigation of insider trading at hedge funds by the New York office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Gupta will be charged alone in a case prosecuted by Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara, according to the person, who couldn’t be identified because the security matter.
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login10/26/11
By Erik Ortiz
With Gupta's fall, feds are putting Wall Street on close watch
Photo credit: Rajat Gupta leaves federal court in New York. (Getty Images)
With the staggering takedown Wednesday of financial baron Rajat Gupta on insider trading charges, the feds have a message for Wall Street honchos: We’re watching you.
Gupta, 62, a former Goldman Sachs board member, was charged with one count of conspiracy and five counts of securities fraud in Manhattan federal court. He pleaded not guilty and posted bail for $10 million, secured by his Westport, Conn., home. He faces up to 105 years in prison if convicted.
Prosecutors allege Gupta sat on the boards of some of America’s most storied financial institutions and corporations, including
Goldman Sachs and Procter & Gamble, only to serve up company secrets to hedge fund manager Raj Rajaratnam, who would then trade stocks based on the tips.
Rajaratnam was found guilty in May on conspiracy and securities fraud charges and was sentenced this month to a record 11 years in prison.Gupta “became the illegal eyes and ears in the boardroom for his friend and business associate Raj Rajaratnam, who reaped enormous profits from Mr. Gupta’s breach of duty,” Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara said in a statement.
The Securities and Exchange Commission also filed a civil suit Wednesday, claiming Gupta earned Rajaratnam’s hedge fund $23 million in illegal profits and loss avoidance.
Gupta’s attorney, Gary Naftalis, denied the allegations, telling reporters: “The facts in this case demonstrate that Mr. Gupta is innocent of any of these charges and that he has always acted with honesty and integrity.”
Gupta’s arrest puts another feather in the cap of Bharara, Wall Street watchers said, after spending the past two and a half years infiltrating insider trading in New York. Under his watch, 51 people have been convicted and 21 sentenced.
“His office’s overwhelming success in that arena has put Wall Street on notice,” said James Keneally, a white-collar criminal defense attorney with the firm Kelley Drye & Warren. “He’s been very aggressive in terms of investigative techniques and the height and depth of his indictments.”
Going after Gupta also puts a blotch on venerable investment bank Goldman Sachs, which posted a quarterly loss this month for only the second time since going public in 1999.
Bill Singer, a former American Stock Exchange compliance attorney, isn’t convinced Wall Street CEOs and their boards are going to be any more vigilant about corruption.
“When you have one roach in the kitchen, you know there’s more somewhere else,” he said.
***
Rajat Kumar Gupta
Education: MBA from Harvard Business School
Net worth: At least $100 million, according to CNN.
Career highlights:
• Was consulting firm McKinsey & Co.’s first managing director from 1994-2003.
• Served on board of Goldman Sachs from November 2006 to May 2010.
• Served on board of Procter & Gamble from 2007 to March 2011.
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
LoginGoldman Sachs and Occupy Wall Street's bank: the real story.
When Goldman got huffy at a credit union honouring OWS and pulled its anniversary dinner funding, much more was at stakeMega-bank Goldman Sachs (assets $933bn), has declared war on one of the smallest banks in New York (assets $30m), the customer-owned community bank that happens to also be the banker for Friends of Liberty Plaza, Inc, also known as Occupy Wall Street. And you thought Goldman didn't care.
The trouble began three weeks ago when the occupiers suddenly found their donation buckets filling with thousands of dollars, way more than needed for their pizza dinners. Suddenly, the anti-bank protesters needed a bank. Citibank and Chase certainly wouldn't fit. So OWS opened an account at the not-for-profit Lower East Side Peoples Federal Credit Union. Peoples has a unique federal charter – designated to open accounts for low-income folk from all over NewYork, available to those families earning less than $38,000 per year. (Disclosure: the CEO of the Peoples bank is my dearly beloved ex. But that's another story.)
Goldman Sachs had also joined up with the Peoples bank. Goldman partners reportedly earn a bit more than $38k per annum, yet Goldman's association so far was limited to giving the credit union $5,000 toward the little bank's 25th anniversary celebration dinner. Goldman's largesse was acknowledged on the dinner invites – along with the night's honoree: Occupy Wall Street.
When a Goldman exec saw its gilded name next to Occupy Wall Street, the financial giant expressed much displeasure. In fact, my sources say, Goldman threatened legal action unless the credit union gave up the $5,000 and reprinted the invite sans the Sachs moniker. Goldman Sachs did not respond to our requests for comment on the affair.
So far, it's a cute story: tiny bank uses Goldman's money to fete some tent-dwellers who are denouncing Sachs as the Giant Vampire Squid.
