Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Perp Walks Instead of Bonuses
There must be a criminal investigation of the AIG debacle, and it looks as if New York's top lawman is on the case. The collusion to save this toxic company in order to salvage the rogue financiers who conspired to enrich themselves by impoverishing millions is being revealed as the greatest financial scandal in U.S. history. Instead of taking bonuses, the culprits should be taking perp walks.
I'm not just referring to the swindlers in the Financial Products Subsidiary of AIG who devised and sold those insurance policies on derivatives that brought the world economy to its knees. They do seem deserving of a special place in hell, and presumably the same divine power that according to Scripture labeled usury a high moral crime and threw the money-changers out of the temple will consider that outcome.
However, the enablers are the AIG leaders who, as New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo revealed Tuesday, signed those bonus contracts a year ago to reward the very people "principally responsible for the firm's meltdown." That's a cool $44 million divided among the top 10 shysters, even though the depth of their chicanery was well known to top management.
As Cuomo noted in a letter to Rep. Barney Frank: "The contracts shockingly contain a provision that required most individuals' bonuses to be 100% of their 2007 bonuses. Thus, in the spring of last year, AIG chose to lock in bonuses for 2008 at 2007 levels despite obvious signs that 2008 performance would be disastrous in comparison to the year before."
The lame argument that those bonus-baby employees needed to be retained in order to sort out the mess they had created was also shot down by Cuomo, who revealed after his office's initial investigation had pierced AIG's veil of secrecy that "[e]leven of the individuals who received `retention' bonuses of $1 million or more are no longer working at AIG, including one who received $4.6 million."
But the $165 million in taxpayer funds used to reward them is but a sideshow in a far larger drama of moral decay swirling around the banking bailout. It should not distract from the many billions, not paltry millions, of our dollars being diverted to reward the very folks who brought us such misery. Consider the $12.8 billion of the $170 billion that taxpayers gave AIG in bailout funds that AIG then secretly diverted to Goldman Sachs, a company that evidently has a lock on both the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve no matter which political party is in power. It was the biggest payoff among those that AIG made to a score of foreign and domestic financial giants.
The bailout is a response to a banking crisis that resulted from the radical deregulation pushed by former Goldman Sachs honcho Robert Rubin when he was President Clinton's treasury secretary. Another Goldman Sachs chairman-turned-treasury-secretary, Henry Paulson, in the Bush administration designed the trillion-dollar bank bailout that will go down as the greatest swindle in U.S. history.
It was because of Paulson that AIG was saved from bankruptcy hours after Goldman rival Lehman Brothers was allowed to go down the drain. Why that reversal of strategy in a top-secret meeting called by then New York Fed Chair Timothy Geithner, a Rubin protégé and now Barack Obama's treasury secretary? Why was Goldman's Lloyd Blankfein the only financial industry CEO in attendance? When that news leaked out, his role was defended as that of a noninvolved concerned citizen with expert knowledge, and whose firm had no direct monetary stake in the outcome.
That was a lie.
Goldman Sachs was into AIG insurance policies for at least $20 billion, which is why the firm got that $12.8 billion while Paulson was in charge. It took six months for the embarrassing facts to finally come out. The bailout program was administered by Neel Kashkari, a former Goldman Sachs VP; why are we not surprised at that?
Another pretend innocent in all this is AIG's CEO Edward M. Liddy, famed defender of the $440,000 AIG executive retreat in Monarch Beach, Calif., held on the heels of the taxpayer bailout. His actions now are defended as mistakes made by a well-intentioned outsider who decided to work for a dollar a year after Paulson appointed him head of AIG. That is just garbage.
Liddy was complicit in Goldman Sachs' role in creating this mess. As a director of Goldman Sachs, he was paid $685,770 in 2007 and would have come in for some questioning if the firm had gone down. Liddy even headed its audit committee during the five years before he resigned that seat to take over AIG in September 2008. As for his salary sacrifice, not to worry; in 2005, when he was still CEO of Allstate Insurance, he received $26.7 million in compensation.
What we have here is a rare glimpse into the workings of the billionaires' club, that elite gang of perfectly legal loan sharks who, in only the most egregious cases, will be judged as criminals-Bernard Madoff, former chairman of NASDAQ, comes to mind. These other amoral sharks, who confiscated billions from shareholders and the 401(k) accounts of innocent victims, were rewarded handsomely, rarely needing to break the laws their lobbyists had purchased.
- Posted in


19 Comments so far
Show AllBernie Madoff broke the law (Ponzi schemes being illegal on their face), but did the managers of AIG or Goldman? After decades of showering money on Congress, the wizards of Wall Street got their way, and practices that were illegal since FDR's first term were suddenly legal again. Scheer alludes to this fact in his last paragraph, but concludes before suggesting a remedy.
We could start by adopting public financing of political campaigns, so that votes on legislation are no longer a commodity to be traded on the futures market; we could then promulgate a Constitutional amendment clarifying that corporations are NOT "persons" protected by the Bill of Rights. Prosecutions of individuals under the RICO statutes, in cases where some sort of collusion could be established, should help recapture some of the taxpayers' hard-earned money, and might deter others from similar misbehavior.
All this sturm und drang over a piddling $165 million is just so much showboating, intended to lull the victims into thinking a bought-and-paid-for Congress is their avenging angel. I wish there were a way to drag Phil Gramm into a courtroom for his part in unshackling the greed monsters, but he'll probably walk away unscathed.
"I wish there were a way to drag Phil Gramm into a courtroom for his part in unshackling the greed monsters, but he'll probably walk away unscathed."
You can bet on it.
