Blog

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

I've said this in previous posts,WHY CANT WE ALL TOGETHER FORM A CLASS ACTION SUIT, AND SUE THE SHIT OUT OF THE SEC AND THE FEDERAL GOVT....at the very least we can embarass the government in an election year....

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

"Of interest is that there was a van with a scrolling screen parked directly in front of the SABEW conference, calling attention to the Deepcapture site, and inquiring of the conference attendees (the entire financial media) whether they too were captured journalists....and yet not a peep out of anyone"

Way to go...just got to keep it "in yer face". this is such a contempible gulag situation where everyone is... silenced... to the detriment of investors.
ignorance is certainly not bliss here folks.

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

What about the fact that O'Quinn is suing in state court? Don't the states still have remedies that would circumvent this rule if it's implemented? I believe the strategy from the beginning was to go after the brokers in state court so they wouldn't have to deal with the SEC.

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

Planned economic collapse. I often wonder if naked shorting is part of a bigger ponsy game where even bonds fail to deliver.

http://groups.google.com/group/misc.invest.stocks/msg/06f296ee4dbac8a2

The United States is consuming 80% of the planet's savings rate to
finance its debt. The central banks of Germany, Japan and Saudi Arabia
are no longer the powerhouses they used to be. Their reserves have now
been substantially depleted. They can, therefore, no longer hide the
fact that they own a certain number, likely in the trillions of
dollars, of U.S. Treasury debt that isn't being serviced, because they
can't hide it through bookkeeping tricks anymore because their
reserves are so depleted.

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

What's really maddening is that if there is a collapse, then the bad guys get to cover pennies on the dollar and keep their profits. It doesn't matter that the bad guys caused the collapse.

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article4770.html

1929 all over again.

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

Bobo,

I outright stated in my comment letter on the rule that the it seems to be a proactive measure to shield broker dealers from future litigation. Guess O'Quinn and company will just have to go after the hedgies instead.

Do you think the brokers will sette the NFI/OSTK suits before or after the rule gets passed? Is there any way the rule can be blocked from being passed?

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

Bobo thank you for this informative piece, however I think they closed the barn door after the cattle left. I hope they all fry for what they have done and that the record 38 bill in bonuses serves them well "Greed is NOT good" and what goes around comes around. Remember REFCO.

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

Strangely enough thee youtube video with the deepcapture truck at the SABEW conferenceis not working. I am being paranoid or what? I tried other videos and this is the only one NOT working. Someone else please try, thanks.

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

Here is a great story that should make all of us cringe with fear, revulsion, disbelief and a feeling of supreme impotence...if there is even a remote chance that Altomare's story is true, most of us will have to think seriously whether we are not one among those thousands of Nazi non-sympathizers who just sat silently on the side watching a great horror unfold...

The Finger...(presumably by Chris Gunderson, ex-General Counsel of Universal Express, Inc.)

Would You Have Given The Gestapo The Finger?

I have often wondered what I would have done in the wake of the 1939-1945 period in Europe?

Whether I had been Jewish or Christian, would I have had the reckless abandon, courage or integrity to open my window while I watched powerful, maybe perceived all-powerful governmental forces carrying furniture and valuables away from my neighbors’ homes and then the actual shipping away of children, aged, women and men in silent sadness.

They weren’t after me, and I had read the carefully placed propaganda that said they were bad, they were dishonest, and they deserved their treatment.

Would I have said anything?

Would I have felt and not said?

Would I have not felt?

Fortunately, I and others have convinced ourselves that our society is beyond that behavior.

There are rules now to prevent seizure.

There are rules now to prevent planted stories against innocents.

We have a legal judiciary which would prevent unchecked governmental abuses.

Or do we?

Recently I have followed an interesting parallel which has either exposed a repeat societal performance, or we have uncovered someone who would have given the Gestapo the finger, and maybe helped us to avoid a past blight which still sits on mankind’s soul.

It is important to note that these ethnic cleansings and genocides continue, as I write this expose; I only use 1939 because of its clarity of comparison to my discovered injustice.

During the past ten years a developing company and an innovative and quite charismatic CEO demonstrated good old American “know-how” and built a pretty interesting and well followed public company.

Sales and new subsidiaries were growing in important businesses to the Nation to where tens of thousands of shareholders believed passionately in its success and employees grew to 89 from its inception of only two.

All was progressing and then the “book burning occurred.”

