More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Richard (RJ) Eskow

Richard (RJ) Eskow

Posted: June 1, 2010 07:43 PM

Law and Order: AIG

What's Your Reaction:

President Obama's Department of Justice announced last week that there would be no indictments in the collapse of AIG, an event which led to a worldwide economic collapse and cost the American taxpayer trillions. As someone who once worked for AIG I was shocked, but apparently that's how this mystery ends: Hundreds of millions of victims, smoking guns in every room, and not a perp to be found anywhere.

Yves Smith is disappointed that PriceWaterhouseCoopers, the auditors who signed off on AIG's financial claims despite mounds of disturbing evidence, escaped serious legal scrutiny. She observes that our "Potemkin" financial reform (her word) won't remove the barriers that prosecutors face in pursuing secondary parties like auditors (although I believe the Supreme Court ruling she cited only addressed civil suits.) Not only is the auditor protected, but that allows the fraudster himself to use the defense that he kept his auditor informed - kind of like Bush and Cheney using John Yoo's legal opinion to inoculate themselves from criminal prosecution.

Here's another possible reason there won't be a prosecution: Our economy was shattered by a syndicate, a ring, a cabal at the top of the financial pyramid. To move against any one of them - AIG's Joe Cassano, the auditors, Goldman Sachs, or even the credit agencies - would trigger a chain reaction of rats turning on one another, summoning each other to testify, and spilling each other's dirty secrets in an attempt to save themselves.

Of course, that's exactly what most prosecutors want. But doing that could topple that pyramid at the top of our economy, and it looks like our leaders don't recognize that this would be a good thing. We must protect the booming stock market, whatever it takes. If it means leaving the con artists in power, leave 'em in power. If it mean breaking America's longstanding social contract in the name of "deficit reduction," that's okay too. (There's an irony in the fact that Great Britain's new government is under pressure to make cuts to keep its AAA rating. and that we may be next. The ratings agencies are part of the problem, and now it looks like they're controlling governments instead of the other way around.)

Was there reasonable suspicion regarding Cassano and AIG Financial Products? Let's review the record: AIG paid $80 million to settle criminal charges against Cassano's unit in 2004 when it helped PNC Financial conceal assets. AIG didn't just pay a settlement. It also signed a deferred prosecution agreement with the Justice Department leaving it open to criminal prosecution if it misbehaved again. (There's a good timeline here.)

After that Cassano kept reassuring the public - and investors - that his products were safe throughout 2007. (It's illegal to mislead investors.) Cassano fought the independent auditor who was brought in to watch his books, preventing him from looking at certain critical books of business and eventually driving him to resign. Cassano insisted that PwC stay out of his way when he prepared for a presentation to investors in December 2007 (hello, Securities and Exchange Commission!)

Then, of course, all hell broke loose. With that history, why didn't Cassano face trial? As the Wall Street Journal reports, "prosecutors obtained information about Mr. Cassano's disclosures to AIG senior executives and AIG's outside auditor, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. That changed the course of the investigation, these people said." So he stonewalled the outside auditor, but he shared info with the cozy inside one? Apparently a compliant auditor is even better than a Father Confessor - you're absolved when you tell him your sins, and he'll never give you "go and sin no more" nonsense.

PriceWaterhouseCoopers weren't just AIG's auditors. They were Goldman Sachs', too. That's right: they had another huge contract with the counterparty whose thirteen billion dollar claim was paid in full on the instructions of Tim Geithner's New York Federal Reserve. So PwC let two massive financial institutions engage in a highly speculative venture - one possibly misleading the other - and raised no warning flags.

Publicly traded companies are required to disclose corporate threats in their 10-K statements, which are approved by their auditors. Here's what AIG said in its 2005 statement (buried several pages into the "Risk Factors" section): "AIG's liquidity could be impaired by an inability to access capital markets or by unforeseen significant outflows of cash." (Gee, ya think?) That's about it for risks. PwC either ignored or missed the warning signs as AIG accumulated losses great enough to break the world's economy.

How have they suffered for this dismal track record? Their revenues rose 8% to $28.2 billion in 2008, and operating profits grew in the fiscal year ending June 2009. And why not? A lot of businesses enjoy the, uh, shall we say flexibility that comes with an auditor like that. Of course, there's no proof their conduct was criminal. They may have just overlooked the worst meltdown in modern financial history.

