HOW TO RUN AN ORGANIZED CRIME OPERATION WITH NON-LAWS THAT YOU HELPED
MAKE IMPOTENT WHEN YOU WORKED IN CONGRESS!
HOW TO RUN AN ORGANIZED CRIME OPERATION WITH NON-LAWS THAT YOU
HELPED MAKE IMPOTENT WHEN YOU WORKED IN CONGRESS!
By law, members of Congress and their senior staffers are supposed to
have a one- to two-year cooling-off period in which they refrain from
lobbying their former colleagues.
But nearly 120 former members and senior staffers since 2015 have been
the sole lobbyist or part of a lobbying team targeting their former
chamber during their cooling-off periods, according to a McClatchy
analysis of post-employment restriction data from the House and Senate as
well as lobbying registration data.
That doesn’t necessarily mean they broke the law.
Those rules are limited in terms of what they specifically prohibit
former members and staffers from doing. They ban direct contact with
current members or staffers, but do not ban providing behind-the-scenes
advice to other lobbyists on who they should contact and what they should
say — essentially using a cutout. Former staffers from the House of
Representatives are only restricted from lobbying their former office or
committee. Lobbying other branches of government isn’t prohibited. And the
system effectively operates on the honor system.
The lobbying rules, designed to prevent former lawmakers from immediately
profiting from their political connections, are more important than ever
as Washington sees a strikingly rapid exodus of elected officials, some of
them weary of the toxic partisanship and eager to cash in on more
lucrative opportunities.
Violating the cooling-off period is punishable by up to five years in
prison and a fine of up to $50,000, but lobbyists who break the law are
unlikely to be detected. While the House and the Senate are responsible
for flagging potential lobbying violations, both the offices of the House
clerk and the secretary of the Senate confirmed to McClatchy that neither
regularly checks whether lobbyists have violated the cooling-off period.
The Government Accountability Office annually audits a random sampling of
lobbying forms for compliance with lobbying rules, but told McClatchy it
doesn’t check for compliance with the cooling-off period. And while the
U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington D.C. is responsible for bringing
charges against potential violators, the office couldn’t recall any recent
instances in which it actually did.
When presented with McClatchy’s findings, former Wisconsin Democratic
Sen. Russ Feingold, best known for his work with former Sen. John McCain
on a 2002 campaign finance law, said Congress should revisit the lobbying
laws, which were last updated in 2007.
“At a minimum, Congress should insist that the clerk of the House and the
secretary of the Senate review lobbying registrations to determine if
former members and staff may be violating the law and refer potential
violations to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for investigation and
prosecution,” Feingold said. “We included tougher revolving-door
restrictions in the 2007 lobbying reform package but without enforcement
that law doesn’t mean much.”
McClatchy’s analysis flagged three former members of Congress — Louisiana
Sen. David Vitter, California Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon, and Florida Rep.
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen — whose lobbying forms indicated they had either
directly lobbied their former chamber during their cooling-off period or
been part of a team targeting their former chamber.
All three are Republicans, and more than 70 percent of the former members
and staffers identified in the analysis were from Republican offices.
Republicans controlled both chambers of Congress for much of the period
in the analysis and more than 10 percent of the Republican staffers on the
list worked for the Republican leadership in one of the two chambers.
But the analysis flagged former staffers from both ends of the
ideological spectrum, with aides to several Democrats on the list,
including Bernie Sanders’ former chief of staff, Michaeleen Crowell.
And McClatchy’s analysis doesn’t take into account so-called shadow
lobbying, whereby former members of Congress and top aides provide many of
the same services as a lobbyist but below the legal threshold of activity
that would require them to register.
“You’re looking at the tip of the iceberg,” said Meredith McGehee,
executive director of the group Issue One, which seeks to reduce the role
of money in politics. “You’re looking at the people who bothered to
register.”
Mining former connections on the Hill
The 2007 update of the lobbying laws
came in the wake of the lobbying scandal that sent super lobbyist Jack Abramoff and former
Congressman Bob Ney, R-Ohio, to prison for
their roles in a scheme in which Abramoff and other lobbyists defrauded
Native American tribes seeking gaming licenses and lavished expensive
gifts and campaign donations on Ney and other politicians in exchange for
political favors.
The law banned gifts from lobbyists to members of Congress or their staff
— and increased the penalty for violating the lobbying rules to as much as
a $200,000 fine or five years in prison.
