Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
David Callahan

David Callahan

GET UPDATES FROM David Callahan

Will New York's Attorney General Finally Nail the Banks?

Posted: 05/17/11 06:40 PM ET

Eric Schneiderman has big shoes to fill as New York State Attorney General. Eliot Spitzer famously used this post to crack down on Wall Street after the excesses of the dot com era, going after the likes of Henry Blodget and AIG's Hank Greenberg. Schneiderman's immediate predecessor, Andrew Cuomo, busted up a "pay for play" operation at the New York state pension fund, sending former state comptroller Alan Hevesi and others to prison.

So how will Schneiderman make his mark? Well, judging by news reports on Tuesday, the New York AG is hoping to be the first law enforcement official to hold the big banks accountable for the subprime mortgage crisis -- starting with Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley.

This move confirms what many New Yorkers already know about Eric Schneiderman: He is a committed progressive and also a fighter. That's not so common in a state where top Democrats often act like moderate Republicans. (Exhibit A: Governor Cuomo's grossly unfair budget that lowers taxes on the rich while enacting draconian cuts to education and health care.)

Schneiderman is tapping into the public's deep frustration that nobody -- and I mean nobody -- has yet been held criminally responsible for the systematic deception, conflicts of interest, and excessive risk-taking that surrounded the securitization of subprime mortgage debt by Wall Street banks.

Schneiderman's intervention is clearly needed. For various reasons, detailed recently in an extraordinary New York Times investigation, federal authorities have totally dropped the ball in ensuring justice following the financial crisis. In contrast, the Savings and Loans scandal of the 1980s resulted in no fewer than 800 bank officials going to jail. Major figures in the last wave of corporate scandals also went to prison, including Bernie Ebbers of Worldcom, Jeffrey Skilling of Enron, and Dennis Kozlowski of Tyco.

The Times article notes that while criminal intent is difficult to prove:

legal experts point to numerous questionable activities where criminal probes might have borne fruit and possibly still could. Investigators, they argue, could look more deeply at the failure of executives to fully disclose the scope of the risks on their books during the mortgage mania, or the amounts of questionable loans they bundled into securities sold to investors that soured.

This is where Schneiderman comes in. Thanks to the Martin Act of 1921, which was revived by Eliot Spitzer, the New York AG has wide powers to go after the banks. The Act includes a broad definition of fraud and, crucially, it doesn't require prosecutors to prove criminal intent to defraud -- which is required under federal securities laws. As a primer on the Martin Act explained in 2004:

the only elements needed to establish a Martin Act violation are a misrepresentation or omission of material fact when engaged in to induce or promote the issuance, distribution, exchange, sale, negotiation or purchase of securities.

Proving that banks shaded the truth about mortgage-backed securities should not be very hard. Many on Wall Street suspected or knew these assets were toxic even as they continued to promote them to investors. Civil litigation against the banks has already turned up damning evidence about the banks' internal knowledge of shady underwriting on loans that were bundled into securities. All Schneiderman needs to do under the Martin Act, it would seem, is find evidence of these private doubts and then contrast them to public cheerleading and he has his case.

Veteran observers of Wall Street chicanery will recall the simplicity of Eliot Spitzer's case against the investment analysts Jack Grubman and Henry Blodget. Spitzer subpoenaed the email traffic of these guys and found them ridiculing the very stocks they were promoting at the behest of their investment banker masters. I bet the same kinds of emails can be found about mortgage-backed securities.

Now the bad news: Even if Schneiderman finds some smoking guns, it's unlikely that anyone will face a judge and jury, much less prison, as a result of the AG's investigation. Why? Because actually trying these cases would be hugely expensive and time consuming, requiring resources that may be beyond the AG's office. Recall that Enron's Jeff Skilling and Ken Lay spent as much as $70 million defending themselves against charges that they misrepresented Enron's financial position and the case dragged on for years before a conviction.

Even Eliot Spitzer didn't bring any Wall Street big shots to trial on criminal charges. Instead, he got them to agree to civil settlements in which they paid large penalties to the government -- although not as large as the fortunes they made. Blodget and Grubman both walked away from their confrontations with Spitzer as wealthy men. And, in their settlements with the AG, they didn't admit to any wrongdoing.

Some justice may well emerge from Schneiderman's worthy effort -- like big civil penalties -- but it is not likely to be satisfying.