How about the ratings agencies? The warning signs were there: A plea deal on a charge of criminal fraud, ongoing negotiations with the New York Attorney General, leading economists expressing concern about the stability of the housing market. Yet remarkably (or not), leading ratings agencies S&P and Moody's were rating AIG well right up until September of 2008, when it became clear that it had already lost $18.5 billion and the worst was yet to be revealed. Until that point, S&P had given AIG's counterparty deals the top rating of A-1+, which means "obligor's capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation is (very) strong."

In 2007, well after the Spitzer investigation was underway, Best's affirmed that in its judgment AIG's creditworthiness was "superior," saying that "AIG's renewed focus on accounting integrity and future successful remediation of accounting concerns provides a level of stability."

Accounting integrity? Write your own joke, as Ed McMahon used to say. When it comes to PwC and the ratings agencies, Upton Sinclair got it right: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it."

We've already reviewed the emails and internal documents showing that ratings agencies were always selling their services to these institutions, a hopeless conflict of interest. The Franken Amendment would improve that situation significantly, but there's no guarantee it will survive the House/Senate negotiations - which should be fully transparent to the public (sign the petition to televise them here, folks.)

My own background as an AIG exec adds an extra dimension to my sense of outrage. The company was destroyed by the ratings agencies, the auditors, and Goldman Sachs (AIG's replacement CEO, Edward Liddy, served on the Goldman board). I heard horror stories about hard-working people who had nothing to do with the scandal receiving death threats or having to pull their kids out of school. Joe Cassano kept his ill-earned salary and bonuses, and for a while after he left was paid $1 million every month at Liddy's behest. PwC had a boom year, and the ratings agencies still (remarkably) have some credibility.

But a once-thriving company is dead. We've paid hundreds of billions of dollars directly, and trillions of dollars indirectly. 15 million people are out of work. The gamblers in the Wall Street casino are still placing bets, secure in the knowledge we'll cover their debts. As they said about Nicky in Casino, they "had a good system: When they won, they collected. When they lost, they told the bookies to go f**k themselves."

And now we're told that nobody's guilty. That's getting it backward. It's like Murder On the Orient Express: They all did it. But apparently we're the only ones who are going to pay for it.
_____________________________

(We'll be discussing financial reform and other critical issues with Simon Johnson, Nancy Pelosi, Alan Grayson, Robert Kuttner, Arianna Huffington, Bob Herbert, and a host of other luminaries at the Campaign For America's Future Annual Conference on June 7-9.(1) Walk-ins welcome! More info here. Come on in!)

Richard (RJ) Eskow, a consultant and writer (and former insurance/finance executive), is a Senior Fellow with the Campaign for America's Future. This post was produced as part of the Curbing Wall Street project. Richard also blogs at A Night Light.

He can be reached at "rjeskow@ourfuture.org."

Website: Eskow and Associates

(1) As they (never) taught me on Wall Street, "always be closing."

 

Follow Richard (RJ) Eskow on Twitter: www.twitter.com/rjeskow

 
 
  • Comments
  • 130
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Devaron Namsaar
04:02 PM on 06/07/2010
By now it should be obvious who has been sleeping with whom... AIG and the Federal Government are twins from different mothers. Asking the federal government to prosecute AIG is like asking the Mafia to find one of its own to be guilty. No one wants to point the finger at anyone because in truth ALL are guilty (the corrupt politicians and the equally corrupt CEO's of AIG). It appears the only persons who will pay the price for this massive crime is the innocent people who got screwed by both the AIG and the Federal government... welcome to filthy America!
I believe there are 3 groups of people who belong in jail for the long term: AIG CEO"s, several corrupt politicians,(that would be most of the Senate and most of the Representatives)... and in general, the boys at the Federal Reserve whose only thought was and is to enslave the people of America to this unwanted and unnecessary debt.
The NO prosecution for high crimes has become a trademark of the Obama Administration... no prosecution for the crimes of Bush and Chaney, no prosecution for AIG, and no prosecution for the Federal Reserve (another company that has been stealing from the American people since 1913).
08:32 AM on 06/07/2010
They are not guilty of anything because it was all legal. It is the congressmen and senators who allowed this to happen and should be held accountable...put them in jail for bribery!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mickthebiologist
Field ecologist
01:26 PM on 06/03/2010
when everyone is corupt, no one is guilty.

re-read marx and engels. there is a way, but it is not pretty.

but then again, neither is the financial and environmental holocaust now underway.

take your pick, a few million down the tubes, or a few billion.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jay Lewis
12:24 PM on 06/03/2010
I suppose if you were persistent enough you could uncover some unofficially knowledgeable media minion who could happily tell you that American business and politics has ALWAYS been corrupt, but I doubt even the most gleefully cynical hack would try to tell you that the current rampant criminality in DC has ever been matched.