This company was attacked ten years before we all read about Bear Stearns just recently by what is today called naked short selling (NSS).

To simplify for this story, NSS is the counterfeiting of a public security with no intention of ever buying and delivering that stock.

It results in more shares trading than are owned or issued and the stock price devalues and most often the company goes out of business.

Those that have sold what they did not own now pocket the profit.

They do not even have to cover their sale because the company is out of business and no taxes are paid on the pure profit made by the counterfeiters.

Such companies are normally “attacked” by lies on the internet as well.

That “book burning” was that this company was viciously nakedly shorted and that they took their case to Florida courts.

They proved the existence of NSS to two Florida juries and were awarded approximately $700,000,000 USD.

How could that be the book burning one might ask?

Frankly, I felt the same way, as I began investigating the story.

The Agency (the SEC) in charge of protecting the sanctity of our trading system denied the existence of NSS and immediately began to harass this whistleblower with subpoenas and actual business interference as well as, proven now, planted stories indicating their “suspicions.”

The company sued the SEC, and the SEC after almost 14 years of allowing the company to file its quarterly and annual reports “suddenly” felt that for the entire period of time the company had not been functioning properly.

The company knows it did function properly, and provided the proof.

Nevertheless, the company welcomed a jury of Americans to examine the real reason for and the veracity of the SEC’ claims.

In fact, its shareholders to this day support the activities of the company.

However, and this is where we finally get to 1939.

A judge ruled no trial.

A judge ruled no court hearing.

We fine you $30,000,000.

There is no stay while you appeal to a higher level of court and I want everyone to step down immediately.

Pretty draconian?

Then the Agency seized, yes seized, control and shut down the Company in days.

The Agency liquidated the company for pennies (to friends?).

Shredded the Company’s documents

It seized that $700,000,000 judgment.

It cancelled the appeal case by the company against the decision.

Three weeks ago, the Agency sent to a Manhattan jail the CEO for “civil” contempt of not being able to pay a fine which “exceeded” the CEO’s total salary earned over the past 14 years.

Let’s see if I can sum up the facts. Incarcerated, assets seized, planted stories placed to defend the government’s actions, and who opens their window to question why?

Interesting enough, this company’s leader has sold all of his personal assets to fund an appeal of this unconstitutional decision for his shareholders and himself.

Interestingly enough, he still sits in solitary confinement for 24 hours a day for almost three weeks, unable to make or receive phone calls, unable to send or receive messages to or from his family, unable to have family or friends visit, unable to read any newspapers or books, denied recreation and handcuffed and shackled whenever he is moved within the prison.

All this, without any crime having been committed.

Interestingly enough, over 30,000 shareholders want to know how the SEC can shut down and ruin their investments when the Company was growing at 200% per quarter?

Interestingly enough, the difference in years between 2008 and 1939 is the approximate age of this American patriot and former marine, who opened the window and told us, starting about ten years ago, about NSS.

The Agency now admits that NSS exists.

The Wall Street Journal recently said it costs Americans 3 Billion dollars a day.

Other governmental agencies and Congress are questioning the Agency’s tactics.

His reward?

None, unless the Appellate Court reverses the destruction of a company and the investments of its shareholders-without any hearing or trial.

None, unless you open your window and remember what courage it takes to stand up to injustice no matter what the cost when you see or hear about it.

The man is a future leader in this Country.

His name is Richard Altomare.

His Company was (or is) Universal Express.

The following web address may enhance or inflame your “Never Again” beliefs.

http://www.usxp.com/nss/richardaltomarenss.wmv

“Standing up for a belief greater than yourself, and having the courage to sacrifice everything so that others may one day benefit.”

That’s a hero in any man’s book.

So as the “Gestapo” walks by – what will you do?

The loss of a 14-year, growing and developing company without any hearing or trial. Incarceration without a crime.

Where’s your finger?

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

Sean.... the youtube worked fine for me. As an alternative, try using this direct link to the video clip:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=4JYVXfBG5Ak

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

What if Patrick says he isn't going to settle? Will there be an enforced settlement through judicial influence?

Can't Patrick prove to a fair??? judge that this data has to hit the light of day?

Paul

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

"My hunch is that they already have decided to do so, and now they are trying to figure out how to cut Patrick out of the decision making process, so the facts can be buried before he gets subpoenaed by curious law enforcement agencies."

