It is very spectacular to talk about dummy corporations etc as being used to bribe public officials or money launder but, most Americans are much more sophisticated and know that these obvious devices went out with the horse and buggy - or least with the Clinton administration.
Only a rube would use any device that was obvious. The days of the white envelope filled with money or the dummy corporation are long gone. Instead:
1) The bargain. When Tony Resko wanted a favor from Mr. Obama, the Tribune and other newspapers reported that Resko purchased the lot adjacent to the Obama residence and sold it to the the Senator at a bargain price.
2) The Charitable donation - or campaign contribution. The UBS bank needed a favor from Secretary of State Clinton. It seems that the US Government issued an order that would adversely affect the Bank. So UBs just made a donation to the Clinton Foundation and the problem disappeared. The donee draws a nice salary, pension, etc from the Foundation.
These bribes (money laundering) are quite open and quite hard to prove as illegal. I have a Constitutional Right to be a bad investor, and I can sell my property to whomever I want without the consent of the government. Similarly, I have favorite charities. I do not have to prudent and ******. The Reports of Clinton perfidy are all great right wing conspiracies!
As I written in prior e-mails there are dozens of ways to bribe a judge, a political figure etc. Investigative reporter Janet Phalen researched the title records of Jerome Larkin and found interesting results. Larkin, a public official, does not bother to file ethics statements. The Larkin title reveals the gambit of unusual loans. A Bank can curry favor by giving a political official a favorable loan, and I can curry further favor by paying off the loan. The principal of the loan of course goes to the bribed public official. Loans also are a vehicle to launder money. ( I should not have to explain this gambit!) Loans, especially based upon negotiable instruments, circulate freely. They are like currency, and using discounts, commissions ***** a fertile field exists.
I trust you noticed that lawyers are not necessary for the foregoing transactions.
The first thing a crook learns is if you are going to commit a crime, do not do it in front of witnesses. The KISS principle is the 2nd thing a successful criminal learns. 60 minutes producers know or should know that big time criminals strictly adhere to these two principles. The people at the Department of Treasury are very smart and unlike many in the mainstream media, if you waive a red flag in front of their faces they react and enforce the law.
Let me poise a question. Why is Jerome Larkin and the IARDC, the two GALs in the Sykes case, the Attorney for the guardian in the Shykes case 09 P4585, ****** all afraid of an HONEST INVESTIGATION. Why does Larkin not file financial disclosures? Why has Larkin ignored all the citizen complaints concerning the Sykes and Gore complaints?
Investigative journalists report some very strange mortgage transactions involving Larkin et al. They all may be coincidental, however, it appears that similar scenarios (involving elder cleansings) go on in Florida.
______________________________
A favorite generation of money for bribes et al has been connoted in Florida, Illinois ****.
Looking at the Mary Sykes case 09 P 4585 (Cook County) let me point out the pattern:
1) a parcel of property is targeted. The elderly owner, has a guardian appointed and the guardian finds a co-operative judge and cries to the Judge: The estate is going bankrupt we have to sell mother's house to pay her bills.
2) the Court after a bit of pomp and Circumstances agrees and the great American Tragedy is reenacted. This house previously appraised at a million dollars has no takers, and no one is interested. (Of course there are no takers -- million dollar houses are not usually advertised in the local shopping news handouts) Finally, a "desperate" guardian appears in Court with an offer. It just so happens John Doe, a client of a very politically connected broker is offering $200,000 for the home.
3) the Court after delivering a very touching speech and expressing severe regret reluctantly approves the sale. (later on this same jurist approves most of the $200,000 being paid as fees to the guardian, his attorney, the Gal, etc - mother gets nothing.
The $800,000 difference between the value and the sale prices is cemented by a series of mesne sales that on the record all look legitimate, but are carefully orchestrated. Ultimately, a developer appears in the picture and miraculously the value of the property returns *****.
This scenario is repeated in many of the guardianship estates! This money laundering scheme was not disclosed in the 60 minute piece even though it is much more common that the dummy corporation gambit!
Ken Ditkowsky
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for commenting.
Your comment will be held for approval by the blog owner.