I hope a list of all getting the bonus money is put up here and all over the country. People should know who these thieves are.
"Bernie Madoff broke the law (Ponzi schemes being illegal on their face), but did the managers of AIG or Goldman?"
A good question, and seeing how the central theme of this article would involve the charging of individuals with crimes, it would have been nice to have some working idea of what exactly those crimes were.
"After decades of showering money on Congress, the wizards of Wall Street got their way, and practices that were illegal since FDR's first term were suddenly legal again."
Could someone specify rather than "allude to" what these deregulations were? Exactly? It seems central to the idea that deregulation played a role in creating the current situation. It was my understanding that rather, the markets and technologies had evolved in such a way that certain regulations that may have been reasonable to apply were never devised in the first place. Thanks in advance.
re jakenewton 10:16am
First, I never said "deregulation." That's a weasel-word meaning "decriminalization." We should never allow ourselves to be confused on this point.
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, signed into law by Bill Clinton, repealed Glass-Steagall, the Depression-era law which put a firewall between commercial banking and investment banking (this actually followed the merger of Citibank with Traveller's Insurance, which technically was illegal at the time). The Commodities Futures Modernization Act placed trading in mortgage-backed securities beyond the reach of regulators (as understaffed and underfunded as they may have been). Together they enabled the inflating of the housing bubble; the sale, bundling and re-sale of "toxic" (meaning "based on no underlying value") mortgages; and the drearily-predictable collapse that followed.
"First, I never said "deregulation.""
True, I used the term because it's prominent in the public debate.
"That's a weasel-word meaning "decriminalization." "
I don't see how, if the regulation is lifted it's now legal.
"The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, "
"Commodities Futures Modernization Act"
Thank you. Anything from GWB?
Wake up folks, financial industry deregulation during the past 30 years has decriminalized the crimes these people have committed. They have a license to steal with no expiration date.
Only financial industry re-regulation will stop the economic freefall and prevent further abuse and theft.
All this sturm und drang over a piddling $165 million is just so much showboating, intended to lull the victims into thinking a bought-and-paid-for Congress is their avenging angel.
--------------------------
Wouldn't it be nice if we had access to a few radio and t.v. stations (that use the public's airwaves) to make this very simple point to the masses.
The entire country is being massaged into a rage over a tiny $165 million.
The Fed has given away a minimum of $2 TRILLION (perhaps up to $9 TRILLION) and you don't hear one word about it.
Shouldn't we be focussing on excessive compensation in general, rather than a small group of individuals? Instead of taxing a small group of scalawags, shouldn't we raise the tax rate for everybody making obscene amounts of money?
"The contracts shockingly contain a provision that required most individuals' bonuses to be 100% of their 2007 bonuses. Thus, in the spring of last year, AIG chose to lock in bonuses for 2008 at 2007 levels despite obvious signs that 2008 performance would be disastrous in comparison to the year before."
Maybe I watch too many Godfather movies, but these "lock in" bonuses could be construed as protection money to maybe keep the King fraudsters out of jail?
The heist of the public trough continues......
Or to keep them all from spilling the beans while everyone connected made sure they got their money before the ship sank.
Wall Street, the financial services industry, Hell on Wheels, whatever you want to call it, has reached a state of totally hopeless corruption. The people who "work" in that giant scam don't give a fig if you and your family die, or I die, or if the whole country dies. They're like an army of driver ants swarming over the land, killing everything in their way and taking what they want. They will do this even to the point of destroying themselves as long as it appears there are a couple of dollars lying on the ground somewhere ahead. You cannot reform those people for the simple reason that they have no shame. They are the prime sociopathic group in this nation. AIG will tell Obama and all 300 million Americans to eat shit and die before they give back that money. The only "shovel ready project" in this country is the grave we've dug for ourselves.
Some of them are definitely self-destructive and they care not a whit whether they take down the rest of us with them. They are greed addicts, literally. They have been rewarded over and over and over again for acting in pure narrow self-interest, motivated only by greed and the lust for money, and their brains have been wired to act that way into the future just as a crack addict must buy crack or a rat must push down the bar repeatedly to get the electrical stimulation to the pleasure centers in its brain. The only question is whether we can destroy them before they destroy us and, from where I am sitting, the odds are not looking too good.
"The people who "work" in that giant scam don't give a fig if you and your family die, or I die, or if the whole country dies."
Almost like an attack on our country. Naw, that couldn't be! We've got DHS, the FBI, CIA, DoJ, DoD, Army, Navy and Marines looking out for us. Surely the Patriot Act or the National Security Agency's domestic spy program or our duly elected representatives - surely someone would have kept us safe from an attack more perilous than an al-Qaeda terrorist plot!
It was the same banksters for both _ 9 _ ! _ ! _ and the economic meltdown.
Whoever believes in "an al-Qaeda terrorist plot", might as well be talking about the boogyman -- with equal chances of incarceration of the guilty.
Namaste
This isn't just a scandal. It's a two-party coup.
-30-
Soooo...... we're actually going to pay people who swindled us, even more money to tell us how they did it?
I hope my mechanic doesn't find out about this.
And, on top of all of this, let's not forget that the entire "bailout" scheme revolves around this:
"Our" government is giving our money to the very thieves who already stole all of our money, so that said thieves can then loan us back our money at a huge profit.
Think about it - I steal $100 from you, which I lose; I then demand another $100 because if I fail, I'm taking half the world out with me; then I loan you back your $100 at 30%; if you pay me back, you're out $230; if you don't, you're out $200, I get your car and house, and then I get your neighbor to cover the $230, because he doesn't want me to take out half the world, either.
Rinse, repeat...