But it left the cooling-off period largely unchanged. When the Senate
tried to extend the cooling-off period to two years for members of the
House and Senate, the House balked at adopting the same two-year
cooling-off period Senators face.
Extending the cooling-off period has historically been met with
resistance because many in Congress see it as an unfair imposition,
McGehee said.
She was involved in a previous rewrite of the lobbying laws in 1995 as a
lobbyist at the government watchdog group Common Cause.
“I have a very vivid recollection of sitting down with a chief of staff
of a House member and getting reamed because I was going to deprive this
chief of staff from the ability to make a living after leaving Congress,”
McGehee said.
The current rules didn’t limit two former members of the House from
playing a role in lobbying work that targeted their former chamber during
their first year out of office.
Ros-Lehtinen, who left office in 2018, inked a deal to represent a former
political supporter from the Miami area, Oscar Cerna, who has been
involved in a 15-year dispute with the government of Honduras, which he
said drove his Honduran cement company out of business. Ros-Lehtinen, a
former chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, had been among
Cerna’s staunchest supporters in Congress, writing a 2007 letter to
then-Honduran President Jose Manuel Zelaya pressing Cerna’s case.
Cerna, for his part, contributed $14,500 to
committees supporting Ros-Lehtinen over the past two decades. So it was
perhaps not surprising that Cerna turned to Ros-Lehtinen to continue to
press his case as a lobbyist. When she retired in 2018, his company Cermar
Investments LLC, hired Ros-Lehtinen and another lobbyist at the firm Akin
Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, which she joined soon after leaving
Congress.
Cerna’s company has so far paid $30,000 to Akin Gump and Ros-Lehtinen is
one of a team of two lobbyists who have together targeted the House,
Senate, State Department and Executive Office of the President on Cermar’s
behalf. The forms don’t indicate which bodies, if any, Ros-Lehtinen
lobbied herself and former members are not prohibited from lobbying other
branches during their cooling-off period.
Ros-Lehtinen, a monthly columnist for the Miami Herald, declined through
a spokesperson to comment directly. A spokesperson for Akin Gump issued
the following statement in response to questions directed at Ros-Lehtinen
and other Akin Gump lobbyists identified in McClatchy’s analysis: “The
firm is fully aware of and abides by all relevant ethical requirements in
its lobbying activities, including post-employment lobbying restrictions
of former members and senior staff.”
McKeon, the former chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, also
represented a client he had prior dealings with during his time in
Congress.
In the wake of the September 2013 shooting at the Washington D.C. Navy
Yard, McKeon pushed for the public release of an internal Pentagon report that
found security flaws in a system used by the Navy to give contractors and
other short-term personnel temporary access to military sites and called
for the Navy to stop using the system.
The system hadn’t been responsible for giving access to the Navy Yard
shooter, but McKeon nevertheless called for the critical report’s public
release.
“The report details critical flaws in the practice of contracting access
control for military installations to non-governmental personnel,” McKeon
said in a statement. “I believe it to be relevant to physical security on
military installations.”
Despite the report, the company managed to keep its contracts with the
Navy and it hired McKeon’s newly formed lobbying firm two years later
after McKeon left office.
McKeon said a form that indicated he had lobbied the House of
Representatives on the company’s behalf in 2015 was a mistake and that he
had limited his lobbying work to the Pentagon. He said his lobbying firm
would be submitting an amended form.
“I know that there are people from both the House and Senate that try to
skirt the issue,” McKeon told McClatchy. “I purposely registered early on
so that we wouldn’t do that.”
Former Louisiana Sen. Vitter also told McClatchy that two forms filed in
2017 indicating that he had lobbied House and Senate directly on behalf of
a Texas public entity, the Chambers County Improvement District No. 1, had
been filed in error.
“I appreciate your pointing them out,” Vitter said by e-mail. “They are
incorrect, and I have directed our compliance staff to correct them
immediately.”
No one had previously pointed out to either Vitter or McKeon that the
incorrect forms seemed to show them doing work impermissible during the
cooling-off period.
And no one flagged another report McClatchy found that appeared to show
that one staffer had signed his first lobbying clients while still on a
congressional payroll. James Peterson’s name appeared on lobbying
registration forms dated to 2015 — while he was still a legislative
assistant to Democatic Sen. Dianne Feinstein — to represent the California
cities of Huron and Riverbank. Peterson told McClatchy the foms had been
filed in error by the lobbying firm he worked for after leaving
Feinstein’s office in early 2016, Townsend Public Affairs.
