cryptogon.com

Tishman, which bought the 80-acre property with BlackRock Realty Inc. in 2006 for $5.4 billion, missed a $16.1 million debt payment on Jan. 8. Gramercy Capital Corp., which holds some of the debt, asked to have Tishman removed as manager of the buildings, three people familiar with the matter said last week.

“We make this decision as we feel a battle over the property or a contested bankruptcy proceeding is not in the long-term interest of the property, its residents, our partnership or the city,” Tishman and BlackRock said in an e- mailed statement today.

The New York-based investors bought the developments from insurer MetLife Inc. near the top of the market with plans to remodel and raise the cost of rent-regulated units to market rates. On Oct. 22, the New York Court of Appeals in Albany ruled that increases on about 4,350 apartments were illegal. That month, Fitch Ratings valued the property at $1.8 billion.

The request to keep the details secret were made by the New York Federal Reserve — a regulator that helped orchestrate the bailout — and by the giant insurer itself, according to the emails.

The emails from early last year reveal that officials at the New York Fed were only comfortable with AIG submitting a critical bailout-related document to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission after getting assurances from the regulatory agency that “special security procedures” would be used to handle the document.

The SEC, according to an email sent by a New York Fed lawyer on January 13, 2009, agreed to limit the number of SEC employees who would review the document to just two and keep the document locked in a safe while the SEC considered AIG’s confidentiality request.

The SEC had also agreed that if it determined the document should not be made public, it would be stored “in a special area where national security related files are kept,” the lawyer wrote.

In another email, a New York Fed official said the SEC suggested in late December 2008, that AIG file the document under seal and then apply to the regulatory agency for so-called confidential treatment, if central bankers wanted to stop the information from becoming public.

The emails were included in the mountain of documents the New York Fed turned over last week to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, which will hold a hearing Wednesday into the AIG bailout and the New York Fed’s role in trying keep the specific terms of that Fed-engineered rescue in November 2008, from being made public.

More than a year later, the Fed’s bailout of AIG remains controversial because it funneled nearly $70 billion to 16 big U.S. and European banks that had bought credit default swaps from AIG. Banks like Goldman Sachs Group Inc, Societe Generale and Deutsche Bank had bought those insurance-like derivatives to guard against defaults on hundreds of securities backed by subprime mortgages.

‘BACKDOOR BAILOUT’

Lawmakers on Capitol Hill have labeled the AIG bailout, in which the New York Fed created a special entity to purchase those securities from the banks at essentially their face value, a “backdoor bailout” for the 16 financial institutions.

The new batch of emails, along with others that have become public in recent weeks, reveal that some at the New York Fed had gone to great lengths to keep the terms of the bailout private and the SEC may have played a role in contributing to some of the secrecy surrounding the AIG rescue package.

“The New York Fed was orchestrating what can only be characterized as an extreme effort to ensure that details of the counterparty deal stayed secret,” Rep. Darrell Issa from California, the ranking Republican on the House Oversight Committee, said through a spokesman. “More and more it looks as if they would’ve kept the details of the deal secret indefinitely, it they could have.”

In March, some of the secrecy surrounding the AIG bailout began to fall away when the insurer, under pressure from Congress and the SEC, agreed to publicly name the 16 banks that got money in the rescue package and how much each received.

But AIG, largely at the prodding of the New York Fed, refused to make public all of the information in the controversial document, officially called “Schedule A — List of Derivative Transactions,” according to the emails turned over by the central bank to Capitol Hill. AIG continued to seek confidential treatment from the SEC for the redacted portions of the five-page filing.

Last May, the SEC did grant AIG’s request for confidential treatment for the remaining redacted portions of the Schedule A filing. The redacted parts include the CUSIP, or trading ID, number for each security on which AIG wrote a CDS contract, as well as the face value of each individual security that AIG had insured against default.

The SEC agreed to let AIG keep that information confidential until November 2018 — or the 10th anniversary of the bailout. Critics contend that without the redacted information, it is difficult to determine which of the 16 banks had held the worst-performing securities, and which banks originated the worst of the troubled securities.

GEITHNER UNDER MICROSCOPE

The New York Fed has argued the information needs to remain confidential to enable BlackRock Inc, which manages the portfolio of securities bought from the banks, to compete with hedge funds on an even playing field.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who has drawn fire for his role in the bailout, was set to testify before the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday. Geithner, who led the New York Fed at the time of the AIG bailout, has said he was not privy to the discussions about what information AIG should or should not release to the public and the SEC.

New York Fed spokeswoman Deborah Kilroe said on Friday that the more than 250,000 pages of documents provided by the central bank to Congress “demonstrate that the FBNY’s actions assisted AIG in ensuring the accuracy of its disclosures and protected important U.S. taxpayer interests.”

