Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
so is that a yes or a no?
so if the sec was negotiating with sanswire there would be a court filing?
filed feb 5,
got anything more current?
Former Qwest chief goes to prison
Judge orders Joseph Nacchio, former communications company chief executive, to spend 6 years in a federal facility for insider trading.
Financial frauds ruin lives
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) -- A federal judge Wednesday ordered ex-Qwest Communications International Inc. Chief Executive Joseph Nacchio to report to prison in Pennsylvania by March 23 to begin serving a sentence for insider trading.
Nacchio will serve the six-year prison term at the minimum-security satellite prison camp at Minersville, Pa., according to an order by U.S. District Judge Marcia Krieger.
A jury convicted Nacchio in 2007 on 19 counts of insider trading for illegally selling $52 million worth of stock six years earlier, after company insiders warned him that Qwest (Q, Fortune 500) could not meet its financial targets.
A three-judge appeals panel of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals threw out the convictions last year. But the full appeals court reinstated the conviction and Nacchio's six-year prison sentence last week.
Nacchio's attorney said her client would ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case. Nacchio's conviction was considered an important victory in government efforts to crack down on corporate titans who profited while their companies suffered financial setbacks.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/03/04/technology/naccio.reut/index.htm?postversion=2009030418
so what is it?
do you think he is guilty or not?
SEC Warns Investors and Financial Firms of Government Impersonators
SEC Warns Investors and Financial Firms of Government Impersonators
Tuesday, March 03, 2009 :: Staff infoZine
The Securities and Exchange Commission is warning investors and financial services firms about con-artists who may use the names of actual SEC employees to mislead potential victims.
Washington, D.C. - infoZine - The agency also is providing information to help potential victims protect themselves from SEC impersonators.
In some instances, investors in the U.S. and abroad have been tricked into revealing private information, giving fraudsters access to their brokerage accounts, and even sending money and other assets to impostors. In other instances, unknown individuals have attempted to impersonate SEC examiners to gather confidential information from broker-dealers and investment advisers. Impostors have contacted firms by telephone, identified themselves as members of the SEC staff, and demanded immediate access to the firm's records, sometimes claiming to be conducting an "emergency" examination.
Investors should be aware that the SEC never makes or endorses investment offers or participates in money transfers. Nor does the SEC send e-mails asking for detailed personal information, or financial information such as PIN numbers.
"Investors should be especially wary, in these turbulent times, of any unsolicited investment offer, and should always verify the credentials of the individuals making the offer," said Kristin J. Kaepplein, Director of the SEC's Office of Investor Education and Advocacy. "If contacted by someone claiming to represent the Securities and Exchange Commission and vouching for investments, it's a scam. The SEC never endorses or participates in investment offers."
Always verify the identity of someone claiming to be from the SEC. Ask for the caller's name, the SEC office in which they work, and their telephone number. Then verify the caller's identity by calling the SEC's personnel locator at 202-551-6000 and asking to speak directly to that SEC staff member.
If contacted by someone unfamiliar to you claiming to be an SEC employee, please report it to the SEC by calling 800-732-0330 or e-mailing: help@sec.gov.help at sec dot gov. If a caller claiming to be an SEC examiner is found not to be a member of the SEC's staff, please report the incident to the SEC's Examination Hotline at (202) 551-EXAM.
Most importantly, if the caller is suspicious and can't be verified, do not share any information. Similarly, if the caller resists providing proof of identity, or efforts to reach the caller through a published SEC telephone number are unsuccessful, do not give the caller any information.
http://www.infozine.com/news/stories/op/storiesView/sid/34405/
Why would people be sending money directly to SEC investigators? Is this customary?
you said,"J.L. is guilty and knows co-operation with the SEC will show it."
then you said,"I am not SAYING he IS guilty. I believe him to be but that is my opinion."
i guess you misspoke, thanx for clearing that up.
you are the one who declared jl guilty, without saying what of.
fwiw i have always known where i was....
guilty of what?
could you be more specific. like what will he be charged with?
really!
lmao.
you are going in circles again.
it is reaL SIMPLE.
the sec is captured, corrupt.
what are the chances of a fair trial there?
better to stall and wait for a new admin.
ask gary aguirre, markopolos
i said nothing of the sort. pls do not put words in my mouth.
if you do not know then ask or remain silent.
Now the big question for me is simply, WHY ? With the company in its current state of failure and need to earn its trust back from the shareholders and public why would they conceal or refuse to cooperate with the SEC when the obvious direction would be to expedite the matter and remove the entity and its officer (J.L.) from the complaint ?
