TOPICS

The Bush Administration sure had a knack for letting criminals get away with it, didn't they? They failed to stop 9/11, never caught bin Laden, and now we're learning about the total incompetence of the SEC in responding to Bernie Madoff's Ponzi scheme.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission repeatedly missed chances to catch Bernard Madoff’s $65 billion fraud over 16 years by assigning inexperienced investigators and accepting “implausible” explanations after catching him in lies, the agency’s internal watchdog said.

At least six warnings from sources including a money manager, a “respected hedge-fund manager” and a firm that studied Madoff’s business failed to spur a “thorough and competent” probe, Inspector General H. David Kotz wrote in a summary of a report released today. Madoff, in an interview with Kotz, said even he “was astonished” when investigators failed to check trading records that would have exposed his scam.

“Despite numerous credible and detailed complaints, the SEC never properly examined or investigated Madoff’s trading and never took the necessary, but basic, steps to determine if Madoff was operating a Ponzi scheme,” Kotz wrote.

This is not only an incredible report, it plays into a larger truth about the conservative conception of regulation as a needless bother rather than a diligent effort to protect the consumer. One incredible moment, referenced above but covered in detail by Zachary Roth, shows that Madoff basically thought he was caught and the scheme had been discovered by federal regulators, only to find himself safe once again.

The agency's biggest screw up, says the summary, was the fact that examiners never verified Madoff's trading through an independent third party.

The details of that failure are more astonishing still. Madoff at one point told examiners that all his trades were cleared through his account at the Depository Trust Company (DTC), a clearing agency -- and he gave the examiners his DTC account number. At that point, Madoff told Kotz in an interview, "I thought it was the end game, over. Monday morning they'll call DTC and this will be over." Amazingly, the SEC never followed up with DTC. Madoff said he was "astonished."

The summary almost makes clear that the SEC's right hand didn't know what the left was doing. It notes with astonishment that at one point, two Madoff examinations were going on at the same time within the agency, without either being aware of the other. It was Madoff himself who informed one team of the other's existence [...]

The final, failed Madoff investigation of 2006 -- triggered by a detailed Markopolos complaint -- was perhaps the most egregious. According to the summary, most of the investigative work was done by a staff attorney "who recently graduated from law school and only joined the SEC nineteen months before she was given the Madoff investigation. She had never previously been the lead staff attorney on any investigation, and had been involved in very few investigations overall. The Madoff assignment was also her first real exposure to broker-dealer issues."

According to the summary, that inexperience helps explain why, when Madoff told the examiners that he got such unprecedentedly good return simply because he had a good "feel" for the market, they took that nonsensical explanation at face value.

Bush's SEC didn't bother to check up on Madoff's dealings, and they took his explanations as good enough for them, because their attitude toward regulation was "don't mess with a good thing." Indeed, the entire stock market during the Bush years was kind of operating under a false reality in its own right. Madoff was a crook, but at least an honest crook. And even he couldn't get caught.

This is not just the story of one agency's embarrassing failure. The failure lied in the theory of government, existing to make profits for cronies and lay off the connected and the powerful. The failure to catch Madoff and the failure of conservatism are essentially the same stories.



Login or Register to post comments.

27 comments

The Bush crime family LOVES criminals.

This should be the nail in the coffin of Cox? Wasn't he the Bushie in place to allow this crap?

> SEC ... "repeatedly missed chances to catch Bernard Madoff’s $65 billion fraud over 16 years"

In the words of a great man, "the math doesn't work"!

If the SEC missed opportunities over 16 years, it sounds like the Clinton Administration was asleep at the switch (at best), as well.

"FUZZY!"

Where did the writer study grammar, Regent University?
The failure LAY.
Like Ken.

Where did you get you manners, the RNC.

get us to believe they are not the "crooks" and "liars" they really are, but WE KNOW BETTER!

The second lead paragraph begins with 'This is not only an incredible report...' Really? Incredible you say? It lacks credibility? Then why are you reporting on it?

Christ! This word, incredible, does not belong here. Unless of course youre trying to say that the report is wrong and doesnt indicate the derelict behavior youre trying to underscore.

Proofread your stuff, people. Lose the hyperbole. Facts do not require seasoning.

....don't.

that most people don'e even realize the proper meaning or use of the word "incredible".

i too, caught the "This is not only an incredible report, it plays into a larger truth " and was puzzled

it is seemingly un- or non-credible, but if written as the lead, every explanation that follows would seem caustic, but the intended effect of exposing it unintentionally makes it "now off limits" as old Admin stuff, which sets most of us to the redline because we know

these people do whatever they want, and we let 'em

shame on us, too

and described how it was that by shaking it, and then putting it on the table, he was able know what to invest in.
One SEC regulator was astounded, "And here we thought he was using a Ouija Board like those guy's at Goldman Sachs. It's no wonder he was able to beat them. He used more modern technology."

