was that wrong

Picture 158.pngReason number one that Steven Mandala not only helped himself to $780,000 from the firm, but lied to get the job in the first place: he’d obviously tasked himself with testing MER’s due diligence and background checks on prospective employees, which he rightly assumed were not up to snuff:

Mandala, who earned about $100,000 annually at Maxim, last year applied for a job at Merrill Lynch, falsely claiming he was a partner at Maxim, that he managed $300 million in client assets and earned $765,000 in compensation against $1.5 million in revenue he generated, the Manhattan DA’s Office said. After Mandala produced fake pay stubs and tax forms to substantiate his bogus claims about his Maxim work, Merrill hired him on April 24, the DA said.

Over the next few months, after Mandala had his new boss loan him the 780 grand as “an incentive,” deposited the money into his parents’ bank account, and withdrew $245,589 to buy a red Ferrari, Mandala “frequently” failed to show up to work and only brought in two or three clients, which was undoubtedly part of his undercover work to see if management was keeping tabs on people. Determining he’d seen enough, SM the “resigned via e-mail” and “asked Merrill Lynch to throw out his personal effects,” so he could focus on other projects, like scamming his woman’s father, which required a bit more attention than taking ML for a ride.

Among [his personal affects] were credit cards obtained in the name of Carlos Gomes — the dad of Mandala’s girlfriend — which the broker had allegedly used to rack up tens of thousands of dollars in debt. Mandala’s lawyer, Franklin Rothman, said Gomes’ ID had been stolen by his daughter, “who had a bone to pick with her own father.”

andrew_cuomo.jpgAnd here’s what he’s doing about it:

New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo filed antitrust charges against Intel Corp., alleging the company threatened computer makers and paid huge kickbacks to stop them from using competitors’ chips.
The attorney general alleges Santa Clara, Calif.-based Intel violated federal and state antitrust laws, according to a statement released Wednesday. Intel wasn’t immediately available to comment.
The suit alleges that for several years, Intel sought to maintain its dominance of the computer-chip market by paying billions of dollars in kickbacks to computer makers under the guise of “rebates.” The suit also alleges Intel threatened computer-makers–including Hewlett-Packard Co., International Business Machines Corp., and Dell Inc.-with retribution if they marketed products with chips made by competitors.

The full complaint is here.

The Journal has published Hank Paulson’s prepared testimony for tomorrow’s hearing on the Hill. Apparently Bald is going to ramble on for about four pages until he finally gets to the following. Basically, what it comes down to is whether or not my definition of ‘appropriate’ is the same as yours. I think it’s appropriate to waterboard a CEO with his drink of choice, Strawberry Hill, until he agrees to do exactly as we say. If you don’t, I guess you’d characterize what I did as ‘inappropriate,’ which is your prerogative.
Picture 1724.png
Picture 1725.png