“I had no idea they had been submitted,” Peterson said.
Anatomy of a lobbying campaign
The current lobbying rules provide ample leeway for former members of
Congress or staffers to be involved in the lobbying process without
violating the cooling-off period restrictions. The rules ban direct
contact with current members of Congress and their staffs, but do not ban
providing strategic advice on who to contact or even what to say. And the
rules apply only to contact with congressional offices, not the White
House or federal agencies.
“The very purpose of revolving-door restrictions is to prevent former
members and staffers from profiting on their inside connections for
influence-peddling on behalf of paying clients,” said Craig Holman, the
lobbyist for Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy group that seeks to limit
corporate influence on public policy. “Yet lobby they do, as full partners
of the lobby team, organizing and strategizing the lobbying campaign for
whoever pays them.”
Vitter’s lobbying on behalf of the Texas public entity provides a window
into the lobbying work that a former member can do during the cooling-off
period while staying on the right side of the law.
McClatchy obtained documents through a Texas public records request that
show the efforts of his team at the lobbying firm Mercury Public Affairs
to help the Chambers County district win a grant from the TIGER program, a
multi-billion dollar competitive transportation grant originally launched
as part of the Obama administration’s economic stimulus plan. The program
attracted notice when one of the projects it financed, the Florida
International University bridge, collapsed while under construction,
killing six on March 15, 2018.
The Texas project, led by William F. Scott, a major Republican donor who
had given $25,000 several years earlier to a pro-Vitter super PAC, decided
to hire Vitter’s team in October 2017.
Vitter’s first suggestion was that they target Texas Rep. Brian Babin, a
Republican on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
“I know Brian pretty well,” Vitter wrote. “And he’s on the DOT oversight
committee — an ideal U.S. House member to get fired up in support and help
corral and lead nearby colleagues.”
Vitter’s team then spent months reaching out to congressional offices and
federal agencies ahead of a D.C. trip they organized for Scott and his
team in early 2018. The itinerary included meetings with Republican Texas
Sens. John Cornyn and Ted Cruz, several members of the House — including
Babin — as well as the White House, the Department of Transportation and
Energy Secretary Rick Perry.
Vitter made clear to McClatchy that he himself did not reach out to
congressional offices directly during his cooling-off period.
“I very carefully followed Senate rules by not having any contact with
congressional offices on lobbying matters for two years following my
service in the Senate,” Vitter said. “For those two years, the
congressional part of Mercury’s Chambers County Improvement District No. 1
work was handled by others in the firm.”
Vitter did directly lobby the Department of Transportation and its
secretary, Elaine Chao, which is not prohibited by the law. He and his
team met with senior officials at the department who told them “pretty
directly that U.S. senators calling in meant a lot to the secretary [whose
husband is Senate majority leader],” Vitter wrote to his clients.
He instructed his clients to redouble their efforts at winning Cornyn’s
support and told them exactly what to ask for from the Texas senator and
how to ask for it.
Vitter also picked up the phone and called Chao directly to sell the
project.
“After several minutes of small talk regarding my family and New Orleans,
which she pursued, I outlined the strengths of the application very
thoroughly,” Vitter wrote.
Vitter’s help wasn’t enough for the project win a grant in 2018, but
earlier this year, Vitter told his clients that he was already hard at
work trying to help them find federal money and would no longer be
encumbered by any restrictions.
“[N]ow that my two-year cooling-off period has ended ... I can lobby
members directly,” Vitter wrote.
A spin through the revolving door
The last rewrite of the lobbying laws left largely unchanged the
restrictions on former top staffers —staffers who make at least 75 percent
of what a member of Congress is paid, which is currently $174,000.
The rules ban former top Senate staffers from lobbying the Senate for a
year, while they ban former House staffers from lobbying either the member
they worked for or the committee they worked on for the same one-year
period, depending on their role.
It’s common for lobbyists to work as part of a team and the forms don’t
require members of the team to specify which office they targeted. That
can make it challenging to determine whether a former member or staffer
has actually violated his or her cooling-off restrictions.
McClatchy found one former senior Senate staffer, Christopher Kearney,
who went out of his way to specify on his form that he had not lobbied the
Senate during his cooling-off period, but his form is the exception.
“The firm and I felt that it was important out of an abundance of caution
to make it crystal clear that I did not lobby the Senate,” Kearney said.
McClatchy’s analysis identified more than 100 former senior staffers who
gave no such indication on their lobbying forms.
