Sheltering the guilty. KPMG helped its clients steal $1.4 billion from American taxpayers, and yet the Justice Department is reluctant to indict it (WSJ):

Federal prosecutors have built a criminal case against KPMG LLP for obstruction of justice and the sale of abusive tax shelters, igniting a debate among top Justice Department officials over whether to seek an indictment -- at the risk of killing one of the four remaining big accounting firms.

[...]

The threat of an indictment could persuade KPMG to settle the case with substantial financial penalties under a deferred-prosecution agreement or other settlement. For Justice Department officials, avoiding an indictment could avert serious damage to KPMG -- an "Andersen scenario" that could cost thousands of employees their jobs and deprive KPMG's hundreds of clients of a choice for accounting services.

Just two weeks ago the Supreme Court reversed the conviction of the big accounting firm Arthur Andersen, which collapsed after being indicted by the Justice Department for obstruction of justice in connection with its role in the Enron Corp. scandal. The Andersen reversal also provided a reminder that the government can lose these big cases. Any trial involving accounting will be highly complex for a jury and difficult to argue for prosecutors.

[...]

The case against KPMG and some of its former executives centers on the promotion of tax shelters aimed at wealthy individuals and in great demand during the 1990s economic boom. KPMG's tax-shelter products cost government as much as $1.4 billion in lost revenue, the IRS has said.

The shelters, known by acronyms FLIP, OPIS, BLIPS and SC2, among others, were the subject of a U.S. Senate investigation two years ago. A November 2003 report concluded that "dubious tax shelters are no longer the province of shady, fly-by-night companies, ... they are now big business."

The investigation singled out KPMG, saying "although KPMG denies being a tax-shelter promoter, the evidence establishes that KPMG devoted substantial resources to, and obtained significant fees from ... potentially abusive and illegal tax shelters ... costing the U.S. Treasury billions." In the years since the shelters were exposed, hundreds of clients have settled with the IRS, turning over millions of dollars. Many clients, in turn, have sued KPMG.

So, who cares?

There are two aspects that are relevant to today's political climate. First, the government was willing to indict a company (Arthur Andersen) whose activities contributed to the financial damage of a large but limited number of private individuals and institutions (Enron employees and shareholders). Now the same government appears to be unwilling to indict a competing company whose activities contributed to the financial damage of every US taxpayer, that is, the public at large. This inconsistency suggests that the Justice Department is misnamed.

Second, this larger inconsistency, and the fact of the Andersen conviction being overturned, support one of the pet theories of this blog: namely, that the de facto destruction of Arthur Andersen (the lack of legality of the conviction doesn't affect that Andersen is now for all purposes a corporate corpse) was simultaneously a sideshow to move the heat of the spotlight from Enron senior management to its undoubtedly guilty but less pivotal auditor, as well as a cover for the vice president.

All of the anguished public hand-wringing about "killing" one of the then five remaining big accounting firms didn't apply when one of those big accounting firms was Halliburton's auditor while Dick Cheney was CEO: Arthur Andersen. The SEC investigation of Halliburton's accounting irregularities on Cheney's watch couldn't get very far when the auditor has been vaporized by the Justice Department, under the direction of an all-energy crony White House. ["Under Cheney's tenure, accounting irregularities at the company exceeded $234 million, according to documents obtained by the watchdog group Center for Public Integrity."]

So spare us the violins if KPMG goes down. As accessory to the theft of $1.4 billion from the US Treasury, KPMG deserves a big "fuck you" sung from taxpayers from sea to shining sea.

For a trip down memory lane, you can see older posts on this topic here, here, and here. Note that one of KPMG's notorious rich tax shelter clients was none other than Terri Schiavo's ophthamologist, kitten killer Bill Frist.

{ 9:16 AM }

.