3 reasons come immediately to mind:
gary aguirre
stanford financial
bernie madoff
the record shows that the sec has obstructed justice in all three cases.
maybe he is just waiting for a new chairman to take charge so he can get a fair trial.
ok , so how would you prove there is no reason for X?
there may be a reason and there may not be a reason. you can prove there is a reason, but how can you see what you cant see?
to put it another way cant you see that you cant see what you cant see cant you see this?
just cause you do not see a reason is not proof.
i dont think you understand what i said, why not just delete my post like you always do. lol.
you do know it it impossible to affirm the negative?
what you are asking for defines basic logic.
you are right i am selling all my shares.
my point exactly.
thank you. and if that bothers you why do you continue to hold?
inspite of all your spite towards the company you seem to still believe there is value to be had.
all you need to do is write the company.
we? who is we?
three questions? go for it what is stopping you?
such a scam! too bad you cannot get the sec to shut it down.
another 280000 scam shares traded today.
how is this relevent?
just fud.
you left out this:
Agents, however, may act for mixed reasons -- both for self-aggrandizement (both direct and indirect) and for the benefit of the corporation, and a corporation may be held liable as long as one motivation of its agent is to benefit the corporation. Thus, in United States v. Automated Medical Laboratories, 770 F.2d 399 (4th Cir. 1985), the court affirmed the corporation's conviction for the actions of a subsidiary's employee despite its claim that the employee was acting for his own benefit, namely his "ambitious nature and his desire to ascend the corporate ladder." The court stated, "Partucci was clearly acting in part to benefit AML since his advancement within the corporation depended on AML's well-being and its lack of difficulties with the FDA." Similarly, in United States v. Cincotta, 689 F.2d 238, 241-42 (1st Cir. 1982), the court held, "criminal liability may be imposed on the corporation only where the agent is acting within the scope of his employment. That, in turn, requires that the agent be performing acts of the kind which he is authorized to perform, and those acts must be motivated -- at least in part -- by an intent to benefit the corporation." Applying this test, the court upheld the corporation's conviction, notwithstanding the substantial personal benefit reaped by its miscreant agents, because the fraudulent scheme required money to pass through the corporation's treasury and the fraudulently obtained goods were resold to the corporation's customers in the corporation's name. As the court concluded, "Mystic--not the individual defendants--was making money by selling oil that it had not paid for."
Moreover, the corporation need not even necessarily profit from its agent's actions for it to be held liable. In Automated Medical Laboratories, the Fourth Circuit stated:
enefit is not a "touchstone of criminal corporate liability; benefit at best is an evidential, not an operative, fact." Thus, whether the agent's actions ultimately redounded to the benefit of the corporation is less significant than whether the agent acted with the intent to benefit the corporation. The basic purpose of requiring that an agent have acted with the intent to benefit the corporation, however, is to insulate the corporation from criminal liability for actions of its agents which be inimical to the interests of the corporation or which may have been undertaken solely to advance the interests of that agent or of a party other than the corporation.
so did gtel benefit from any of these actions?
you left out sanswire.
and globalstar.
its a little fuzzy, since you seem to know more than me maybe you could fill in the details
nobody has said how globalstar fits into the scam.
any ideas?
why do yo always change the subject?
confused about which company issued stock?
you are so smart. do they need full boost at 6500 ft? i do not think so. my car uses 2 gph on the freeway. lmao.
you are all over the map! very impressive.
BTW i HAVE worked with ion thrusters. lol.
and you are definitely no engineer and no expert.
your OPINIONS add nothing here, just waste time and deceive.
thanx for the little bit of knowledge. its good to know about the ram jet, i will pass it along to dr k. lmao.
btw, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
first lets find out what engine tao is using. other wise all your babble is meaningless.
you are making all this up.
furthermore all your previous comments are wrong, do you want to ignore that? you are a lose cannon like Vern lmao.
and where do you get the 2 gph from?
my car uses 2 gph on the freeway! rotflmao
doesn't it bother you that somebody comes here out of the blue and just starts making posts (about a recent pr) that are just plain not true? don't you wonder what he is doing?
i would say yes,
lol.
that must be why the dod uses rotax so much.
lmao.
lmao
rotax makes many engines, what,"totally unreliable" model does sanswire use?
try and google this stuff:
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/05/a_lightweight_v.html
it seems there are plenty of two cycle engines with boost.
you claim to be an expert but you said,"Attempting to supercharge a 2-stroke engine seems ludicrous to me"
far from ludicrous!
you are wrong and you are no expert.
based on the sales?