That includes a former top aide to Republican Senate Majority Leader
Mitch McConnell, Brendan Dunn, who, at Akin Gump, has been part of several
lobbying teams that targeted the Senate for a number of blue-chip clients,
including tobacco company Altria, CVS, and Qualcomm. Dunn, whose company
bio touts his experience advising Republican leadership on retirement
matters, was the sole lobbyist for the American Council of Life Insurers,
lobbying the House on a retirement savings bill that had been introduced
in the Senate while he was still working for McConnell. A spokesman at
Dunn’s firm told McClatchy that Dunn had fully complied with the
cooling-off rules.
The analysis also tabbed a staffer-turned-lobbyist who has
already taken another spin through the revolving door. Bill Cooper, the
current general counsel at the Department of Energy, previously lobbied
the House in 2017 and 2018 on Puerto Rico electricity issues for
Scotiabank, one of the top lenders to the Puerto Rico Electric Power
Authority, as well as the North American affiliate of the French natural
gas company ENGIE, which owns a large stake in a Puerto Rican energy
company. That lobbying came soon after he left his post at the House
Natural Resources Committee.
Cooper’s filings didn’t indicate which committees or offices in
the House he lobbied, and the lobbying work didn’t come up in his Senate
confirmation hearings for his current position at the Energy Department.
A spokesperson for the department said Cooper complied with all relevant
rules and regulations. As general counsel for the department, Cooper is
charged with overseeing the agency’s compliance with ethics rules.
The analysis also flagged former staffers from the other end of the
political spectrum, including Michaeleen Crowell, the former chief of
staff to Vermont Sen. and Democratic presidential candidate Bernie
Sanders. Crowell was part of teams at the firm S-3 Group that lobbied the
Senate on behalf of 11 clients, including the Sinclair Broadcast Group,
Boeing, Duke Energy and the Internet Association, a trade group for major
tech companies such as Google, Amazon and Facebook. Crowell’s lobbying
teams brought in more than $1 million for their lobbying work during her
first year out of the Senate.
Crowell told McClatchy that she would be amending the forms to make clear
that she herself had not lobbied the Senate during her cooling-off period.
“I never lobbied the Senate during the ban at all,” Crowell said. “I was
very serious about not even having the appearance of an improper contact.”
Of course, if it were up to her former boss, Crowell wouldn’t be lobbying
at all. Sanders has said that if elected president he would institute a
lifetime lobbying ban for former members of Congress and their senior
staffers.
Ben Wieder is a data reporter in McClatchy’s Washington bureau. He worked
previously at the Center for Public Integrity and Stateline. His work has
been honored by the Society of American Business Editors and Writers,
National Press Foundation, Online News Association and Association of
Health Care Journalist
WE SAW OUR OWN ELECTED OFFICIALS TAKE BRIBES IN TECH STOCKS!!!
Silicon Oligarchs And California Senator's Stock Market
manipulations are a type of stock
market abuse where there is a deliberate attempt to interfere with
the free and fair operation of the market and create artificial, false or
misleading appearances with respect to the price of, or market for, a
product, security,
commodity
or currency.[1]
Market manipulation is prohibited in most countries.
The owner's of the Palo Alto Sandhill Road Venture Capital Firms, Tech
Oligarchs in Silicon Valley and California Senator's and Governors
conspired together to have their lobbyists, technologists, big tech law
firms and David Plouffe-ian operatives operate these manipulations as
bribe and payola cross payments for illegal profiteering and campaign
financing.
Billions of dollars of illicit gains and asset transfers, conduit-ed
through Facebook, Google, Tesla, Netflix and other firms, are going on
even now. SEC and forensic account records prove these assertions. The
U.S. Department of Energy has been used, extensively, as a slush-fund and
stock valuation pump for puml-and-dump scams.
Search engine manipulation traded for stock perks accounts for billions
of dollars of unreported campaign finance never documented to the FEC!
The US Securities Exchange Act defines market manipulation as
"transactions which create an artificial price or maintain an artificial
price for a tradable security"
THESE ARE THE SCAMS THEY STILL USE TO THIS DAY:
Pools
Agreements, often written, among a group of traders to delegate
authority to a single manager to trade in a specific stock for a
specific period of time and then to share in the resulting profits or
losses."[5]
In Australia section 1041B prohibits pooling.
Churning
When a trader places both buy and sell orders at about the same
price. The increase in activity is intended to attract additional
investors, and increase the price.
