Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Going Soft on Corporate Crime

  1. #1
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,550
    Post Thanks / Like

    Going Soft on Corporate Crime

    April 10, 2008

    [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/10/opinion/10thu2.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&ref=opinion&pagewanted=print[/url]

    [B][SIZE="4"]Going Soft on Corporate Crime [/SIZE][/B]

    The Bush administration has a well-known aversion to regulating big business. As it turns out, it is also reluctant to prosecute corporations that break the law. Federal prosecutors have been regularly offering settlements to companies for wrongdoing that, in previous administrations, would likely have led to criminal charges. It is another disturbing example of how this administration has taken the justice out of the Justice Department.

    Eric Lichtblau reported in The Times on Wednesday that during the last three years, the department has put off prosecuting more than 50 corporations on charges ranging from bribery to fraud. Instead, it has been entering into so-called deferred prosecution agreements and nonprosecution agreements, in which companies are allowed to pay fines and hire monitors to watch over them.

    Defenders say these deals save the government time and the expense of going to trial and avoid doing unnecessary harm to corporations and their employees. The cost to the public and the rule of law is too high.

    If corporations believe that they can negotiate their way out of a prosecution, the deterrent effect of the criminal law will inevitably be weakened.

    The deals also leave a clear impression that an administration that prides itself on being pro-law-and-order — and on appointing federal judges who are tough on ordinary criminals — is tilting the justice system in favor of the wealthy and powerful.

    There also are worrying signs that some prosecutors may be using these agreements for political patronage. Congress has been investigating the decision by Christopher J. Christie, the United States attorney for New Jersey, to award John Ashcroft, the former attorney general, a multimillion-dollar contract to monitor a medical supply company accused of fraud. He also gave a valuable contract to another former official, Debra Wong Yang.

    Now that the F.B.I. is investigating mortgage lenders in the subprime scandal, the issue of deferred prosecution agreements takes on even more urgency. If any of these lenders have committed fraud, the Justice Department must prosecute them vigilantly. What it should not do is work out another cozy deal and hand another rich monitoring contract to a political friend.

    Do you agree?

  2. #2
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,476
    Post Thanks / Like
    Ken Lay is "dead[SIZE="1"]*[/SIZE]".










    [SIZE="1"]*on an island avoiding sentencing[/SIZE]

  3. #3
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Long Island & Section 337
    Posts
    4,859
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2473612]April 10, 2008

    [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/10/opinion/10thu2.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&ref=opinion&pagewanted=print[/url]

    [B][SIZE="4"]Going Soft on Corporate Crime [/SIZE][/B]



    There also are worrying signs that some prosecutors may be using these agreements for political patronage. [B]Congress has been investigating the decision by Christopher J. Christie, the United States attorney for New Jersey, to award John Ashcroft, the former attorney general, a multimillion-dollar contract to monitor a medical supply company accused of fraud[/B]. He also gave a valuable contract to another former official, Debra Wong Yang.



    Do you agree?[/QUOTE]
    Do you know anything about the qualifications of Ashcroft's firm to do the job, or are you just ranting because he is John Ashcroft? I admit I don't know anything specific about his firms skill-set, but you have also given no specifics besides ranting that something must be fishy because it's Ashcroft.

  4. #4
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Montville, NJ
    Posts
    5,473
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=HDCentStOhio;2473637]Do you know anything about the qualifications of Ashcroft's firm to do the job, or are you just ranting because he is John Ashcroft? I admit I don't know anything specific about his firms skill-set, but you have also given no specifics besides ranting that something must be fishy because it's Ashcroft.[/QUOTE]

    that is just one problem with this... and not the main one...

    I believe the main issue is that while Bush is hard on individuals who commit crimes, corporations who commit crimes can get out of the reprecussions. Wouldn't it be nice if you could commit crimes and not have to do the time?

  5. #5
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Long Island & Section 337
    Posts
    4,859
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Tanginius;2473645]that is just one problem with this... and not the main one...

    I believe the main issue is that while Bush is hard on individuals who commit crimes, corporations who commit crimes can get out of the reprecussions. Wouldn't it be nice if you could commit crimes and not have to do the time?[/QUOTE]

    The problem here is the editorial was lazy. An accusation was thrown out with the only fact being that the name John Ashcroft was involved. The NYT should be above the mouth-foaming left wing blogs such as Dailykos and crooksandliars.