 
 
 

Follow David Callahan on Twitter: www.twitter.com/CheatingCulture

Eric Schneiderman has big shoes to fill as New York State Attorney General. Eliot Spitzer famously used this post to crack down on Wall Street after the excesses of the dot com era, going after the li...
Eric Schneiderman has big shoes to fill as New York State Attorney General. Eliot Spitzer famously used this post to crack down on Wall Street after the excesses of the dot com era, going after the li...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 25
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
01:10 PM on 05/19/2011
During the bubble, if you wanted to invest in the view that housing prices would continue to rise, you bought houses, builder stocks, etc. If you wanted to invest in the view that housing prices were due for a major correction; there were few ways to back that analysis. In Michael Lewis' book: "The Big Short: Inside the Doomsday Machine", the author outlines how difficult it was for Paulson and Burry to find ways to invest against the housing bubble. The big investment banks and groups like AIG taking the opposite side of Paulson and Burry's trades initially believed they were almost certain winners by going long on housing. The bubble burst when more and more of the organizations (or groups within the organizations) switched from a positive to a negative view in housing. Institutions like Goldman's match investors with opposing views; so they are bound to take the opposite view to many of their clients. This point has always been clearly laid out in their Global Disclaimer, where Goldman Sachs explicitly states that what they tell you is "not independent from our proprietary interests, which may conflict with your interests". Of course there are going to be internal emails saying you are an idiot for making any particular decision. Your bartender probably thinks that you are an idiot for ordering a Brain Hemorrhage (peach or strawberry schnapps, Baileys Irish Cream, Grenadine); but he is fulfilling his obligations to you as a client by making the cocktail.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
marignymitch
E pluribus unum percent
01:47 PM on 05/18/2011
The banksters' bestest friends, Obama and Holder, cannot be happy about this development. This is a good thing. Best wishes to the AG.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
cats530
Valar morghulis
11:23 AM on 05/18/2011
"Bove calls Schneiderman’s a “w*tch hunt†and says the efforts are more likely a way for the AG to “make a name for himself..."

"It takes a certain perverse skill to say so many wrong things in a short space. The TBTF banks are in no way private companies. They are so heavily subsidized as to be welfare departments for the rentier classes. And it’s idi*tic to use cash generation as an excuse to refuse to pursue law-breakers."

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/05/bank-tout-dick-bove-proves-his-ignorance-in-defense-of-his-meal-ticket.html
10:53 AM on 05/18/2011
Short answer: No. Long answer: No.
10:40 AM on 05/18/2011
You don't say, when a restaurant sells food poisoning, 'promoting-food-they-knew-was-bad'; you call it for what it is: 'criminal restaurant'.

Therefore Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan have to be SHUT DOWN for fraud. PERIOD.

Fines and 'settlements' will never retore the public in a bank, therefore it must be SHUT DOWN.

Restore Glass-Steagall and put TBTF in RECEIVERSHIP/BANKRUPTCY NOW!!!!

Then prosecute Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, BoA and the rest of these clowns to the fullest-extent-of-the-law. PERIOD.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JudeOnPolitics
08:56 AM on 05/18/2011
May God bless his endeavor with success.
08:52 AM on 05/18/2011
New York's AG Schneiderman may not have the resources to get the bad guys but US Attorney General Eric Holder surely does. So far he's done nothing. There's a lot of evidence for him, as described by Matt Taibbi, in the current Rolling Stone and online in "The People vs. Goldman Sachs." Taibbi relies on a 650 page bipartisan report by a Senate committee chaired by Carl Levin (ranking member Tom Coburn) to argue that Goldman Sachs committed many crimes in not telling the committee the truth about its mortgage market security activities, which cost the taxpayers billions thru AIG and cost its customers additional billions because it was selling them what it knew was junk while telling them, or implying to them, that it was good stuff, and then going out and insuring itself against what it was selling, expecting it to fail. You can find the article at ://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-people-vs-goldman-sachs-20110511
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rothomaha
The Truth will out
08:43 AM on 05/18/2011
Someone needs to bring these outfits to heel! Part of the problem is that America has become convinced that only an expert in a given area can oversee that area(e.g. only a Big Bank banker can run SEC or Treasury); hence, we have this unholy alliance of Wall Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, with the Gang of 600 doing obeisance so that they can become lobbyists when they leave the hallowed halls of Capitol Hill! This is utter nonsense - anyone with motivation and aptitude can learn enough to understand the system, and anyone with half a grain of common sense will make the assumption in any negotiations that reps of these Big Banks are thoroughly dishonest and reprehensible. Thus, the perfect mixture of skepticism, expertise and common sense with which to humble these outfits and bring them into line. We Americans have got to end this "hero worship" psychology, leading to the belief that "the next guy" will be The One! This crap is what leads us to send one crook after another to "represent" us in Congress, and to elect one liar after another to live in the White House. Let's stop looking for heroes and start looking for intelligent, common sense, decent human beings, as opposed to these damned aliens!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
eddy joe
welcome to the machine
07:21 AM on 05/18/2011
No. If he "nails them, who will pay? The taxpayer. So who gets nailed?
photo
elbzee
Fear is the mind-killer
08:26 AM on 05/18/2011
Hmmmm.... Lemme think.... ummmm. Yep, it's us.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
anastmosis
02:28 PM on 05/18/2011
It costs us to "nail" him, but if we don't because it's too expensive and time consuming, then we are no longer a nation ruled by law, the demands of justice are unmet, disorder and chaos ensue, and it costs us even more.
photo
AlexNYC
Pumps dont work cause the vandals took the handles
10:26 AM on 05/20/2011
At the very least the individuals responsible for running these gambits against the investors, and then lied about it under oath, should be brought to justice. The taxpayers always pay the cost of brining criminals to trial, so what? The cost of not doing so is much more costly.
01:43 AM on 05/18/2011
Fraud and negligence are two very different things. If fraud can be proven, then those guilty should be all means be given criminal convictions, but most of the facts so far show that a lot of this was negligent behaviour.