I haven't seen the actual pleadings in the case. Is Patrick a plaintiff individually, or only as an officer of OSTK? I have represented several plaintiffs who have gone to court "on principle". One of my stock replies to such people is that they are prefectly entitled to litigate a matter on principle, but "principle" is often a very expensive commodity. I think that Patrick is their worst nightmare. If he is a plaintiff in his personal capacity, he has made it clear what his intentions are, and that the expense of NOT litigating appear to him to outweigh the cost of the fight. Good luck to them in finding a monetary settlement offer that he would likely accept (I presume this from having read DeepCapture etc, and trusting that he is a man of his word. Lord knows he's walked the walk more than anybody...) I echo your sentiment that they are likely looking frantically for a way to keep settlement authority out of his control. Unfortunately, as has been stated elsewhere, these are some very bad people, and he has been warned to watch his back before.

I truly hope that he is able to get this public in a way that even the captured media cannot ignore. Painful as it will be (can what's left of our financial system recover from a trauma of this magnitude) "justice" if nothing else requires that the light of day chase these scum back under their rocks. Best to Patrick, and thanks to you for your efforts these years, which I've followed via NFI.

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

Well Bobo, if your theory about the brokers feeling compelled to settle is true I would think a settlement woud have to happen soon as all CNS data requested by OSTK in discovery is due by May 31st and non-CNS data by June 30th. Might this be the reason we've seen the recent jump in OSTK shares?

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

Perhaps the reason we are seeing the rise in the price of OSTK, is because the defendants want to show that there was no real harm done in the end Or that they're not going to do it anymore - please settle the suit.

As to state courts, that is a very successful way to go after the prime brokers and stop NSS. In the past, when these state lawsuits failed due to the defendants invoking federal law,the entire suit was not based on exclusive state jurisdiction issues - like redistributing voting rights or failing to hold securities in forms requested - like as physical certificates.

Those lawsuits also always sought monetary damages - which have to be proven in addition to everything else. The SRO targeted was also the DTCC - which is not the causing factor. I think there was a lack of full awareness, including by me, on how the pieces of jurisdiction and law came together. It was also on the day when we were just discovering how FTDs came about. Those were the early days.

We're much better prepared now. Just look at the NFI/OSTK suits.

Another thing that has never been done in state court is suing on the basis that the brokers are not registering their FTRs, IOUs, ETC that hey are holing in lieu of the real securities - as required per STATE laws and with the states.

Why? Because only securities exempt from Section 18 of the 1934 Securities Exchange Act do not have to register with the states. If they do not fit the exemption, the states require them to be registered with the states and there is nothing the SEC can do to require otherwise - as on all of these state jurisdiction issues
http://www.law.uc.edu/CCL/33Act/sec18.html

So we can sue for injunctions as a Non Profit in NIPC and would not have to prove any monetary damages.

Now the other obvious targets (to me) that have not yet been defendants in any serious lawsuits regarding NSS as far as I know, are FINRA and CBOE.

These SROs are obligated to enforce all securities laws and police their members. That was part of the deal for inventing the SRO system in securities regulation in the first place. But with so many federal and state laws being ignored and violated, they are a natural target. They're next in line.

Matter of fact, why not file simultaneous lawsuits in state court against FINRA and CBOE covering state jurisdiction issues like securities voting, securities form and securities registration and another against them in federal court on federal issues?

- SROs are not enforcing their own rules
- SROs are not enforcing federal laws and SEC rules
- SROs are not enforcing state laws

The SROs are next in line.................

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

Prices are being set by supply and demand of contracts, rather than real commodities. Kind of like how company share prices are set by supply and demand of chits rather than real shares.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-traders21-2008may21,0,2916861.story

"The American people are about to take out pitchforks" because of the cost of groceries and gasoline, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) said during a Senate hearing on whether commodities are being pushed higher by investors' high-stakes bets that prices will keep going up. Given the uproar from consumers, McCaskill warned an official from the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, "if you don't do something, Congress will."

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

http://investorprotectioncoalition.org/CurrentIssues.html

Check out the analysis on the proposed rule. Bobo is right. Thank God we sent in a comment letter on time stating these issues that Bobo raises - now we could petition that rule based on what we told them, should it come to that.

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

Anyone keeping an eye on OSTK!?? LOL!!I amGo Patrick. I think I can see them sweat!!!

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

The plaintiffs would need to accept a settlement. In Patrick's case, I would expect him to require disclosure of the information to accept a settlement.