For its part, SEC has said it pushed AIG to make public the list of banks getting bailout money and only signed off on the request for confidential treatment after the insurer released that information. SEC spokesman John Nestor said: “The SEC required AIG to make public all of the information in Schedule A that was material to an investor in AIG.”

But this latest round of emails reveals that it was an official with the SEC in December 2008 who recommended that AIG and the New York Fed could seek confidential treatment for the Schedule A document as an alternative to making the entire document public.

In November, a New York Fed lawyer, in another email, had said he thought it was “highly unlikely” the SEC would grant confidential treatment for the document.

AIG and the New York Fed took the SEC’s advice and filed a heavily redacted version of the Schedule A on January 14, 2009, and at the same time requested confidential treatment for the redacted portions.

We are working on resolving this issue as fast as possible. Please use our bank accounts for direct transfer in the meantime, or contact wl-donations@sunshinepress.org for any further questions.

“People elected Democrats in 2008 to change the country’s direction,” he told Raw Story in a nearly hour-long interview.

“And the same entrenched interests that George Bush could not shake, this current White House is having great difficulty in shaking. One could suggest they might be more entrenched than ever.”

Kucinich staunchly defended liberalism but alleged that Democrats are not behaving like liberals.

“There’s nothing liberal about the bailouts. There’s nothing liberal about standing by and watching banks use public money to get their executive bonuses. There’s nothing liberal about giving insurance companies carte blanche to charge anything they want for health care… Since when did that become liberal?”

“There’s nothing liberal about letting coal and oil write climate change legislation,” he added. “Are you kidding me?”

The 13-year congressman lamented the lack of change in economic policies, tying it to the major problems Democrats are facing.

“The minute the president appointed Tim Geithner and Larry Summers to key policy positions, and the minute that [Ben] Bernanke was named to head the Fed again, we’re looking at people who participated in the decline of the economy,” he said. “This group has done us a disservice.”

“Every area of the economy is still about taking wealth from the great mass of people and putting it into the hands of a few. If you don’t have a economic democracy, you don’t have a political democracy.”

In a draconian – and highly unusual – order, Lord Hutton, the peer who chaired the controversial inquiry into the Dr Kelly scandal, has secretly barred the release of all medical records, including the results of the post mortem, and unpublished evidence.

The move, which will stoke fresh speculation about the true circumstances of Dr Kelly’s death, comes just days before Tony Blair appears before the Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq War.

It is also bound to revive claims of an establishment cover-up and fresh questions about the verdict that Dr Kelly killed himself.

Tonight, Dr Michael Powers QC, a doctor campaigning to overturn the Hutton findings, said: ‘What is it about David Kelly’s death which is so secret as to justify these reports being kept out of the public domain for 70 years?’

Campaigning Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker, who has also questioned the verdict that Dr Kelly committed suicide, said: ‘It is astonishing this is the first we’ve known about this decision by Lord Hutton and even more astonishing he should have seen fit to hide this material away.’

The body of former United Nations weapons inspector Dr Kelly was found in July 2003 in woods close to his Oxfordshire home, shortly after he was exposed as the source of a BBC news report questioning the Government’s claims that

Saddam Hussein had an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, which could be deployed within 45 minutes.

Lord Hutton’s 2004 report, commissioned by Mr Blair, concluded that Dr Kelly killed himself by cutting his wrist with a blunt gardening knife.

It was dismissed by many experts as a whitewash for clearing the Government of any culpability, despite evidence that it had leaked Dr Kelly’s name in an attempt to smear him.

Only now has it emerged that a year after his inquiry was completed, Lord Hutton took unprecedented action to ensure that the vital evidence remains a state secret for so long.

A letter, leaked to The Mail on Sunday, revealed that a 30-year ban was placed on ‘records provided [which were] not produced in evidence’. This is thought to refer to witness statements given to the inquiry which were not disclosed at the time.

In addition, it has now been established that Lord Hutton ordered all medical reports – including the post-mortem findings by pathologist Dr Nicholas Hunt and photographs of Dr Kelly’s body – to remain classified information for 70 years.

The normal rules on post-mortems allow close relatives and ‘properly interested persons’ to apply to see a copy of the report and to ‘inspect’ other documents.

Lord Hutton’s measure has overridden these rules, so the files will not be opened until all such people are likely to be dead.

Last night, the Ministry of Justice was unable to explain the legal basis for Lord Hutton’s order.

The restrictions came to light in a letter from the legal team of Oxfordshire County Council to a group of doctors who are challenging the Hutton verdict.

Last year, a group of doctors, including Dr Powers, compiled a medical dossier as part of their legal challenge to the Hutton verdict.

They argue that Hutton’s conclusion that Dr Kelly killed himself by severing the ulnar artery in his left wrist after taking an overdose of prescription painkillers is untenable because the artery is small and difficult to access, and severing it could not have caused death.

