Why Did the Justice Department Kill the Madoff Subpoena Against JPMorgan?
by alethoBy Pam Martens | Wall Street on Parade | December 31, 2013
Since
December 16, major business media have failed to dig deeper into a
potentially blockbuster story involving the Justice Department’s refusal
to honor a Wall Street regulator’s request for a subpoena against
JPMorgan Chase to obtain Madoff related documents the firm was refusing
to turn over. JPMorgan Chase was Madoff’s banker for the last 22 years
of his fraud. The Trustee in charge of recovering funds for Madoff’s
victims, Irving Picard, said in a filing to the U.S. Supreme Court this
Fall that JPMorgan stood “at the very center of Madoff’s fraud for over
20 years.”
It’s
a big story when a serial miscreant like JPMorgan – which has promised
its regulators to change its jaded ways in exchange for settlements –
risks obstruction of justice charges by denying one of its key
regulators internal documents. It becomes an explosive story when the
Justice Department, the highest law enforcement agency in the land and
the regulator’s only source of help in enforcing a subpoena for the
documents, sides with the serial miscreant instead of the regulator.
The
story began on December 16 when Scott Cohn of CNBC posted a story with
this headline: “Feds Probe JPMorgan Interference in Madoff Case.” The
article revealed that the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
(OCC), a JPMorgan Chase regulator and part of the U.S. Treasury
Department, had been so riled by JPMorgan’s refusal to turn over
documents related to what its employees knew about the Madoff fraud that
it referred the matter to the Treasury Department’s Inspector General.
The
article quotes Richard Delmar, legal counsel to the Inspector General,
who explains that “This office was looking into allegations made by
JPMC’s regulator, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC)
that its oversight of the bank was being impeded, specifically with
respect to the bank’s provision of banking services to Madoff.”
The
Inspector General’s office clearly believed there was merit to the
OCC’s claim because it issued its own administrative subpoena for the
documents, according to the CNBC story. JPMorgan refused that request as
well, leading the Inspector General to ask the Justice Department to
enforce the subpoena – a request it refused to honor.
When
the Justice Department refused to enforce this subpoena, it went
against not one, or two, but three sets of investigators who had found a
serious basis for suspecting JPMorgan of wrongdoing in the Madoff
fraud.
Irving
Picard, the Madoff victims’ fund trustee, had already filed a lower
court lawsuit mapping out his case against JPMorgan. Picard told the
court:
“Evidence
of Madoff’s fraud permeated every facet of JPMC [JPMorgan Chase]. It
ran from the Broker/Dealer Group, where BLMIS [Bernard L. Madoff
Investment Securities LLC] maintained a bank account that no one
honestly could have believed was serving any legitimate purpose, to
Equity Exotics, where JPMC learned of the red flags inherent in BLMIS’s
investment strategy, to JPMC’s London office, which learned that
individuals might be laundering money through BLMIS feeder funds, to the
Private Bank, which maintained intimate relationships with one of
BLMIS’s largest customers, to Treasury & Security Services, which
was responsible for investing the balance of the 703 Account in
short-term securities.”
In
a more recent filing with the U.S. Supreme Court seeking to overturn
lower court findings that he lacked standing to sue JPMorgan and other
banks, Picard further detailed his case against JPMorgan, explaining
that JPMorgan was well aware that Madoff was claiming to invest tens of
billions of dollars in a strategy that involved buying large cap stocks
in the Standard and Poor’s 500 index while simultaneously hedging with
options. But the Madoff firm’s primary bank account at JPMorgan, which
the bank had intimate access to review for over 20 years, was devoid of
evidence of stock or options trading.
Picard’s
petition to the Supreme Court reads: “As JPM [JPMorgan] was well aware,
billions of dollars flowed from customers into the 703 account, without
being segregated in any fashion. Billions flowed out, some to customers
and others to Madoff’s friends in suspicious and repetitive round-trip
transactions. But in the 22 years that JPM maintained the 703 account,
there was not a single check or wire to a clearing house, securities
exchange, or anyone who might be connected with the purchase of
securities. All the while, JPM knew that Madoff was using the account to
run an investment advisory business with thousands of customers and
billions under management and knew that Madoff was using its name to
lend legitimacy to his enterprise…”
Picard
also informed the Court that employees inside JPMorgan were well aware
of the suspicions surrounding Madoff. JPMorgan’s Chief Risk Officer,
John Hogan, had warned his colleagues 18 months prior to Madoff’s
confession of his Ponzi scheme that “there is a well-known cloud over
the head of Madoff and that his returns are speculated to be part of a
ponzi scheme.”
Rather
than reporting their concerns to the Justice Department, according to
Picard, JPMorgan invested over $250 million of its own money with Madoff
feeder funds while it simultaneously created structured investment
products that allowed its own investors to make leveraged bets on the
returns of the feeder funds invested with Madoff.
In
September 2008, just two months before Madoff would confess to running
an unprecedented fraud that bilked investors out of over $17 billion in
real money and $65 billion in assets shown on customer statements,
JPMorgan conducted a new round of due diligence and decided it was time
to get out of its $250 million investment involving the feeder funds to
Madoff.
One
week ago, David Cay Johnston picked up on the subpeona story for
Newsweek, writing: “Bernard Madoff’s principal bank, JPMorgan Chase, has
for years obstructed federal bank examiners trying to ascertain what it
knew about his gigantic Ponzi scheme, an official document obtained by Newsweek shows.”
Johnston cited an internal document he had obtained from the Government Attic,
a public interest website that posts documents it obtains from Freedom
of Information Act requests. Johnston said that “The JPMorgan memos
Justice declined to pursue are almost certain to show that years earlier
the bank had grounds to suspect Madoff was running a fraud.”
The
most critical aspect of this subpoena story has thus far been
overlooked. It may well be that there is an official position at the
U.S. Department of Justice not to issue any subpoenas against the largest Wall Street firms.
On January 22 of this year, the award-winning producer, Martin Smith, aired a Frontline program for PBS titled “The Untouchables.” Smith had this to say on air:
“We
spoke to a couple of sources from within the Criminal Division, and
they reported that when it came to Wall Street, there were no
investigations going on. There were no subpoenas, no document reviews,
no wiretaps.”
One day after that program aired, the Washington Post reported that Lanny Breuer, head of the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice was stepping down from his post.
Now
it would appear that the Justice Department’s problem of quashing
subpoenas against Wall Street did not end with the departure of Lanny
Breuer.
Related articles
- New Revelation that AG Eric Holder Is Protecting JPMorgan Chase NYC From Criminal Investigation (truth-out.org)
- JPMorgan May Face Criminal Charges for Blowing the Whistle on Madoff - To the Wrong Country (blacklistednews.com)
- New Revelation that AG Eric Holder Is Protecting JPMorgan Chase NYC From Criminal Investigation (blacklistednews.com)
No comments:
Post a Comment