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

"They correctly believe that they are going to get cored a new one once the OSTK and NFI suits move to discovery, which will take place within the next few months, and they want to ensure that never happens again."

Bob, what NFI suit are you talking about?

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

I'm not so sure the plantiffs would need to accept the settlement. O'Quinn took the NFI/OSTK cases on contingency. They are spending their own money on the case so I think the ultimate decision would be theirs. How could they allow the plantiffs to accept an offer if it didn't cover their costs?

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

In light of the fact that Masters appeared before Congress today and in a vague way put the blame on the hedge fund and derivative specialists in regards to the inflated cost of oil I feel that public sentiment towards the whole investment community is or will be shifting negative quite soon. As I have stated before, until Joe six pack feels the impact of collusive Wall St. behavior in his wallet he will not give a rats ass about NSS and all other schemes, because they are over his or her head. When they can't drive without taking out a loan this will get their attention, BIG TIME, as it will feed on itself. Eventually the media will start reporting on all of the ongoing cases because there will be an audience just like the O.J. case as they will realize that their self worth is in jeapordy. Then there will be a book explaining and detailing the whole scam as seen from the outset and detailed meticulously. At this point a settlement means poop. I venture to say there are a couple of chapters that are not yet history, but remember that I requested my copy (signed) years ago. Only you can really write it and be accurate and honest. Best to you.

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

VALUEINVESTOR.....I agree with your post..so what is Altomares strategy..to sit in jail and rot until the appeal..or is there some other alternative....Thanks for your posts......

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

In light of this, is it possible that other companies should file suits before any rule comes into effect?

TIA as I, along with many others are just getting too tired to keep up.

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

The whole subprime disaster was caused by a computer bug.

http://tinyurl.com/6mebq9

Ya right.

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

BTW, Patrick Byrne will be interviewed by Terry Gilberg of station KFYI in Phoenix this Saturday (5/24) around 8 pm PDT. The topic? Patrick, Wall Street and naked shorting. This interviewer knows the score and wants to spread the word. Tune in and spread the word!

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

Is it just me alone, but I get the feeling some really worst news (not bad, bad is already out) is about to be released into the market? It think the tsuami is upon us for real this time and the PPT is out of bullets to stop it.

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

stryker-ny...as far as I understand the incarceration of Altomare for non-payment of a fine has been appealed but the appeal has not yet been heard...also, the SEC was supposed to have a forensic expert go over the evidence provided by Altomare's lawyer last friday and see if there was anything there that was doctored or incomplete and did not support Altomare's contention that he could not afford to pay any more than he did, but the SEC requested additional time for this...if the forensic expert does not find any evidence of missing or doctored financial records, etc. then they have to let the man go...the fact that this man is in a maximum security jail for non-payment of a securities-related fine that in itself is being contested in the 2nd circuit court of appeals is quite telling...unless I am missing something, this reeks of a Gulag...

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

Looks like SIFMA smells the BS the SEC is spewing:
http://sec.gov/comments/s7-08-08/s70808-467.pdf

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

When SIFMA says that 99% BY DOLLAR VALUE settle, you need to keep in mind they are including debt securities and 99% of securities is debt. Government debt dwarfs share trading.

Why would someone introduce the concept of failures to deliver of securities (debt + equity) when the complaint is failure to deliver of equities. Introducing debt just creates meaningless statistics.

It's almost like someone is trying to obfuscate the issue.

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

http://investigatethesec.com/drupal-5.5/node/303

SEC's Morris to leave

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

Azkole --- Plaintiffs can't absolutely block any settlement, but neither can lawyers force any settlement on them. As long as the lawyers recover their costs and get paid reasonably well, the plaintiffs can influence the settlement.

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

On May 22, SIFMA posted comments to "Comments on "Naked" Short Selling Anti-Fraud Rule"

http://sec.gov/comments/s7-08-08/s70808-467.pdf

"While SIFMA firmly supports the Commission’s attempts to address and prevent manipulative activity, SIFMA does not believe that enactment of a new anti-fraud rule that might have unintended consequences is the most efficient means available to the Commission to achieve its goals. Rather, SIFMA believes that the better approach to address concerns about sellers engaging, or attempting to engage, in naked short selling through misrepresenting information is for the Commission to act upon the proposed amendments to the 1994 Prime Broker No-Action Letter (“Prime Broker Letter”)."