Of course, with the internet making it possible to uncover virtually most transgressions instantaneously, the bouyant, bloated carrion is made more visible, closer to the surface, making such a claim hard to dispel.

Day after day, we are appalled by politicians whom we thought we had internally vetted who step forth to disappoint with dramatic incredulity. Just when we expect refreshing confirmation of wrong-doing by a major corporation, we instead get--like a fool on a blind date who has been looking at the wrong but best looking girl waiting to be identified--a denial that is both embarassingly bogus and soggy with sociopathology.

There is but one conclusion.

The politician most credibly truthful must step forward and bring us all up to speed--simply by admitting that the corporations are simply too powerful, that they are running the whole show, that our federal government will not recover because it cannot recover, and that every politician, sooner than later, is but a paid stoodge.

Were there a single politician capable of such honesty, he or she would have too be labelled a whistle-blower.
11:02 AM on 06/03/2010
this and this alone is why Obama is not a good president, until the banksters are bought to justice we are on a road to failure, I voted for him and I'm mad, for gods sake we put pot smokers in prison. . .
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Larry Kurnarsky
10:53 AM on 06/03/2010
Oligarchy. This word mean that there are rules for those at the top and there are rules for the rest of us. Society is run to benefit those at the top. The only rule they have is the deal - Thou must honor the deal. These deals are between oligarchs. Only deals between oligarchs are to be honored. Deals between consumers and an oligarchs are meant to be broken, like the deal between you and your health insurance company. At the very top are those who run the nation's financial institutions. Just below them are those in the energy sector. Below them are the giant manufacturers, particularly corporations that like, General Electric, that serve the veracious appetites of the military. The military is increasingly the government. They govern and fight wars to serve the oligarchs.

And so it descends to you and I near the bottom of the pyramid, and below us the historically super-oppressed and conquered, such as Mexican immigrants and the descendants of slaves. That is the America we live in, stripped of the patriotic prattle and the breast swelling references to the American constitutions - which is at this moment is tattered and about to be shredded and replaced with God's Protestant Bible.

In that sense this will be, indeed, a nation of laws, rules, and regulations. Rules and regulation and God's punishment for you and I. God's pro-Transnational Corporation, pro-White, pro-Oppressor, Pro-Fundementaist Christian, pro-War, law above all of us.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cosatjockomo
10:37 AM on 06/03/2010
Corporate officers enjoy individual immunity for corporate actions. What did you expect. The government wants them to keep making purely financial decisions for the best short term interest of the corporation. It's ok to act immorally, disregard public safety, disregard public welfare, ignore standing regulations to save what amounts to corporate chump change. Why did Love Canal, Bophal, the gulf leak, acid rain, the bank melt down, AIG failure, etc. all occur? Because their directors knew they would never be held accountable personally for their treacherous actions and the worst possible outcome would be some fines that also amounted to corporate chump change. We need to implement a death penalty for any corporate officers' decisions which ignores standing regulations and thereby damages the public's domain. When they believe we'll kill them for doing this, they start considering the consequences of their actions.
11:32 AM on 06/03/2010
Sorry but corporate officers do not have immunity. They can be sued for the performance (and non performance) of their duties as well as for things like sexual harassment. In the latter case the C level staff are often included in claims against those lower in the organization simply because it puts additional pressure on the company to settle.

Companies will generally provide financial support of a defense but most corporate officers also have Directors and Officers insurance because of personal costs and threats to the seizure of their assets.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Lowell Thompson
Artist, writer, recovering adman
09:33 AM on 06/03/2010
Tell it RJ!

I've always said the USA is the world's longest running, most successful pyramid scheme. And like all pyramid schemes, it's the ability of the perps to bring in a constant stream of new suckers at the bottom that keeps them at the top.

http://buythecover.com
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
fourbrrl
07:54 AM on 06/03/2010
In a nutshell...it TAKES PEOPLE OF INTEGRITY to do the right thing for EVERYONE.

