They change the switches in my living room. It’s simple like that. For fifteen years was switch adjusted up-down. Now is down-up. Than after I spat on the policia-milicia they make me wall at the London Stack Exchange and yet call me dirty. Seeing and knowing perfectly well “how much cost” the run hairs out of bushes. That is to say after the Centrica bought 20% stake in British Energy from EDF. Lousy bastards from Brussels and Strasburg, how you call this change in the switches? The pocket of “me-who-never-will-be-goal”? The “Robin Hood Project”? You know how Poland enters in NATO? With a help from crossbow from “independent” yellow (like the almohads bankers) Trade Union called Gaz Solidarnosć. Trust me. Like the expansion of EU’s poverty with political Manifesto called “Buy the lottery ticket”. I just don’t stop wonder where the life would take me from right now? It’s like don’t stop ask myself if breaking spine (i.e. 20% of EdF’s of British Energy acquired by Centrica) of Prince Charles the II with his “associate” Abramovitch was right choice. How many times I should blame myself, because know very well all this European bull shit inside-out, for get come to UK, the worst possible decision in my life? To receive telephone call from FUCKING BETSY: please to confirm that you will be in Düsseldorf at once for Platts Power and Gas Forum. I don’t believe that Japan Airlines pilot (situ: Lady and Gentleman’s we have a little problem in our NO1 engine…” One funny situation, when luggage container stuck in the engine) don’t believe that this is had nothing to do with “Warner Brothers” from LA, Brussels or Düsseldorf. Rather like enjoy the ride and see which chances the letting stream would float me to wherever to land, the current circumstances have being a lot to do with things I’d never planed. Like the billion taken from Microsoft because this is “not a goal” something. Like the 24 sailors disappeared in teen air because of it is “not a goal”. Who knows the real reasons for a many centuries ago accusations made to Maria Luk’ianovna by the Düsseldorf’s Platts Power and Gas Forum? Who say this to you is not your friend? Like the chit-chat with a fancied 2nd pilot in New Jersey Flight 3407. I tell you what: After last night, I ‘m feeling a bit woozy. Mean, “Don’t touch me unless you want to be bitten”.
US jury indicts Stanford investment chief May 13 2009 01:17. Laura Pendergest-Holt, chief investment officer of Stanford Financial Group, was on Tuesday indicted by a federal grand jury in Houston on two counts of obstructing the investigation into the alleged $8bn fraud at the group. Ms Pendergest-Holt was charged with one count of conspiracy to obstruct and one count of substantive obstruction. It is the first criminal indictment to emerge from the ongoing investigation into what the US Securities and Exchange Commission has described as a “massive Ponzi scheme”. In a civil action in February, the SEC accused Ms Pendergest-Holt along with the group’s chairman, Sir Allen Stanford, and James Davis, the group’s chief financial officer, of defrauding investors in high-yielding certificates of deposit issued by the Antigua-domiciled Stanford International Bank. Ms Pendergest-Holt is the only one of the three who is currently facing criminal charges. She was previously charged in a criminal complaint – filed by federal officials in Dallas – with one count of obstruction of justice for allegedly lying to investigators from the SEC. Ms Pendergest-Holt has denied all of the charges against her, as have Sir Allen and Mr Davis. Sir Allen has said that he expects to be indicted “fairly soon”, while an attorney for Mr Davis said his client was “actively co-operating” with US authorities. Attorneys for Ms Pendergest-Holt did not return calls and e-mails seeking comment. The indictment comes in the midst of a series of fresh disagreements between the various regulatory and quasi-governmental agencies in different countries that are involved with the investigation. In court documents filed this week, US officials have sought to dispute the authority of the receivers appointed by the Antiguan government. The Internal Revenue Service has asked a judge to block a request by Nigel Hamilton-Smith, who is acting as the receiver and liquidator for Sir Allen’s Antigua-based companies, to pursue assets through US courts. The IRS contends that the request by Mr Hamilton-Smith, if granted, would make it more difficult to recover the more than $200m in back taxes it claims that it is owed by Sir Allen. The IRS also accused Mr Hamilton-Smith of spoiling computer records at an office of the Stanford group in Canada. Ralph Janvey, the receiver appointed by the US courts, has also sought to block his Antigua-based counterparts from accessing Sir Allen’s other assets. Mr Janvey claimed that the Antiguan government – which owes more than $100m to the Stanford group – might “hijack” liquidation proceedings.
Why Would Laura Pendergest-Holt Take The Fall For Allen Stanford's Ponzi? Suspected Ponzi schemer Sir Allen Stanford's chief investment officer Laura Pendergest-Holt was indicted in Houston this morning for obstructing and conspiring to obstruct the federal investigation into Stanford's sham money manager. Aside from a new allegation that Pendergest transferred$4.3 million of bank funds into the bank's operating account after speaking to the SEC, the charges don't appear much different from those laid out in a criminal complaint filed against the photogenic 35-year-old overseer of Stanford's "Tier 2" investments in February. (That's not for lack of rifling through her underwear drawer, according to a motion filed by her lawyer.) That complaint depicted Pendergest-Holt's role in the Stanford enterprise as less mastermind than a case of (yes we realize this is a lame joke but) "Who Framed Jessica Rabbit?" It described in detail how Stanford lawyer Thomas Sjoblom -- who was identified in the complaint as Attorney A -- deflected the SEC's January requests to get testimony from Stanford and his fearsome chief financial officer James Davis by explaining the two did not "micro-manage" the firm's investments, and turning investigators instead to Pendergest-Holt and Stanford International Bank President Juan Rodriguez. Sjoblom then admitted in an email that it could be a problem that Pendergest-Holt knew nothing about the company's "Tier 3 investments" -- the secret part of Stanford's scheme, where 80% of his investments had been located, according to the SEC -- and arranged for her to be briefed on Tier 3 before she testified, explaining that the SEC only wanted to hear from executives familiar with the "entire investment portfolio." Within three weeks of Sjoblom explaining this to her -- during a meeting at the Stanford Aviation airport hangar in Miami, Florida -- Davis had briefed Pendergest-Holt and Rodriguez on Tier 3, Rodriguez had resigned in horror, Pendergest-Holt had botched her testimony with all manner of rookie lies and evasions, and Sjoblom had quit the case altogether. A former SEC enforcement lawyer named Jacob Frenkel told the Daily Journal the complaint was "a printed invitation to Ms. Pendergest-Holt to get on the government's train or be run over by it." So why didn't she board the train? Media coverage of Pendergest-Holt's role at Stanford generally depicts her as something of a Stepford executive. Having grown up in the same tiny Mississippi town (Baldwyn) attending the same tiny Baptist church as Davis, she was"groomed" for a position at the firm from the age of 15 by the man she called a "visionary mentor," according to the New York Times. She began at Stanford straight out of a master's program in 1997 and enjoyed the requisite "meteoric rise," replete, a story in this month's Texas Monthly says, with the attendant designer clothes, $700 bottles of wine, corporate jet trips between Baldwyn and her Stanford office in Memphis, and "temper tantrums" when her expenses were questioned. And few media outlets fail to mention her looks. When one Wall Street Journal blog snippily called out a Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal profile for one too many uses of words like "striking" and "statuesque" the editor contacted the blogger and said he'd approved all the descriptive passages because "people kept bringing it up" to his reporter and it "seemed like part of the larger story." And perhaps it is, though it doesn't get us much closer to the mystery of why Pendergest-Holt didn't cooperate with the investigation. She has since sued Sjoblom for malpractice, so why not the "visionary mentor" who hired him? We'll stay on the case... May 12, 2009, 4:19PM
No comments:
Post a Comment