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

Indictment in U.S. links to B.C. brokers
David Baines, Vancouver Sun
Published: Tuesday, April 29, 2008

In the fall of 2005, B.C. securities regulators cranked up the heat on Vancouver brokerage firms that were acting as conduits for illicit stock transactions.

The B.C. Securities Commission had just completed a marathon hearing into allegations that U.S. promoters had used Pacific International Securities to manipulate the shares of U.S. over-the-counter stocks and launder the proceeds.

A decision in this important case, which was expected to set new standards on Howe Street, was pending. Brokers were waiting with baited breath. Or so we thought.

At the same time, the Investment Dealers Association of Canada was hot on the trail of Union Securities, with respect to similar allegations.

The situation was so dire that in July 2005 the IDA placed Union under third-party supervision. This would keep the firm in line. Or so we thought.

In the middle of this regulatory shakedown, three brokerage firms -- two based in Vancouver and one in Toronto -- sold $32 million worth of allegedly fraudulent OTC stock at the behest of their crooked clients, then dispersed the proceeds to accounts in offshore tax and secrecy havens, according to an indictment handed down by a North Carolina grand jury last week.

Shockingly, one of those firms was identified as Union Securities, which during that very period was operating under the third-party supervision of Grant Thornton LLP.

The other Vancouver firm was Global Securities, which, under the leadership of chairman Art Smolensky and president Doug Garrod. The third firm is Blackmont Capital, a Toronto brokerage that also has an affection for OTC stock.

According to the indictment, Montreal promoter Bryan Kos conspired with U.S. spam king Jeremy Jaynes and convicted U.S. felon David Hagen to manipulate the shares of GTX Global Corp. and several other companies quoted on the "pink sheets" in the United States.

The indictment alleges that in April 2005, they delivered millions of GTX shares into a half-dozen offshore accounts, transferred those shares into accounts set up by offshore companies at Union, Global and Blackmont, then dumped the shares into the market.

"Approximately six million shares were sold from the brokerage accounts at Global Securities, Union Securities and Blackmont Capital for proceeds of approximately $32 million," the indictment alleges. "Proceeds of the fraudulent scheme were then further wired to and laundered through various foreign and domestic financial institutions," including First Caribbean International Bank in the Bahamas, Hellenic Bank in Cyprus, and First Curacao International Bank in the Netherland Antilles.

The indictment cites specific transactions. For example, on Dec. 2, 2005, the conspirators are said to have caused $1.2 million to be wired from an account at Global Securities in the name of Walcott Indies (an Anguilla-registered company) to an account at First Caribbean in the name of Montague Securities (a Bahamian investment advisory firm).

And on Nov. 21, 2005, $70,100 was similarly wired from an account at Union Securities in the name of Toussaint Liberte SA (another Anguilla-registered company) to First Caribbean

My Lord, if brokers have any responsibility to screen out suspicious activity (which they certainly do under existing "gatekeeper" rules), then the type of transactions referenced in the indictment should be at the top of the list.

Consider also that Union and its principals (brothers Rex, Norm and John Thompson) were already under investigation by the IDA and BCSC for breaching their gatekeeper roles, and under third-party supervision to ensure they didn't commit any more breaches.

In April 2006 -- several months after the alleged GTX transactions -- Union and the Thompson brothers admitted to a host of trading infractions and compliance breaches, and agreed to pay a total of $1,775,000 in penalties.

The settlements cited a series of specific breaches, but the GTX transactions were not among them. That raises the question: If the GTX allegations are proven, will the IDA and the BCSC reopen its case against Union?

"I'm not sure whether we knew about this situation," said Warren Funt, the IDA's vice-president of member regulation for Western Canada, referring to the GTX transactions. "If we didn't know about it, I think we could take follow-up action."

Lang Evans, the BCSC's head of enforcement, wasn't sure either. But he was very annoyed to hear that firms under his watch have once again been alleged to be involved in this sort of dirty business.

"I'm not pleased to see reference to this sort of activity coming from B.C. again. We are committed to getting rid of this sort of activity," he said.

He noted that the commission is developing a new set of rules for brokers who trade OTC stock. They will, for example, be prohibited from accepting delivery of OTC stock until that delivery is approved by a designated compliance person. And they won't be allowed to trade that stock until they know who the beneficial owners are. The idea is to stop illicit dealing before it gets started.