Stock bashing
This scheme is usually orchestrated by savvy online message board
posters (a.k.a. "Bashers") who make up false and/or misleading
information about the target company in an attempt to get shares for a
cheaper price. This activity, in most cases, is conducted by posting
libelous posts on multiple public forums. The perpetrators sometimes
work directly for unscrupulous Investor Relations firms who have
convertible notes that convert for more shares the lower the bid or
ask price is; thus the lower these Bashers can drive a stock price
down by trying to convince shareholders they have bought a worthless
security, the more shares the Investor Relations firm receives as
compensation. Immediately after the stock conversion is complete and
shares are issued to the Investor Relations firm, consultant, attorney
or similar party, the basher/s then become friends of the company and
move quickly to ensure they profit on a classic Pump & Dump scheme
to liquidate their ill-gotten shares. (see P&D)
Pump and dump
A pump
and dump scheme is generally part of a more complex grand plan
of market manipulation on the targeted security. The Perpetrators
(Usually stock promoters) convince company affiliates and large
position non-affiliates to release shares into a free trading status
as "Payment" for services for promoting the security. Instead of
putting out legitimate information about a company the promoter sends
out bogus e-mails (the "Pump") to millions of unsophisticated
investors (Sometimes called "Retail Investors") in an attempt to drive
the price of the stock and volume to higher points. After they
accomplish both, the promoter sells their shares (the "Dump") and the
stock price falls like a stone, taking all the duped investors' money
with it.
Runs
When a group of traders create activity or rumors in order to drive
the price of a security up. An example is the Guinness
share-trading fraud of the 1980s. In the US, this activity is
usually referred to as painting the tape.[6]
Runs may also occur when trader(s) are attempting to drive the price
of a certain share down, although this is rare. (see Stock Bashing)
Ramping (the
market)
Actions designed to artificially raise the market price of listed
securities and to give the impression of voluminous trading, in order
to make a quick profit.[7]
Wash trade
In a wash
trade the manipulator sells and repurchases the same or
substantially the same security for the purpose of generating activity
and increasing the price.
Bear raid
In a bear
raid there is an attempting to push the price of a stock down by
heavy selling or short
selling.[8]
Lure and Squeeze
This works with a company that is very distressed
on paper, with impossibly high debt and consistently high annual
losses, but very few assets, making it look as if bankruptcy must be
imminent. The stock price gradually falls as people new to the stock
short it on the basis of the poor outlook for the company, until the
number of shorted shares greatly exceeds the total number of shares
that are not held by those aware of the lure and squeeze scheme (call
them "people in the know"). In the meantime, people in the know
increasingly purchase the stock as it drops to lower and lower prices.
When the short interest has reached a maximum, the company announces
it has made a deal with its creditors to settle its loans in exchange
for shares of stock (or some similar kind of arrangement that
leverages the stock price to benefit the company), knowing that those
who have short positions will be squeezed as the price of the stock
sky-rockets. Near its peak price, people in the know start to sell,
and the price gradually falls back down again for the cycle to repeat.
Quote stuffing
Quote
stuffing is made possible by high-frequency trading programs
that can execute market actions with incredible speed. However,
high-frequency trading in and of itself is not illegal. The tactic
involves using specialized, high-bandwidth hardware to quickly enter
and withdraw large quantities of orders in an attempt to flood the
market, thereby gaining an advantage over slower market participants.[9]
Spoofing (finance)
Spoofing
is a disruptive algorithmic trading entity employed by traders to
outpace other market participants and to manipulate commodity markets.
Spoofers feign interest in trading futures, stocks and other products
in financial markets creating an illusion of exchange pessimism in the
futures market when many offers are being cancelled or withdrawn, or
false optimism or demand when many offers are being placed in bad
faith. Spoofers bid or offer with intent to cancel before the orders
are filled. The flurry of activity around the buy or sell orders is
intended to attract other high-frequency
traders (HFT) to induce a particular market reaction such as
manipulating the market price of a security. Spoofing can be a factor
in the rise and fall of the price of shares and can be very profitable
to the spoofer who can time buying and selling based on this
manipulation.
High Closing
(finance)
High closing is an attempt to manipulate the price of a security at
the end of trading day to ensure that it closes higher than it should.
Usually by putting in manipulative trades close to closing.
