Who Duped Rolling Stone Gonzo Reporter Matt Taibbi?

It's starting to look like basketball-player-turned-political-reporter-turned-overnight-authority-on-Wall-Street Matt Taibbi may have fallen for a stock-trading ruse. Heaven knows he's an easy mark. "I can't even balance my checkbook," he told radio talk show host Don Imus.

Taibbi, Rolling Stone magazine's teen heartthrob, became a sensation last month after calling Goldman Sachs "a giant vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity." His piece contained as many errors as facts, but few of us minded because the imaginative writer memorably captured the national zeitgeist.

Taibbi knows you're only as popular as your latest record, so in this month's issue of Rolling Stone he takes on short selling, a controversial Wall Street stock trading practice. His report offers the usual cocktail of half-truths, which you can read about at Business Insider, Economic Policy Journal, Fraud Files Blog, The Atlantic, New York Times DealBook, and Investment News.

To tell you the truth, I haven't lost any sleep worrying about Taibbi's sloppy reporting or his obscene language. He's colorful, he's cute, he admits he'd rather be writing fiction ... oh, fiddle dee dee.

But I am intrigued by the video Taibbi posted on YouTube to make his point about short selling. People who know about these things say the video is a fake ... a hoax. Taibbi claimed the video showed a Penson Financial Services trading platform transaction, but today Penson dashed off a fast letter to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, alerting them that the trading platform identified in each of Taibbi's posts is not Penson's. "While we are uncertain whether Taibbi's article is the result of a hoax or something more deliberate, we are contemplating sharing our concerns with YouTube and the blogger directly," wrote Penson's associate general counsel, in a two-page letter to the SEC that was made available to the Huffington Post.

If all these folks are right, it begs a few questions:

-- How did "short selling" happen to catch Taibbi's attention?
-- Who slipped Taibbi the fake video?
-- For what purpose?

Well, Matt? Who's screwin' with ya? We're waiting ...

* * *

For more details on this story I recommend business writers John Carney, Dan Jamieson, Megan McArdle, Gary Weiss, and Robert Wenzel. You can also read fraud examiner Tracy Coenen. If you think this is all a bunch of silly nonsense, you might enjoy satirist William K. Wolfrum's hilarious Taibbi video.

Follow Diane Tucker on Twitter: www.twitter.com/dianetucker

Comments

[MissVirginiaVoter]

Goldman still crooks.........

[veracity]

< he takes on very complex issues that even most economists admit they don't understand >

Hate to be the "SKUNK at your garden party," AdunAfraid, but I'll quote heroine ELIZABETH WARREN, Chair of the Congressional (authorized) "T.A.R.P. Oversight Panel" who, in her now famous interview with NPR's financial hack Adam Davidson said exactly that:
(my very rough paraphrasing)
"while the Financial Big-Boys blather on endlessly about HOW GREAT and SMART they are, and HOW COMPLICATED these financial transactions are, in the end those transactions are BANKRUPT if not outright FRAUDULENT, and they - the great financial geniuses - have run crying, begging, screaming, and extorting to Congress to GET us TAXPAYERS to BAIL OUT THEIR FAILURES."

HuffPost's own Jason Linkins does a near- Jon Stewart takedown of NPR's Nicholson, for Nicholson doing a TEXTBOOK "Heathers" (NY/DC INSIDERS) WHITEWASHING of vast financial frauds & other corporate crimes....
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/15/planet-money-reporter-pai_n_203890.html

and here's the link for the full 70 min. mp3 Warren interview - sorry, can't quite give you a time-stamp for her "SKUNK at the GARDEN PARTY" comment -
http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2009/05/the_full_warren_interview.html )

[Diane Tucker - Huffpost Blogger]

(veracity) I agree with you about Elizabeth Warren. Her intellectual honesty is refreshing. I also hope the new Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, which has subpoena power, is dogged. Otherwise, how can Washington reform the financial system when we still don't know what, exactly, happened?

[sposton]

If he was indeed duped, it is not hard to think of the party who would like to discredit him. Take a look at what's happened to Dan Rather. It is exceedingly easy to trick people like that. CIA has been discrediting people around the world since its inception. There are plenty of former CIA operators working for thieving classes and Wall Street banksters.