One thing is clear: the commission can't assume that these brokerage firms will do the right thing on their own. Just last year, BCSC investigators discovered that seven Vancouver brokerage firms were trading millions of shares of grotty OTC companies, some of which were being touted by spam, for a Liechtenstein bank called Hypo Alpe-Adria Bank without knowing who the beneficial owners were.

Those firms were Union, Blackmont, Wolverton Securities, Research Capital, Canaccord Capital, Haywood Securities, and Gateway Securities.

When the investigators asked bank officials who owned the stock, they refused to say, citing Liechtenstein confidentiality laws. So BCSC enforcement staff took the matter to a hearing. A decision is pending.

A favourable decision will help, but I have always maintained that, if B.C. regulators really want to get the message across, they will have to shut down a few brokerage firms. After reading the latest grand jury indictment, I am more convinced than ever.

dbaines@png.canwest.com

© The Vancouver Sun 2008

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

More icening on the cake or just fluff, pretend investigations?

SEC reportedly examining Bear Stearns trading recordsFont size: A | A | A9:40 AM ET 5/28/08 | Marketwatch
RELATED QUOTES


4:03 PM ET 5/27/08
Symbol Last % Chg
BSC 9.46 0.00%
JPM 43.01 0.00%
GS 173.92 0.00%
Quotes delayed at least 15 minutes

NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- Securities regulators investigating the fall of Bear Stearns Cos. are examining documents provided by the firm that detail how trading partners cut exposure ahead of its collapse, the Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday.

Investigators are looking for any signs of whether improper manipulation or coordination contributed to the demise of Bear Stearns (BSC), according to unnamed sources familiar with the situation cited in the report.

The probe is focused on credit-default swaps, financial contracts in which one side pays another to assume the risk that a bond or loan will go bad.

The newspaper said its own review of the records did not suggest any improper trading activity in the weeks before J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. (JPM) agreed to buy the Manhattan firm with support from the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve of New York.

The trades drawing scrutiny were made by Paulson & Co., Citadel Investment Group and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS), according to the report. See full story at WSJ.com.

The newspaper also said that in the three weeks before the company's downfall, those firms closed out about 400 trades in which Bear Stearns was the counterparty. The report also said regulators asked Bear Stearns to highlight anything they found unusual in the documentation of those trades.

Credit-default-swap trades swelled to a volume 10 to 20 times higher than normal in the two weeks before Bear Stearns' implosion, a counterparty risk analyst told the paper.

Representatives from the SEC, Bear Stearns, Goldman, Citadel and Paulson declined to comment, according to the Journal.

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

Things seem to be heating up, huh?

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/lawsuit-filed-against-major-financial/story.aspx?guid={57B221F6-C1D5-4845-9E44-93806619A8C0}&dist=msr_38

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

http://www.247wallst.com/2008/05/taser-going-aft.html

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

What will it take to bring the SEC to the Supreme Court and compel them to enforce Federal law ? Or, are "we" waiting for a new administration so the current administration cannot use executive orders and pardon everyone.

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

What will it take to bring the SEC to the Supreme Court and compel them to enforce Federal law ? Or, are "we" waiting for a new administration so the current administration cannot use executive orders and pardon everyone.

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

What will it take to bring the SEC to the Supreme Court and compel them to enforce Federal law ? Or, are "we" waiting for a new administration so the current administration cannot use executive orders and pardon everyone.

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

Would or could someone kindly instruct me how to locate the Taser Lawsuit against the Prime Brokers as of May 28th on either Google or Wikipedia(sp)? I can't seem to locate it on either site. Thanks

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

Where money comes from.

http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/730

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

From a messageboard. a must listen, the word is getting out.

The EXPOSURE of

"The Crime of The Century" persists and continues to grow daily.

Keep Your Ears and Eyes "Pinned"!!

Much Much more to follow!!

Some weekend listening.

Enjoy.


http://www.netcastdaily.com/broadcast/fsn2008-0531-3b.mp3


Protect and Govern Thyself!!

Got Gold/$ilver/Hard A$$et$?

Got CMKX? :-)

Have a Wonderful Sunday Evening!!!!