  6. #6
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,550
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=HDCentStOhio;2473637]Do you know anything about the qualifications of Ashcroft's firm to do the job, or are you just ranting because he is John Ashcroft? I admit I don't know anything specific about his firms skill-set, but you have also given no specifics besides ranting that something must be fishy because it's Ashcroft.[/QUOTE]

    I also do not know enough about his qualifications to make a determination. But there are some issues with his history of oversight;

    [B]CIA leak conflict of interest allegation[/B]

    Main article: CIA leak grand jury investigation
    When Karl Rove was being questioned by the FBI over the leak of a covert CIA agent's identity in the press, Ashcroft was allegedly briefed about the investigation. Democratic U.S. Representative John Conyers described this, and many other acts of Republicans as a "stunning ethical breach that cries out for an immediate investigation."[25] Conyers, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, sent a letter asking for a formal investigation of the time between the start of Rove's investigation and John Ashcroft's recusal.[26]

    [B]Tommy Chong sentencing[/B]

    Ashcroft was an enthusiastic advocate of the War on Drugs.[22] In a 2001 interview on Larry King Live, Ashcroft announced his intent to escalate efforts in this area.[23] In 2003, Ashcroft and the acting DEA Administrator, John B. Brown, announced a series of indictments resulting from two nationwide investigations code-named Operation Pipe Dream and Operation Headhunter. The investigations targeted businesses selling drug paraphernalia, mostly marijuana pipes and bongs, under a little-used statute (Title 21, Section 863(a) of the U.S. Code[24]). Counterculture icon Tommy Chong was one of those charged, for his part in financing and promoting Chong Glass/Nice Dreams, a company started by his son Paris. Of the 55 individuals charged as a result of the operations, only Chong was given a prison sentence (nine months in a federal jail, plus forfeiting $103,000 and a year of probation). The other 54 individuals were given fines and home detentions. While the DOJ denied that Chong was treated any differently from the other defendants, many felt that he was made an example of by the government. Chong's experience as a target of Ashcroft's sting operation is the subject of the feature length documentary a/k/a Tommy Chong, which premiered at the 2005 Toronto International Film Festival.

    [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ashcroft#Controversies[/url]

    these incidents are worth mentioning, but again, I do not know enough to say for certain that he is not [B]qualified.[/B]

  7. #7
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Long Island & Section 337
    Posts
    4,859
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2473667]I also do not know enough about his qualifications to make a determination. But there are some issues with his history of oversight;

    [B]CIA leak conflict of interest allegation[/B]

    Main article: CIA leak grand jury investigation
    When Karl Rove was being questioned by the FBI over the leak of a covert CIA agent's identity in the press, Ashcroft was allegedly briefed about the investigation. Democratic U.S. Representative John Conyers described this, and many other acts of Republicans as a "stunning ethical breach that cries out for an immediate investigation."[25] Conyers, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, sent a letter asking for a formal investigation of the time between the start of Rove's investigation and John Ashcroft's recusal.[26]

    [B]Tommy Chong sentencing[/B]

    Ashcroft was an enthusiastic advocate of the War on Drugs.[22] In a 2001 interview on Larry King Live, Ashcroft announced his intent to escalate efforts in this area.[23] In 2003, Ashcroft and the acting DEA Administrator, John B. Brown, announced a series of indictments resulting from two nationwide investigations code-named Operation Pipe Dream and Operation Headhunter. The investigations targeted businesses selling drug paraphernalia, mostly marijuana pipes and bongs, under a little-used statute (Title 21, Section 863(a) of the U.S. Code[24]). Counterculture icon Tommy Chong was one of those charged, for his part in financing and promoting Chong Glass/Nice Dreams, a company started by his son Paris. Of the 55 individuals charged as a result of the operations, only Chong was given a prison sentence (nine months in a federal jail, plus forfeiting $103,000 and a year of probation). The other 54 individuals were given fines and home detentions. While the DOJ denied that Chong was treated any differently from the other defendants, many felt that he was made an example of by the government. Chong's experience as a target of Ashcroft's sting operation is the subject of the feature length documentary a/k/a Tommy Chong, which premiered at the 2005 Toronto International Film Festival.

    [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ashcroft#Controversies[/url]

    these incidents are worth mentioning, [B]but again, I do not know enough to say for certain that he is not [B]qualified.[/B][/B] [/QUOTE]
    Will give you credit for this admission.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us