American.....Integrity ??

LOL

No WONDER there's a drug DEMAND in America today !!

Sheesh
12:49 AM on 06/03/2010
Another reason they don't prosecute is prison space.

These folks lied about their projected income and borrowed money to bet that assets they bought would go up in value, knowing that - if the assets went down in value - they would not be able to pay back the loans. So if we prosecute these guys, we have to prosecute a significant proportion of the families who let their houses go into foreclosure.

Worse, the ratings agencies and auditors actions are those of many mortgage brokers and banks, so a significant proportion of them would have to be prosecuted, along with everyone at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

In short, if we prosecuted fairly, about 10-15% of America would end up in jail, and we just don't have the prison space for another 30 or 40 million bodies.
LetsHearTheTruth
"Jobless Recovery" is an oxymoron.
05:55 AM on 06/03/2010
I would definitely not try to absolve all homeowners who went into foreclosure of any responsibility. However, historically it has been the role of bankers to:deny credit to those who do not have sufficient savings and income (as well as 20% down) to reduce the risk. This historically has been a check on the natural human tendency for optimism. Remove these checks, and the repressed desire to own a home is unleashed. Also, many people have been unemployed for extended periods, and/or suffered other unexpected financial hardships, such as medical bills, leading to inability to pay. Further, the average person might be forgiven for believing the media and financial establishment's prognosis that the property values were justified. Not everyone can be expected to be wise and informed. Some people really do not have that capacity, which is a reason for regulation. Regarding the NINJA loans, many were indeed making false claims on their income, and prosecution could be considered. I would rather not live in a society which allows Washington Lobbyists to control legislation, such that the sneakiest can make laws allowing them to get rich by tricking the masses. Many people who are honest and have worked hard all their lives are being hurt badly. Stiglitz has suggested that the government could step into cases of foreclosure, assisting with payments, in exchange for a lien. If there is profit when the house is sold, the government gets it's money back with interest, so it is not rewarding irresponsibility.
LetsHearTheTruth
"Jobless Recovery" is an oxymoron.
06:27 AM on 06/03/2010
I don't think the lack of prosecution of the Wall Street banking crowd has anything to do with lack of prison space. Rather, it is because Wall Street bankers make the laws. As we write (and are distracted by the oil spill, right-vs-left emo battles over abortion, guns, gays, "terror", ideology, etc.) the banking lobby is spending more than a $1 million per DAY, to make sure that the (already too weak) financial legislation (about to be reconciled) has all it's teeth pulled. This is not a "Republican vs Democrat" issue. Wall Street owns both sides, with few exceptions.

If the Wall Street banks themselves lost money through fraud, you can bet that there would be prosecutions, and new legislation (with extremely harsh penalties) zipping through congress, and signed by our Wall Street Owned President in no time flat.

A lot of foreclosures are due to people caught in the economic and housing value "death spiral", sometimes through irresponsibility, often through misfortune.

This contrasts greatly with the case of the bankers, who have full knowledge of what they are doing, and are in near total control of our financial laws, effectively legalizing criminal behavior, and continuing to get rich on the corrupt process. This is not a moral equivalent to a guy who lost his job, and is now losing his house.
12:15 AM on 06/03/2010
When the Supreme Court votes in more freedoms for corporations, how can anyone be surprised that the DoJ is dropping any criminal investigations against AIG. What type of message is this sending to BP?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dsws
No owning ideas. Limit only commercial use.
11:11 PM on 06/02/2010
Was it actually illegal? I had the impression that they had bought themselves enough deregulation that they could build financial WMDs and hold the economy hostage, all without even breaking any laws.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Kurt Mundt
Interesting world we live in, eh?
10:19 PM on 06/02/2010
Why am I not surprised?
08:20 PM on 06/02/2010
Great timing on releasing this 'decision'. We are all so distracted by the oil spill, that most of us won't notice.
08:16 PM on 06/02/2010
What does anyone expect? Bush and Paulson started the 'bailout with no strings attached' mentality. Unfortunately, Obama continues it.

Whatever happened to the 'accountability' that every politician is supposed to endorse? I guess only us poor folks have to be accountable...