4ND

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

There is a major violation of all kinds of constitutional rights going on right under our very noses, and no one wants to talk about it !!! instead, in my humble opinion, we conveniently choose to dabble in affairs that are much too big for most of us (except Patrick and a few others), content to express our unending frustration at how powerless and impotent we are to do anything about it...the dabblers want to handle the entire juggernaut, rather than chip away at the edges…everybody is avoiding Richard Altomare and USXP shareholders like the plague...what a pity that even on a blog dedicated to address the damage, or even the alleged damage, brought about by rampant naked shorting of a BB company, hardly any one wants to involve himself/herself with this living, breathing subject…this even as the company's CEO, an outspoken whistleblower on NSS no matter how you look at it, and his shareholders are being openly raped by Judge Lynch and the NY Federal Courts in broad daylight...I am sorry, but in my humble opinion, most here want to pay only lip service to the righting of issues much bigger than they are equipped to handle, against forces much bigger than they can ever hope to fight

I understand the reluctance by many to jump and give Mr. Altomare of USXP the green light...to the lay man it certainly appears like he may have bent the truth from time to time and exaggerated things about the company's progress, funding prospects, etc. (I think the latter was to attempt and trap the shorts, which succeeded partly a few times)...but for God's sake, guys, listen to your own advice for a change !!! The issue of alleged naked shorting in USXP, the issue of this company not being allowed to proceed to a jury trial even after being promised by the SEC that it would not object to a jury trial, a Federal jury trial being the only method available to force the SEC's hand to open its books to clear these allegations, the issue of an American citizen being put behind bars in solitary confinement now for over a month for non-payment of a fine in a civil case, without any evidence offered by the judge challenging the accused of non-payment, the issue of the court’s charge that shares were issued illegally by the company (most after the SEC countersued the company !!!), a charge that was appealed in the 2nd circuit and the incarceration happened even as the court prepares to hear it, all this has nothing to do with a man's personal character, no matter what your own superior psychological skills are telling you...separate the wheat from the chaff and please listen to your own advice from time to time…

If Altomare is right, and it certainly looks that way to many of us shareholders, most of you (and many of us) will have to hide in shame much like those Germans who looked the other way as the Nazis carried out their slaughter...I understand it is not a comparison to be made in vain, for this was mankind's most serious blemish of the previous century, but the point has to be driven home...

Wake up and do your own investigations into this case...learn about a real case right under our very noses rather than what who will do about Bear Stearn's untimely demise...leave that to the big boys…take care of the little guys and the big picture will right itself…

Here is a message from Richard Alto mare after 31 days in Solitary Confinement on a "civil" contempt, all while he is allowed no telephone calls to be received or made, no family visits, no writing materials, no books or reading materials, no newspapers, radio or tv, no contacts with other persons.


Dear .....

There are some personal issues that need to be briefly expressed so one can understand the full impact of solitary incarceration and the moral issues behind this particular draconian decision, made by this "appointed for life" man with more hubris than a judge should possess.

The facts of this case is the Judge refused a trial to hear the full facts of this case and fined me almost $4,000,000 (more than I earned in the 17 years of developing and building the Company), and he closed the Company down (17 year public company with over 30,000 worldwide shareholders) and ruled that I could not work as an officer in a public company for life!

All without a trial, all where we feel we were correct in our actions.

Nevertheless, I have been placed in jail because after mugging me and my family, he's angry I don't have the resources to pay his ridiculous and unfounded fine.

Let's forget about all that for a minute.

How do I pay basic bills while I am in here?

How do I find a source of income while I am in here?

What does my family do to survive?

What would others do in my place?

As my wife cries due to creditors, and I am not there to "start over" when we have appealed his entire "finding."

By the way, if a higher court, as expected, rules that we should have had a jury trial (8th Amendment to the Constitution) every fine, every action, every ruling, go away!

So let's sum up.

When I win, why was I here?

When we win, where is our wonderful developing Company?

When we win, who pays the shareholders?

When we win in the higher court, who pays? The SEC? The Government? The Court of Claims? The Counterfeiters? The Hedge Funds?

Oh, remember that this all started when our Company won $700,000,000 judgments proving that the SEC had not prevented trading violations called naked short selling.

Who seized the judgments that we won? Well, the same governmental agency that destroyed a growing public company.

Yes, you are right, the SEC seized the $700,000,000 - the same agency we sued to pay!

Our Company, was $46 Million Dollars in debt when I took over in 1994. In late 2007 the Company was virtually debt free, with 5 new American industries, and was growing at 200% per quarter.

I have been working since 14 years of age.

Only because I questioned financial scandal, agency coverup and tried to protect our Company, have I temporarily been banned from working in America.