It seems Mr. Callahan has decided to conflate the two. He should not feel bad about this lack of legal knowledge, it seems that Spitzer and now Schneiderman are doing the same. I only wish that these two AG's had been in my some of my 1L law classes so as two bring the curves down with this misunderstanding of legal concepts.
Vinkaye
None of the Above 2012
09:10 AM on 05/18/2011
I think you are using the term "negligent" as an excuse. The people in charge committed fraud, they may have been swayed by a lack of understanding of the terminology surrounding their financial products, but they did understand that they started with mortgages, broke them down and sold them as something else. Often that "something else" existed only on paper, and that is fraud!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PhilipTaylor
Legalized Bribery is an Oxymoron - must END
12:02 AM on 05/18/2011
11,000 Executive Level investigations in 1980's Mini-Housing Scam
 
0 ____ Executive Level investigations in 2008 to 2011 Continuing M0NSTER Scams

1,100 to 0 is the score!

1,100 Executives put in PR1S0N in 1980's Mini-Housing Scam
 
0 ___ Executives put in PR1S0N in 2008 to 2011 Continuing M0NSTER Scams

+BUT OBAMA SAYS "WE MUST LOOK FORWARD!"+

+++++++++ "NOT BACKWARD!" ++++++++++++
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robobrewer
12:39 AM on 05/18/2011
Infuriating, isn't it?
How most Americans sheepishly accept this is beyond me.
photo
Jack Daniels Esq
Hold the ice
02:14 AM on 05/18/2011
This is like Hiroshima (bomb) - how much more evidence do ya need .......?
Vinkaye
None of the Above 2012
09:15 AM on 05/18/2011
President Obama not only says "move along" but he hires a JP Morgan Chase Exec as his WH Cof S????? If Bush had done that after the massive banking scandal, liberals would have screamed and rightfully so. President Obama does it, and the professional left talks about what a good guy Daley is???? We have completely lost our way. Americans need to understand that this fight isn't Democrat vs. Republican, campaign finance demands both parties pay more attention to bankers than people. The American people must stop accepting it!
ScaredAcademic
The GOP: Peddling Hate Since '68
04:42 AM on 05/18/2011
The article mentions the warchests that Skilling and Lay brought to bear on their defense. What fact comes to mind that distinguishes 1981 from the present period? If you answer that the marginal tax rate on the highest bracket was twice as high in 1981 than in the present, then you are on the right path to finding the answer. I would not be surprised to find that what Skilling and/or Lay spent exceeds the entire budget for most US attorney satellite offices. Here is one very real consequence of cutting spending......
photo
elbzee
Fear is the mind-killer
08:28 AM on 05/18/2011
Absolutely! The wealthy can now afford what the states cannot. How scary is that????????
11:53 PM on 05/17/2011
Schneiderman is tapping into the public's deep frustration that nobody -- and I mean nobody -- has yet been held criminally responsible for the systematic deception, conflicts of interest, and excessive risk-taking that surrounded the securitization of subprime mortgage debt by Wall Street banks.

KINDA CRAZY HOW TRAINED THEY HAVE US.........!?

makes me sicker than sick.....
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:41 PM on 05/17/2011
Where have you gone, Teddy Roosevelt our nation turns its longing eyes to you!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robobrewer
12:40 AM on 05/18/2011
So true! FDR as well.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
WorldEdition
Speak Truth to Power
11:39 PM on 05/17/2011
Either that or he'll be the next president.
iridium53
Semper Fi
10:58 PM on 05/17/2011
He'll have to.
Holder won't hold anyone accountable.