It is also worth keeping in mind that Dan Rather was 99% right about Bush. That story was effectively displaced by the 1% "error" created by ensnaring Rather into a deliberate sting. Isn't a similar mechanism at work here? A subtle attempt to discredit Taibbi who has also basically gotten the critical mass of the story right?

[Diane Tucker - Huffpost Blogger]

(sposton) " Is it a similar mechanism at work here?" Could be. That's why it's important to get to the bottom of it.

[veracity]

Dianne, there's NOTHING "radical," over-the-top, or exaggerated in Taibbi's reporting on Golddamn-Sachs, a very right-wing financial company that is allied with EVERY ONE of the
"Ten Easy Steps to FASCISM in America" outlined by Naomi Wolfe...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/apr/24/usa.comment

Unfortunately, Naomi's "Top 10" doesn't quite spell out the FINANCIAL component of radical-right corporate fascism, but Naomi Klein does, in her "SHOCK DOCTRINE" - how the wealthy USE DISASTERS to INCREASE THEIR wealth & power, at everyone else's expense -
http://www.naomiklein.org

Decades before either Naomi was born, the GREAT MISSISSIPPI FLOOD of 1927 gave a text-book example of "DISASTER CAPITALISM" in action: white planters, businessmen, & bankers USED the disaster as an EXCUSE to round up black-workers AT GUNPOINT (several MURDERED), to FORCE them to work on the flood ravaged levees... while HIJACKING disaster relief intended for the victims!
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/flood/timeline/timeline2.html
= modern SLAVERY!

The even LARGER case of DISASTER CAPITALISM in relatively recent Western experience was the GREAT (Irish) FAMINE of 1845-1852... ONE MILLION Iish men, women, & children perished of famine-related diseases, after English troops & landlords EVICTED millions of Irish families from their traditional towns & villages (the "ENCLOSURES") then, when the subsistence potato crop failed, English bankers, landlords, & local Anglicized Irish landlords EXPORTED GRAIN FROM IRELAND _AT_ the VERY HEIGHT OF THE FAMINE, starving DEAD-PEASANTS be damned!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_(Ireland)

[Diane Tucker - Huffpost Blogger]

(Veracity) -- I agree, capitalism isn't all it's cracked up to be. Does it beat the alternative? That's another discussion for another day.

But for now, as former Rolling Stone editor William Greider said a few days ago in The Nation, our financial landscape "remains littered with unanswered questions and informed suspicions about who did what to produce the breakdown. The relevant facts are still buried in the files of Wall Street firms and the regulatory agencies that utterly failed as watchdogs." Greider is concerned the media considers the financial crisis "last year's story." Here's the link to Greider's post, which I think is a good read. Let me know what you think.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20091026/greider/single

[veracity]

Now, let's see if this tidbit of brutal, hammering truth slips by HuffPost's (oh so NYC neo-con) censoring crew:

#1. GUESS who was England's (London's) BIGGEST, most profitable, MOST POWERFUL BANKERS through the ENTIRE Irish FAMINE years, as London absentee landlords were EXPORTING GRAIN from Ireland, AT THE VERY HEIGHT of the FAMINE, to "raise capital" and pay off previous capital debts?
(hint: a banking family with roots, and branches, in Continental Europe.)

#2. Guess which London bankers were widely considered (in economic and financial history circles) to have been closely ALLIED WITH JP Morgan,. especially regarding the oft rumored "INTENTIONALLY INCITED Banking PANIC of 1907," which led almost directly to the creation of the PRIVATELY OWNED Federal Reserve system in 1913?

#2. And if JP Morgan (now united with Chase Bank, the former family bank of the Rockefeller family, i.e. JP Morgan/Chase bank) was THEN the FRONT bank for that London banking powerhouse, what are the odds today, that GOLDDAMN-SACHS is NOT also "closely allied with" that same London banking dynasty??
(answer: zero)

[John Olagues]

Attached is an article which completely debunks the idea that "naked short sellers" collapsed Bear Stearns.

http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=cache:h4pExFCPWKgJ:fisher.osu.edu/~diether_1/b822/short_slides_2up.pdf+fails+to+deliver+bear+stearns&hl=en&gl=us&sig=AFQjCNFn95_ROpGdOsWP_-h0jA0PYNdk1g

Anyone who reads this and just does a short review of the data will know that most of the "naked short sellers" took place after Bear Stearns collapsed. So unless someone believes that a future event can cause a past event, no honest person will hold on to the notion that "naked short selling" collapsed Bear Stearns.