Blaming this entirely on Bush & the republicans is a little too much. Madoff ran his Ponzi scheme for decades. The 16 year period also covers a democratic president. I do believe that the conservative fallacy that the market will police itself is a load of crap but you can't pin this entirely on Bush.

We have multiple examples of have the market needs regulation. The depression, the S&L crisis, Enron, the dot com crash, and the housing market crash are all prime examples of how de-regulation leads to greed, thievery, and the tax payers getting screwed.

I have to agree with Zak on this one!

The first thing Bush did was let Microsoft off the monopoly hook.

Everyone seems to have forgotten in all of this that the object of having power is to KEEP power. George Orwell once said"absolute power corrupts absolutely". I think this is a case in point.

As proven by the power of NO.

now imagine how many others are out there, hedge fund managers, that are still doing this but we are still not investigating.

“respected hedge-fund manager”

I wondered when in hell you'd find a respected hedge-fund manager? The word respected doesn't seem to belong with hedge-fund manager...

It's all about the money... so many people in seeming positions of power appear to be totally consumed with the almighty dollar. There's no shame, therefore there's no conscience. Pitiful and look where it's taking society... right down the toilet!

.

In a normal universe this would be the nail in the coffin for "the market will police itself" zombies. In a normal universe...

FDR put these regulations in place for a reason. Reagan, et al, took them out for a reason. It's pretty clear we need to put them back, stat.

even faster.

The goal should not be preventing a bunch of ultra wealthy people from losing $65 billion. The goal should be strong and effective, but low cost and minimally invasive anti-fraud laws. We didn't have that before, Reagan. We certainly don't have it now. And we do need smart regulation.

The whole point of a free market is the allocation of capital to finance innovation. Sometimes innovation doesn't happen with capital allocation, that's just the way it works. And when that happens, those people will lose money. Sometimes they'll even lose a lot of money. Regulations should not prevent people from losing money in what are voluntary transactions. But regulations should act as a disincentive for fraud. That should mean broad rules, consistently applied rather than micromanaged regulation which is expensive and ultimately costs businesses nothing, they merely pass it onto consumers. Which means less money available for investment and innovation.

When the indictments come, and they will, I suspect we'll find more than a few in governmental agencies were corrupt.

The 180 million dollar man and former head of NYSE, who lied to the SEC, praised by the chimp, protector of large Wall Street firms from SEC scrutiny, has successfully kept his name out of these latest Wall street criminal activities. Good job Dick!

... can be made for the "reason" the SEC with help from the Bush administration let Madoff screw his "clientele"... can anybody say anti-semitism?

BushCo and his Amen Corner love the Jews. They need as much of their blood as possible to be spilled in Israel in order to bring about the 2nd coming.

or qui bono, who benefits from his PAC contributions? Anyone on the payroll? somethings not kosher on the east side.

Bernie Madoff was a Crook it's as simple as that.However "GREED" was his greatest ally.These investors allowed themselves to be blinded by
their "Greed for Gold" " Wonderlust"!!!.Anybody who even had a slight
grip on their mental senses "MUST" have twigged that it was all far too good to be true.During the Bear Markets and also during everysingle slowdown Madoff's Ponzi Investments turned the same regular profit.Experts were ten a Penny telling all (out of Earshot of
Bernie and his Vulture like Lawyers,that there is really something wrong here).I was talking on the Internet to a Femail Investment Banker and she told me this little story.All persons shall remain nameless for the sake of sparing peoples blushes.Anyway Sophie was attending a Christmas Party in the name of a Charity function.High rollers from every side of Americas investment "Uber Menchen" were in
attendence.As the night wore on a old Lady sitting next to my friend
suddenly asked her of her opinion of "Bernie" as he was universaly known.My Friend stated that she thought that something very big was clearly amiss, and Bernies House of cards would come tumbling down given the sort of perfect storm of circumstances these things require.
Where-upon the old Lady totally blew her top, she accused my friend of
anti Semetism and claimed that every-body was out to get poor Bernie!!.This made my friend hold her counsel to her-self in future,or
until the coming collapse.Then almost two years after the Christmas party,my friend was watching the news which was going into detail about Madoffs scam.There in the background demonstrating was the same
old Woman who had blew her top in defence of Madoff.She was claiming that this was all the Governments fault,where really we all know,it was utterly the fault of some very very greedy people who were more than prepared to look the other way when they were making a quick dirty Buck.These people created Madoff, they fed and watered him and turned him into a Giant.This "is" the reason they are all broke now.

27 comments

Login or Register to post comments.