These are some of the "pangs" of outrage I feel while I sit here without having committed a crime, in debtors prison (not Constitutional either).

And when all is corrected, that Judge says, "OOOPS" and remains appointed for life?

Well, I guess this judge knows something about the economy and American work habits that are still hidden from me.

Please assure our shareholders, on my behalf, that we shall prevail.

Also, please assure them that I will not be broken.
Best,
Richard

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

http://tinyurl.com/3p6v4v

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

Attorney Weiss gets prison in kickback scheme
By GREG RISLING,
AP
Posted: 2008-06-02 15:16:46
LOS ANGELES (AP) - Melvyn Weiss, the co-founder of a law firm known for securities class-action suits, was sentenced Monday to 30 months in prison for his role in a lucrative lawsuit kickback scheme targeting some of the largest corporations in the nation.

U.S. District Judge John F. Walter also ordered Weiss, 72, to pay $9.7 million in forfeitures and $250,000 in fines.

In a prepared statement read before sentencing, Weiss apologized for his "wrongful conduct" and described his conviction as a fall from grace.

"I promise you my contrition is profound and genuine," he said.

Weiss pleaded guilty to a racketeering conspiracy charge in April as part of an agreement with prosecutors.

Prosecutors had asked for a 33-month sentence. Weiss and his attorneys had sought a reduced sentence.

Authorities said the New York-based law firm made about $250 million over two decades by filing legal actions on behalf of professional plaintiffs who received $11.3 million in kickbacks.

The firm dominated the industry in securities class-action lawsuits, which involve shareholders who claim they suffered losses because executives misled them about a company's financial condition.

The kickback scheme allowed attorneys at the firm then known as Milberg Weiss to be among the first to file litigation and secure the lucrative position as lead plaintiffs' counsel, according to court documents.

The lawsuits targeted companies such as AT&T Inc., Lucent, WorldCom, Microsoft Corp. and Prudential Insurance.

A seven-year investigation has resulted in guilty pleas by three of Weiss' former partners.

There are two defendants remaining in the case - the firm itself, now known as Milberg LLP, and attorney Paul T. Selzer. Trials for those defendants are scheduled in August.

In court papers filed on Weiss' behalf, attorneys said their client is considered by many as "one of the most extraordinary men of this generation."

The filing also included dozens of letters from Weiss supporters.



http://money.aol.com/news/articles/_a/attorney-weiss-gets-prison-in-kickback/n20080602151609990011

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

Manipulation?

Found this link on another board. Go to the 28th minute mark and start listening. Very interesting to say the least.

http://www.netcastdaily.com/broadcast/fsn2008-0524-3a.mp3

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/apr/19/subprimecrisis.useconomy

Is it just me or I am the only one making the connection that this man had to have had insider information to make this kind of money(3.7 billion in salary alone) during the SubCrime disaster, and now he his being investigated by the SEC in the Bear Stearns fiasco. Coincidence..I think not. Citadel hedge Fund and our prime broker extraodinare(sp) is also been mentioned as part of the investigation that will probably go no where since our Corrupt and captured SEC is doing the "Investigation". a man makes 3.7 bil and nobody investigates him, that alone says it all to me.

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

Bobo,

Now that the plantiffs attorneys have the first round of discovery material for NFI/OSTK lawsuits and the order of confidentiality is in place, what do you think are the next moves by the defendants? The data is in the hands of the "good guys" but it appears Patrick isn't allowed to view the data. Is it safe to say the defendants aren't looking to settle since they turned over the CNS data?

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

Please read and disseminate(sp)

http://www.i-newswire.com/goprint177313.html

Re: New SEC Rule Should Be Titled, "No More Suing The Prime Brokers" Rule...

Let me try again!!!!! Maybe you'll post this comment this time???

Pretty funny that while you NSS whackos castigate Weiss for his Blog, he allows totally llonie bgaholders like Someshwar and Kalantzis (and the criminal CHECK MATE) to post comments, no matter how nasty or nucking futs, yet you and the Bobo Baloney Brigade CENSOR this Blog.

You guys are NOT ONLY Lying Loons, you are also Cowards. History will bury you Patch, Burrell, Byrne et al in your own voluminous bullshit!

Freedom of Speech? Yeah, for people making money off innocent and gullible investors. But not for those who espouse the TRUTH, eh? Post this coward!! It will show up on the boards to prove your dishonesty!!

Speaking of 1,000 companies destroyed by NSS...