It was an "insiders job" where the beneficiaries worked together to "pull it."

John Olagues

http://www.optionsforemployees.com/articles/article.php?id=130

[Skepticalperson]

I don't think there can be any real dispute that the video is a fake, or at least very dubious. Taibbi's response does not make one feel reassured. His reaction has been to attack the blogger who has been most tenacious in establishing that the video is probably fake.

Taibbi also has changed his story, first claiming in the blog that the "trade went through," that there was a "naked swindle," and then turning around and saying only that a 100-share trade had been executed.

The underlying article begins by detailing a $1.7 million option trade in Bear Stearns, without disclosing that this is old news (Bloomberg, 8/08) and roundly derided at the time by Felix Salmon and Barry Ritholz, both respected business bloggers, and by Columbia Journalism Review.

See http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2008/08/betting-on-bear.html
and
http://www.felixsalmon.com/003794.html
and
http://www.cjr.org/the_audit/bloombergs_lobs_explosive_nake.php

[WilliamKWolfrum]

Oh noes. A female reporter threw snark at Taibbi. Maybe she'll learn her place. Probably not.

[Condetector]

I'm a late comer to Taibbai's writing, having discovered him through Tucker's earlier critique. It sounds like the two of you can become friends. Come on Diane, if he makes the errors you suggest, why not mentor him? We need writers of his ilk who have the courage to speak truth to power. NOW JOIN ME--THREE CHEERS FOR TAIBAI!!!

[Skepticalperson]

Why? Why cheer him? He posted a video that has every reasonable likelihood of being a fake.

[Ben Cohen - Huffpost Blogger]

I'm sorry Diane, you're going to quote Charlie Gasparino from CNBC and The New York Post as proof Taibbi's reporting on Goldman Sachs is bogus? Are you serious? Don't tell me, you're bringing out Maria Baritiromo next....

I've yet to see a convincing argument that Taibbi was wrong about anything in his piece on Goldman Sachs (outside of the corporate media of course), and for you to demean his reporting by reducing him to a caricature is pretty low. Taibbi has done some excellent reporting on the financial crisis and actually took the time to research what he was talking about unlike most other 'journalists' who for years wouldn't touch Wall St scandals with a barge pole.

Your piece is a classic example (intentionally or not) of how main stream commentators sideline serious debate. I think you are above that. I like your stuff - it's well written, conscientious and usually right. But this? Not cool at all.

[Diane Tucker - Huffpost Blogger]

(Ben Cohen) You're right. I failed to deify Taibbi.

[Diane Tucker - Huffpost Blogger]

(Ben Cohen) Okay....I was admitedly snarky on that one. That's what happens when I post while watching too-cool Wanda Sykes on Leno. Anyway, to get back to the questionable video, which is the subject of this post.....either Penson is lying through their teeth to the SEC, or Taibbi trusted his sources and did not verify their information. If the latter, well, you can't go to war on false premises. (Wait....Dubya did. Well, you get my point.)

[Faraway01]

Methinks the lady protests a bit much.

If she was a seious journalist she'd have checked out MT's blog on True Slant where he addresses critics on a regular basis. Here's a link to a post she should have read before blogging:

http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2009/10/05/keystone-clusterstock-strikes-again/

Just because MT is viscious that doesn't mean he's wrong. Just sayin'.

[Mikecroft]

I read that link. So far, the Clusterstock team has scored more points. But it ain't over till it's over. Stay tuned...

[PartyPartyParty]

I don't see any concrete evidence that Taibbi does not have his facts straight, only essays critiquing his essays. That does not prove that Taibbi is wrong or naive.

And calling Goldman Sachs a "giant vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity' isn't naive, and it isn't an overcharac­terization­. I'd say it's an understatement.

[Diane Tucker - Huffpost Blogger]

PartyPartyParty: That's his best line, hands down. We all loved it.

[bobwalters]

Not only do the "visuals" of the quote amuse and satisfy -- the substance of the metaphor is a spot on description of the facts. See Bill Black's piece on HP today. And BTW, what little I've checked out of MT's reporting has also been spot on. The links you cite seem to have a vested interest in de-bunking MT's reports, lest they get certain parts of their anatomy caught in the proverbial wringer.