Cornering the
market
In cornering
the market the manipulators buys sufficiently large amount of a
commodity so they can control the price creating in effect a monopoly. For
example, the brothers Nelson
Bunker Hunt and William
Herbert Hunt attempted to corner the world silver
markets in the late 1970s and early 1980s, at one stage holding the
rights to more than half of the world's deliverable silver.[10]
During the Hunts' accumulation of the precious metal, silver prices
rose from $11 an ounce in September 1979 to nearly $50 an ounce in
January 1980.[11]
Silver prices ultimately collapsed to below $11 an ounce two months
later,[11]
much of the fall occurring on a single day now known as Silver Thursday,
due to changes made to exchange rules regarding the purchase of
commodities on margin.[12]
political insidertrading through a "disclose or abstain" rule for
corporate political spending would promote greater efficiency in the
capital markets, ensure corporate accountability and political
legitimacy, and sustain the growing market for corporate social
responsibility.
May
7, 2015Congress Tells Court That Congress Can't Be
Investigated for InsiderTrading.
But as the Securities and Exchange Commission made news with the first
major investigation of political insidertrading,
Congress moved to block the inquiry. The SEC investigation focused on
how Brian Sutter, then a staffer for the House Ways and Means
Committee,...
Dec
31, 2013In response to public outrage, the was passed in
order to restrict insidertrading
by Congress and other government employees*. That lasted an entire
year before an amendment was passed that basically undid portions of
the STOCK act, specifically relating to transparency.** Insidertrading is still...
May
29, 2017When 'Political Intelligence' Meets Insider
TradingWhen 'Political Intelligence' Meets InsiderTrading.
Political intelligence firms provide services for companies that have
a strong interest in knowing the direction of Medicare spending, not
just for trading firms that might profit from the
information.
Jun
10, 2013Insidertrading is
illegal on Wall Street, yet it is routine among members of Congress.
Normal individuals cannot get in on IPOs at the asking price, but politicians
do so routinely. The Obama administration has been able to funnel
hundreds of millions of dollars to its supporters, ensuring yet more
campaign donations.
The Political Insider,
founded in 2006, publishes the independent reporting, commentary and
opinions of free-thinking American writers. Visit daily for
insightful, fact-based commentary, analysis, and news you won't find
in the mainstream media.
The buying and selling of
stock by corporate insiders who have access to
non-public information that could affect the stock price can be a
criminal offense, just ask hedge fund manager Raj Rajaratnam who
recently got 11 years in prison for doing it.
Jun
1, 2011MORE FROM FORBES. In a surprising twist, the study
found that there tended to be an inverse relationship between the
lawmaker's seniority and the insider-trading profits
pocketed by him and his minions. The authors speculated that "Whereas
Representatives with the longest seniority (in this case more than 16
years),...
Westport Fuel Pays $4M to
Settle SEC Charges of PayingBribes
to China Official. ... The Real Trade-War Impact on Stocks
and What to Expect Going Forward.
Sep
24, 2018New York Stock Trader Admits PayingBribes To Broker In Exchange For Stock
TRENTON, N.J. - A New York stock trader today
admitted making bribe payments to a broker at an
investment banking firm in exchange for stock
allocations, U.S. Attorney Craig Carpenito announced.
Apr
3, 2018Paying a steep price. U.S. enforcers
have imposed nearly $11 billion in fines under the anti-bribery law.
It applies to both U.S. companies and foreign companies listed on U.S.
stock exchanges. The German conglomerate Siemens paid
$1.6 billion to U.S. and German authorities in 2008 for bribing
officials on five continents.
North Koreans payingbribes to survive: U.N. report. Breaking News. ...
All CFDs (stocks, indexes, futures) and Forex prices
are not provided by exchanges but rather by market makers, and so ...
Nov
2, 2018Low: Except for the chunk of it I will use to pay bribes.
... stock exchanges, or national securities
regulators — excluding dual-class stocks because
some big investors want them to. The ...
Mar
15, 2019Most families don't pay bribes to
get their kids into college — but many wealthy parents know other
ways. ... Real-time last sale data for U.S. stock
quotes reflect trades reported through ...
Teach staffers how to
recognize when the fee they're asked to pay is actually a bribe
and how to avoid the temptation to pay it. ... How To Lead Employees
Away From Bribery's Temptations ...
ZTE reportedly had an
department that managed bribes of foreign officials,
and sign off was required from several managers including some based
at its Shenzen headquarters. ZTE and Huawei are also
Journal of Financial Economics
51, 343-369.