But there's a lot more at stake in this battle than a $5,000 donation gone wrong. Underneath, it's a battle royal for control of tens of billions of dollars in government mandated "community reinvestment" funds.In 2008, the US Treasury handed Goldman Sachs a check for $10bn from the Troubled Asset Recovery Program (Tarp), the bailout funds given to desperate commercial banks. A few eyebrows were raised: Goldman was not desperate, and it certainly was not a commercial bank. Yet – abracadabra! – Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson transformed investment bank Goldman into a commercial bank overnight. (Paulson's prior post was chairman of Goldman Sachs. Just saying.)
But there was a catch: Goldman would have to return a chunk of the public's billions in the form of loans for low-income customers and members of its "community", as required by the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) of 1977. Problem: Goldman has, it seems, no low-income customers, nor a "community". Goldman was directed to find poor people and a community and hand over some cash.
So Goldman looked down from its riverfront tower in lower Manhattan and discovered Peoples. Over 80% of Peoples member-owners have low incomes. At least 65% are Latino.
For the big money-center banks, the CRA is good deal. They pay some blood money into community banks and offload their low-income customers. Indeed, bank branches catering to the carriage trade often hustle would-be customers from housing projects out the door with an admonition to take their undesirable business to Lower East Side Peoples.
Goldman's circuits blew when the credit union's management appeared in Zuccotti Park to endorse Occupy Wall Street's call to "Move Your Money" from commercial banks to community credit unions. Heeding Peoples' and Occupy's call, 23 protesters marched to their local Citibank branches to close their accounts – and were promptly arrested.
Peoples' Chairwoman Deyarina Del Rio tells me that Peoples sees itself in agreement and alliance with the protesters' demands to radically shift the American finance system away from profit-first to people-first banking. But not with our money, seems to be Goldman's attitude. But of course, it's not Goldman's money but our money – effectively, the tax payer dollars that were supposed to come back in the form of loans in return for the Tarp bailout.
The billions of dollars in CRA funds (Citibank alone committed $115bn over ten years) have given community banks tremendous political authority at the local level. Notably, Congresswoman Nydia Velasquez will be honored alongside Occupy Wall Street at the credit union's 3 November dinner. "We didn't mean to draw a line in the sand with Goldman," Peoples Chairman Del Rio told me, standing inside the bank's vault, the only place in the cramped back office with room to meet.
But Goldman did draw the line. And other bankers are stepping back across it, too. Capital One also pulled its name off the dinner invites.
Goldman has so far only passed out its legally-required CRA funds with an eye-dropper: the $5,000 for Peoples (now withdrawn), and a few other dabs here and there. The big cash investments from the Goldman fund are dangling, hoping to lure only those community banks and low-income funds that will dance to Goldman's tune. My sources told me that Goldman's "Urban Investment Group" representative had stated in a phone conversation that Occupy's credit union will never get another dime from any big bank, but, again, Goldman refused to speak with me to confirm or deny this.
Peoples' Del Rio dismisses such threats, but I don't. These Community Reinvestment funds ultimately come from public pockets, so why should the titans of Wall Street be allowed to bully community credit unions, which are answerable to their members, not Goldman's partners?
• With additional reporting by Arun Gupta, founding editor of the Occupied Wall Street Journal
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
LoginInside Secrets of the Goldman DealBy Johnnie L. Roberts
Published: December 05, 2010 @ 8:46 pm
The transaction outlined in the secret Goldman file would have been the culmination of an ambitious proposal to salvage Michael Jackson’s crumpled financial life. Jackson owed $270 million to Bank of America, which could take control of his songs had he missed a looming due date.
Under the Goldman proposal, he’d forfeit the music -- an outcome that he fiercely wanted to avoid -- but emerge with a horde of as much as $1.3 billion.The confidential files from those days were provided by a member of the Goldman Sachs group, which grew out of a chain of relationships started by “Rush Hour” director Brett Ratner in late 2002. (Click on documents to enlarge.)
Acting as Jackson’s adviser, Charles Koppelman, the veteran entertainment executive and investor, recruited Goldman Sachs and worked closely with two of its private-equity aces, Gerry Cardinale and Henry Cornell, in crafting the proposal.
Ahead of the proposal, he and Florida businessman Al Malnik also arranged to double -- to $70 million -- one of Jackson’s two loans with Bank of America, where a Koppelman friend, Jane Heller, happened to handle his and Jackson’s personal accounts.