[mjtaylor22]

are you the blogger version of peggy noonan.
u seem so protective of money and power
and glossing over the reporting that matt did, and knockign on its legitimacy.
when he did a good job connecting the dots
u take his admitted imperfection and malign his writing style and investigative credence
with a laugh n a smirk, as if you are doing the people a good service instead of a disservice.

[Diane Tucker - Huffpost Blogger]

mjtaylor22: I WISH I was protective of money and power. I'd have a better wardrobe. My support is for Taibbi. He takes a lot of risks in his writing, and that can create enemies, and attract people who try to take advantage -- which MAY have happened with that video. Who gave it to him? And why?

[ErnestineBass]

"Who gave it to him? And why?"

Let's face it, when Matt dared to question the great and powerful Goldman Sachs, he painted a very large target on himself, and one method used by the GS of the world to squelch criticism is to metaphorically "ki.ll the messenger".

Discrediting the messenger invariably discredits the message.

IMO, Goldman Sachs was most likely behind the ACORN "expose" as well.

http://www.housingwire.com/2009/08/19/acorn-urges-goldman-sachs-barclays-to-up-modification-rate/

[ORpolitico]

Regardless of what you think of Matt Taibbi's reporting style, he takes on very complex issues that even most economists admit they don't understand. At least he's reporting on the real news, which is more than can be said about the mainstream media. As a journalist myself, I know that fact-checking involves a certain amount of subjectivity. If your goal as a reader is to pick apart an article and tear down the writer, you've missed the whole point.

[Diane Tucker - Huffpost Blogger]

ORpolitico: Reread the headline. I'm on Taibbi's side. If someone gave him a doctored tape, I hope he smokes 'em out and exposes why.

[Chez Pazienza - Huffpost Blogger]

Sorry, Diane -- but your cutesy condescension toward a guy who's largely a damn good reporter is a little off-putting. It feels like you delight in elevating those who take issue with Taibbi to adult status -- making it seem like, as you say, they "know about these things" with 100% certainty -- while off-handedly diminishing Taibbi as some kind of naive kid. That's nonsense -- and it's insulting.

Are you assuming that Taibbi's original piece on Goldman Sachs was full of factual errors because you've read a couple of subsequent articles that take issue with it? You of all people should know that when you stir the pot that furiously, there are going to be people who refute not simply your conclusions but the facts and reporting that got you there.

From what I've seen so far, Taibbi's done a pretty decent job of pushing back against the criticism he's faced not just for the Goldman piece but in response to the fallout from this supposed tape hoax. If you don't want to respect the man, that's your prerogative -- but I certainly know that his work deserves more than clumsy snark and a couple of links to columns that can be as easily questioned as the reporting they decry.

Believe it or not, I actually do say this with all due respect to you.

[Diane Tucker - Huffpost Blogger]

Chez Pazienza: Wait....you like Taibbi, but not snark? Have you read his work? Taibbi himself likes snark.

[collettethehedgehog]

This is not snark. This is saying his reporting is equivalent to O Keefe's and deserves quote marks as in Rolling Stone "reporter." As if you were a reporter. In actual journalism, the Walter Cronkite kind your statements would need to be as substantiated as his. And if he or you screwed up you'd be - at the least fired.

[Chez Pazienza - Huffpost Blogger]

Not quite. There's a difference between snark and venom, particularly clever venom. Snarky is sounding like a petulant kid impressed with him or herself for turning a cute phrase for its own sake. Taibbi's stuff is occasionally out and out vicious -- and to be honest I don't think that's necessarily a negative given the subject matter he often covers. Cynicism and skepticism permeate his reporting, and, sorry, but I can't help but think that that's a very, very good thing -- especially in the current climate.

It's easy to write a couple of blog posts taking saccharine-y jabs at somebody -- God knows I've probably done it before -- but doing real reporting, forming logical theories (debatable yes, but logical and thought-provoking) on what you've found and sometimes getting really freakin' angry about it is the hallmark of being a good journalist.

[heal57]

I think Matt Taibbi does a great job, and I'm no teenage girl. I'm in my 60's....and by the way, Goldman Sachs spreads misinformation, although with our uneducated population, it's not that difficult to do.

[Diane Tucker - Huffpost Blogger]

Heal57: There's no shortage of misinformation out there, that's for sure.

[RoloTomassi]

Indeed, and from what I've read of your articles, YOU are a prime Wall St. apologist resource.