Jeb Schiavo. Lest we forget, it wasn't just Frist — for eighteen months, dynasty member Jeb Bush's fingerprints were also all over Terri Schiavo:

26 August 2003: Florida Governor Jeb Bush asks court to appoint new guardian for Mrs Schiavo; court does not act

17 September 2003: Judge orders feeding tube removal on 15 October

22 September 2003: Parents petition Federal Court

15 October 2003: Doctors remove Mrs Schiavo's feeding tube

21 October 2003: Florida's lower house passes a law giving Jeb Bush the power to order doctors to feed Mrs Schiavo - the law is known as "Terri's Law"

22 October 2003: Doctors start giving fluids to Mrs Schiavo and a day later her feeding tube is reinserted

30 October 2003: Michael Schiavo asks Florida Court to strike down Terri's law as unconstitutional

6 May 2004: County Court rules that Terri's Law is unconstitutional and a violation of the right to privacy

23 September 2004: Florida's Supreme Court strikes down Terri's Law

4 October 2004: Jeb Bush files motion for rehearing of Mrs Schiavo's case

1 December 2004: Jeb Bush asks US Supreme court to accept the case for review

25 January 2005: US Supreme Court rejects Jeb Bush's appeal to change ruling

23 February 2005: Judge extends a last-minute stay and orders that doctors must wait for a further court ruling before removing Mrs Schiavo's feeding tube

25 February 2005: County Court judge issues a three week stay

12 March 2005: Michael Schiavo refuses an offer of $1m (£520,000) from a Californian businessman to keep his wife alive

16 March 2005: Florida Appeals Court refuses to block removal of Mrs Schiavo's feeding tube and sets 18 March 2005 as the day the tube will be removed

17 March 2005: The Schindlers file an emergency motion at the US Supreme Court to block the removal of Mrs Schiavo's feeding tube.

They say lower courts need time to consider whether their daughter's religious freedom and due process rights have been violated.

18 March 2005: The US House of Representatives and US Senate both move to block the removal of Mrs Schiavo's feeding tube - but Judge Greer rejects the manoeuvres and orders the tube removed.

20 March 2005: The Senate passes an emergency bill calling for a federal court to review the case.

21 March 2005: The House of Representatives backs the bill in the early hours of the morning, and it is signed almost immediately into law by President Bush.

22 March 2005: A Florida judge refuses to order doctors to resume feeding, on the grounds that the family is unlikely to win a new court case.

23 March 2005: A panel of appeal judges backs the Florida decision.

24 March 2005: The US Supreme Court refuses to hear an emergency appeal by Mrs Schiavo's parents, and later a Florida judge rejects a petition by Governor Jeb Bush to become her legal guardian.

Eighteen months is a long time to pander, but those Bush boys seem to have unlimited stamina for wrong-headedness (cf. George W and his limp take-it-to-the-shills campaign for Social Security privatization).

Someday we'll need to remember how profoundly Jeb Bush pandered to his perceived base, in all opposition to actual public opinion.

{ 3:09 PM }

.

“Do you think I should shave my vagina tonight or tomorrow?” John Aravosis interviews porn star and Bush/Rove booster Mary Carey.

{ 2:36 PM }

.

On second thought, confiscate their yachts. Doomsday observations from a crackpot Christian Science Monitor staff writer:

The income gap between the rich and the rest of the US population has become so wide, and is growing so fast, that it might eventually threaten the stability of democratic capitalism itself.

Is that a liberal's talking point? Sure. But it's also a line from the recent public testimony of a champion of the free market: Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan.

America's powerful central banker hasn't suddenly lurched to the left of Democratic National Committee chief Howard Dean. His solution is better education today to create a flexible workforce for tomorrow - not confiscation of plutocrats' yachts.

Holy shit! The stability of democratic capitalism is itself threatened by current trends in income? Oh my God! Who should we blame?

Instead of simply reporting on the facts that bolster his assertion in the first graf, Peter Grier, the author of this monstrosity, chooses to gratuitously swipe at liberals twice within the next two grafs.

Since when is Howard Dean the ne plus ultra of American leftism? Why is liberalism itself such a prominent feature of this story? Aren't talking points a more characteristic tactic of the monolithic Right than the slapdash, ineffectual Left?

Later in the article we get these gems of journalistic integrity: "So are liberals overjoyed by these words from a man who is the high priest of capitalism? Not really, or at least not entirely." Liberals overjoyed about income equality just because it's validated by Greenspan? Peter, what are you smoking?

Or this: "On the other hand, some conservatives label the whole inequality debate a myth. The media's recent focus on the subject stems from its liberal bias and clever press management by Democrats, they say."

Peter, what the fuck? Get your head out of your ass. Liberals aren't the problem — plutocrats, their yachts, and their lackeys in the press and in government are the problem.

Look in the mirror. Now look at your yacht. Don't have a yacht? Then you're a lackey. Stop kissing pork-greased plutocratic ass already.

{ 1:44 PM }

.

Alternative transportation. World Naked Bike Ride Chicago.

{ 9:31 AM }

.