Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 24 of 24

Thread: Former DE Senator, Ted Kaufman Objects to SEC Nominee Jay Clayton

  1. #21
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Townsend
    Posts
    9,993

    Re: Former DE Senator, Ted Kaufman Objects to SEC Nominee Jay Clayton

    You make a convincing argument


  2. #22
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Travel from OK, to DE, NY, CA
    Posts
    1,516

    Re: Former DE Senator, Ted Kaufman Objects to SEC Nominee Jay Clayton

    Congrats on the Supreme Court win.

    Should Clayton be confirmed, may be before SCOTUS, sooner than planned.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Travel from OK, to DE, NY, CA
    Posts
    1,516

    Re: Former DE Senator, Ted Kaufman Objects to SEC Nominee Jay Clayton

    Washington, D.C. District Court Clerk is refusing to docket my Complaint requesting a TRO to block Fonald Trump's nominee (Jay Clayton) from being head of the SEC.

    The current excuse (juxtaposed with others) is that the Clerk of Court is under standing orders to block poor people from filing complaints as poor people.

    Said they need 6 to 8 weeks to investigate my poor man status.

    Perhaps I should send them a snap shot of the bedbug bites on my leg, from having to sleep in a place with 6 others.

    Talk about violations of due process Civil Rights..

    Shheesshh

  4. #24
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Travel from OK, to DE, NY, CA
    Posts
    1,516

    Re: Former DE Senator, Ted Kaufman Objects to SEC Nominee Jay Clayton

    As my letter to Trump, 8 New York Judges, and others, stated, Goldman Sachs and Bain Capital are partners in crime, against our eToys public company, GSachs & Bain Cap., deliberately destroyed via their bad faith counsels who LIED UNDER OATH (Paul Traub confessed deliberately doing so).
    (see Wall Street Journal July 2005
    http://www.post-gazette.com/business...s/200507250210 )

    Goldman Sachs took eToys public doing hundreds of millions of dollars in a pump-n-dump stock fraud "spinning" scheme.
    (see NY Times March 2013
    https://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/03/1...-ipo-game.html )

    Goldman Sachs Delaware law firm LIED UNDER OATH in the eToys bankruptcy case, hiding the fact it was Goldman Sachs law firm, to become eToys Debtor counsel ..AND THIS IS NOW CONFESSED.
    (see court's Published OPINION pages 25 thru 29
    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...ysmnatfees.pdf )

    Whilst benefiting from those acts of perjury Paul Traub and Goldman Sachs Delaware law firm colluded and put forth a Forged "HAAS Affidavit" telling the court Laser HAAS waived millions of dollars in fees (probably talking about my turning down and reporting their bribe offer)

    Though the court ruled the lawyers had an "actual" conflict if interest that did "harm" the eToys estate about Goldman Sachs issues - that same court allowed the forgery to stay in the record and ruled this whistleblower must have the court"s permission to inform it about the fraud.

    HAAS must have the court's permission to inform the court that the HAAS Affidavit is a forgery. (As if someone really needs to prove they didnt give away millions of dollars in fees earned over a year - to parties admitting dozens of erroneous affidavits).

    By the LAW the Dept of Justice and the chief justice were required to Disqualify all the bad faith parties.(In re Middleton Arms).

    Including eToys CEO who testified, under penalty of perjury, that he was "extensive" arm's length from Creditors counsel Paul Traub (when they were actually partners {see Published OPINION linked above}).

    THEN the corrupt eToys Debtor counsel (secretly also Goldman Sachs counsel) nominated the corrupt eToys creditors counsel (Paul Traub) to be the one to prosecute Goldman Sachs - for a billion dollar stock fraud "spinning" scheme.

    In essence, Goldman Sachs sued Goldman Sachs -thousands lost a billion.

    None of this was prosecuted because of Department of Justice Conflict of Interests by "switching sides" (revolving door) where a Bain Cap., / Goldman Sachs law firm partner, was arranged ro become the very United States Attorney over these cases. (and to this very day ..they are trying to cover this up)

    http://crooksandliars.com/2015/01/mi...eering-lawsuit

    https://www.justice.gov/archive/olp/...ollyresume.htm

    Sullivan & Cromwell is the firm representing Sachs in the case NY Supreme Court of eToys (ebc1) v. Goldman Sachs

    That Paul Traub settled for a measly $7.5 million in 2013; and the crooked lawyers argued over who gets what of the $7.5. Then they closed eToys case in 201t (which, even without the US Attorney corruption, gives me 5 years Statute of limitations ..to 2020).

    To imply SullCrom was unaware its sister Delaware law firm was caught for playing fraud games, is a testimony disingenuous and of gross incompetence of the highest order.

    Especially given the fact it was aSullCrom partner who pointed out eToys (Gsachs) law firm asked for (and received) permission to Destroy eToys Books & Records (early in the case).

    Then that SullCrom attorney was removed from the case and I've cried foul to SullCrom a dozen times (and sued Sachs for RICO).



    NOW....a man (Jay Clayton) who is partners of SullCrom, who also works for Goldman Sachs (and wife is an executive of Sachs) who also invested in Bain Capital is nominated to be in charge of Goldman Sachs/ Bain Capital inquiries.

    In other words Nitti is to be put in charge of Capone cases.

    When people bark ...block..and deride about me, just because their guy is in office, they can't possibly be remarking about my character or the validity of the facts (which are all public docket records)

    Fighting against me (defending "them") is a testimony about the character of the those attacking me (obtuse to mayhem & murders).

    It's absurd that people argue for crooks to remain "Scot Free", simply because the crooks are in their neighborhood.

    this isnt ethical rocket science

    And the arguments that "my guys" can do corruption and fraud ...is...reprehensible/ABSURD!

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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