Second Acts
A couple of months ago I wrote:
Any questions?
A former CEO who did felony jail time a couple of years ago still has a TV show, writes books about cooking, and poses for cameras at public events...There's no shame, because there's been no mass revulsion or rejection to cause it. The bad actors -- and the photographers, book publishers, and TV producers -- get this. |
Any questions?
posted by The Cunning Realist at Tuesday, May 12, 2009
10 Comments:
Not exactly convinced that was a government lynch job myself. She was convicted of perjury. She had made some statements trying to protect her broker. She was innocent of insider trading. That is why she was never convicted for that. Her broker called her up and told her to sell...and she said OK. It was her broker who was guilty of insider trading not her. Not that anybody really cares. Martha stewart is not a banker. She is a celebrity. The government had no problem convicting her and throwing her into a pen. And for what? Glad she is out and doing well for herself again. Even though I think she is a ridiculous person. LOL.
Man, you're letting her off the hook pretty easily. She's the poster child for the "two stock markets..." one for the rarified few and the other for the chumps.
I'm with Goldhorder on this one.
I'm also with Goldhorder. Enough people think, and have reason to think, that Martha Stewart was railroaded that she isn't the best example of the good point CR is trying to make.
That said, in a sane country she would never have become as wealthy or as famous as she became in the first place.
Maybe you know more than the rest, but from main street, there seems to be far worse apples to pick that are doing grave damage to people, our economy, and Nation.
Bill Maher is right, "If you have a gun you can rob a Bank, but if you have a Bank you can rob everyone." There are different rules if you are wealthy or can make others wealthy. If the average investor thinks they are getting a fair shake, they are delusional.
Having said that, my gut is telling me Martha was an easy target on someone's agenda. They might of swatted a tiny fly, but they left a huge hive and apparently that is just fine with them. Nothing has changed, Wall Street and financial institutions didn't become any less corrupt. There are basically two well known wealthy and popular business women that most people can name. They tried Oprah with the Texas beef trial. Both women actually made something from nothing to make their own empire without doing harm to anyone or the planet. They aren't snake-oil salesmen, churning money, gambling with our economy, polluting our politics, taking from main street and giving it to the wall street, and they aren't running a Ponzi scheme. They actually make a positive contribution to society through their work.
And I also agree with goldholder :-)
It seems we should be more concerned with those corporate execs and Wall Streeters that lurk in the dark, and don't want their names mentions.
This program aired last night, but you can see it online:
Madoff Affair
I'm with goldhorder too on this one. I think the Martha Stewart example is a bad one. She was asked if her friend had called her to tell her she should sell her stock that she owned in his company. She answered "um no" like probably anyone else would have in that situation. That was her entire crime. That doesn't make her denial right, but surely that pales in comparison to the financial crimes of the past 10 years (not to mention the political ones) that no one dares to investigate.
There is a problem with lack of culpability and shame in high places - I just don't think Martha Stewart a good example of it. I felt sorry for her actually.
The perjury rap against Stewart seemed trumped up at the time, especially in light of the way Republicans in the House at the time held her up as the poster girl for stock fraud.
Billy Tauzin, the very powerful chair of the Energy & Commerce Committee, led the smear campaign.
I thought the GOP might have been have after Martha as paybacks for her flattering Clinton White House Christmas tv special.(Don't forget how low the GOP would stoop under DeLay.)
But I later found out that Stewart, along with Sam Waksal and Charlotte Beers and others, were doing deals with some unsavory characters.
One of the deals involved an online perfume store with the Jacobwitzes of Allou Healthcare fame. Allou was a public company that went bankrupt. Subsequently, the Jacobwitzes were accused of fraud, bribery and arson among other charges.
The kicker is that Martha still has Tauzin's barbecued shrimp recipe on her website.
All in all, I think Martha paid the price. She did time in prison and she lost a lot of her cachet, i.e. marketability.
Market manipulation and insider trading are rampant and the SEC does not care and does not investigate. For example who kenw Saks would have good earnings? Some sharpies did. Manipulators manipulated it down, flushed out some longer term holders last week and then started buying on Monday May 18 and see the share price increase all that day? The sharpies held until the earnings. Then they sold. Notice the share price climb on the 18th the entire day before earnings. This is not investigated and not punished. Why go after Martha. Everyone cheats all the time. The markets are worse than they were before the 33 act and 34 act. And Mary Shapiro! What a clown. I wonder what Markopoulos thinks of her. Why go after Martha. At least most of her money was made via hard work and creating something. The SEC should e able to finance its policing via fines. New York city more than pays for its parking enforcement thru fines. The SEC should do its job. But it can't with incompetent leadership.
I fully tie in with everything you have printed.
Post a Comment
<< Home