See the full document: Jackson's $70M Loan
The confidential Goldman documents detail a proposal with several steps:
How Michael Jackson Nearly Lost His Prized Music Catalog
The Secret Probe That Got Branca Fired>> First, Goldman and Jackson become 50-50 owners in a new company, Music LLC.
>> Next, Music forms a separate company, “Newco,” with new partners -- Sony, with its half of the Beatles, and Goldman putting up money.
>> Newco’s assets would be 100 percent of Sony/ATV (the Beatles) and Mijac (Jackson’s hits) and Goldman (more cash).
>> Newco would swallow Warner Music Group’s music publisher, Warner-Chappell, and combine it with Sony-ATV.See: Goldman's Secret Rescue Plan and The Term Sheet
A target list also included other publishers -- arms of Universal Music Group, BMG or EMI. The goal: industry dominance.Jac
kson’s original stake would shrink as more investors entered the Goldman-crafted venture. “Like Bill Gates, [Jackson] would have a smaller stake in a multibillion-dollar company,” Goldman declared in a talking-point memo dated April 15, 2003. (See: Michael Jackson = Bill Gates)
Within five years, Goldman’s typical time frame for such investments, all would have been monetized in a sale of the venture, most likely to Sony Corp. By Goldman’s projections, Jackson’s share would be $700 million to $1.3 billion.But backend riches didn’t solve Jackson’s shorter term crisis of repaying the $270 million bank debt. Not to worry. A $135-million Goldman loan would retire the $70-million Bank of America loan and $7-million due Sony. He would catch up on $12 million in overdue monthly bills and have a few million as a cushion.
The Secret Probe That Got Branca FiredBy Johnnie L. Roberts
Published: December 05, 2010 @ 8:48 pm
It’s known as the “Interfor Report,” after the Manhattan-based corporate espionage firm, Interfor Inc.
The contents -- based on a private investigation by the firm on Michael Jackson’s behalf in 2002 and 2003 -- included stunning assertions about John Branca, the entertainer’s on-again, off-again music attorney for 30 years and now co-executor of his estate.
Interfor’s investigation, "found a tight business relationship between Branca and Tommy Mottola,” then-CEO of Sony Music, where Jackson was an artist, according to an excerpt from the firm’s final report. The excerpt added: “Interfor has begun investigating the flow of funds from Jackson through Mottola and Branca into offshore accounts in the Carribean [sic].”
Read the excerpt.
The investigation, which apparently began in late 2002, provided no credible evidence to corroborate those and other assertions. And the probe may have been little more than part of an elaborate smear campaign intended to influence the beleaguered Jackson to fire Branca.
If so, it was successful.
“This is to confirm that I am terminating the services of you and your firm effective upon delivery of this letter,” Jackson wrote the attorney in February 2003. “You are commanded to immediately cease expending effort of any kind on my behalf…You are specifically instructed to transfer any funds you are holding in trust for me…”
How Michael Jackson Nearly Lost His Prized Music Catalog
Inside Secrets of the Goldman DealBranca declined repeated overtures for further comment after having granted this reporter a lengthy taped interview last summer.
Mottola, who abruptly resigned from Sony a month before Jackson fired Branca, called the assertion about off-shore accounts involving him "nonsense." But in an interview Sunday evening, he also added that he would have been unaware of any offshore accounts established by Branca, Jackson or both. It's "not anything that a multinational corporation like Sony" would have been involved in during his tenure, Mottola reiterated.
It’s unclear who ordered the investigation. But the report, dated April 15, 2003, was prepared for an attorney with Hale Lane Peek Dennison & Howard, the firm that Jackson hired to succeed Branca. In a brief interview in June, the lawyer, Fred D. Gibson III, confirmed that Jackson was a client of the firm.
(There are some indications that the report in some way figured in Jackson’s child molestation trial in 2005, and it has been grist for internet conspiracy theorists apparently for years. More recently, Joe Jackson filed the Interfor excerpts in his son’s probate case in an unsuccessful effort to oust Branca as co-executor.)
The report materialized in 2003 amid a complex, and ultimately aborted, effort by a new inner circle of Jackson financial advisers, including Goldman Sachs, to craft a bailout of the beleaguered entertainer. With the due date on the horizon, Jackson owed a breathtaking $270 million to Bank of America. And a default would mean Jackson’s probable loss of, among other things, his most prized assets -- half share in Sony/ATV Music Publishing, repository of the Beatles song catalog, and Mijac, the catalogue of his own songs, including “Beat It” and “Billy Jean."
Show Posts
- to more and more interfiere with TS religious posts and all the deep meaning we are (succesefully?) digging behind the Mega-Global Matrix of your Hoax.
- exactly following FRONT advice