In their 12-page opinion, they concluded: ‘The bleeding from Dr Kelly’s ulnar artery is highly unlikely to have been so voluminous and rapid that it was the cause of death. We advise the instructing solicitors to obtain the autopsy reports so that the concerns of a group of properly interested medical specialists can be answered.’

Tonight, Dr Powers, a former assistant coroner, added: ‘Supposedly all evidence relevant to the cause of death has been heard in public at the time of Lord Hutton’s inquiry. If these secret reports support the suicide finding, what could they contain that could be so sensitive?’

The letter disclosing the 70-year restriction was written by Nick Graham, assistant head of legal and democratic services at Oxfordshire Council.

It states: ‘Lord Hutton made a request for the records provided to the inquiry, not produced in evidence, to be closed for 30 years, and that medical (including post-mortem) reports and photographs be closed for 70 years.’

Nicholas Gardiner, the Chief Coroner for Oxfordshire, confirmed that he had seen the letter.

Speaking to The Mail on Sunday today, he said: ‘I know that Lord Hutton made that recommendation. Someone told me at the time. Anybody concerned will be dead by then, and that is quite clearly Lord Hutton’s intention.’

Asked what was in the records that made it necessary for them to be embargoed, Mr Gardiner said: ‘They’re Lord Hutton’s records not mine. You’d have to ask him.’

He added that in his opinion Lord Hutton had embargoed the records to protect Dr Kelly’s children.

The inquest into Dr Kelly’s death was suspended before it could begin by the then Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer. He used the Coroners Act to designate the Hutton Inquiry as ‘fulfilling the function of an inquest’.

News that the records will be kept secret comes just days before Mr Blair gives evidence to the Chilcot Inquiry on Friday.

To date, Dr Kelly’s name has scarcely been mentioned at the inquiry. One source who held a private meeting with Sir John Chilcot before the proceedings began said that Sir John had admitted he ‘did not want to touch the Kelly issue’ .

A spokesman for the Ministry of Justice said: ‘Any decision made by Lord Hutton at the time of his inquiry was entirely a matter for him.’

A spokesman for Thames Valley Police said yesterday that it would not be possible to search their records during the weekend.

The body of the 52-year-old was found in a junk-strewn suburban backyard eight days after he was reported missing.

While a missing person’s investigation into his business activities across Australia and New Zealand turned up nothing unusual, it’s believed detectives uncovered details of the Harvard graduate’s secret double life.

Police discovered Mr Rockefeller had been using erotic websites to find partners within Melbourne’s swingers’ network, sources close to the family have told AAP.

His relatives have been told of the development, with his brother Robert saying on Saturday that they were “devastated by Herman’s loss and deeply shocked by the circumstances surrounding his death”.

The development allegedly led police to a Hadfield home near Melbourne Airport, where Mr Rockefeller had met two residents who are now charged with his murder.

Mario Schembri, 57, of Wallan, and Bernadette Denny, 41, of Hadfield, will appear in court on Monday.

An out-of-sessions court hearing has been told Mr Rockefeller was killed at their home within hours of his return from an interstate business trip.

The property investor was last seen on CCTV footage at Melbourne Airport after 9pm (AEDT) on January 21.

Both Schembri and Denny have admitted to being involved in a fight with Mr Rockefeller, which led to his death, and have told police they assisted or had knowledge of the disposal of his body, the court heard.

Police were taken to a home in the neighbouring suburb of Glenroy on Friday evening and there they found human remains in a backyard cluttered with car and boat parts.

Neighbours said homicide detectives questioned them about any unusual activity in the area.

“They asked whether we had seen fire or smelled fire,” Marika Williams, 33, told AAP.

“And we did mention that on Australia Day we had smelled something about four o’clock in the afternoon.”

Forensic testing is under way to confirm if the human remains are those of Mr Rockefeller, but police have already told his family that they are those of their missing relative.

Mr Rockefeller allegedly died in a run-down home a world apart from his million-dollar lifestyle in East Malvern where he enjoyed a mortgage-free mansion, a home office and two teenage children – one who was recently accepted into medical school.

He could have retired at 40 after holding senior business positions with New Zealand’s Brierley Investments and the Pratt family’s Visy empire in Melbourne, but he kept working to keep busy, making millions off property investments in Tasmania, Victoria and NSW.

Friends say the American-born businessman and avid marathon runner had no hints of a secret life and was a devoted family man.

His wife heard virtually every phone call he made because of their shared office.

When Mr Rockefeller vanished, police considered a vast range of theories from kidnapping to a mid-life crisis as possible explanations.

Detectives followed those theories for days as unconfirmed sightings poured in across Victoria. All of those sightings have now been discounted.

After his 2007 Toyota Prius was found abandoned in rural Victoria four days after his last confirmed sighting his family stopped giving media interviews. Homicide detectives then became more involved in the investigation.

“I spent probably the best four days I’ve spent with my brother,” he said.

Herman Rockefeller disappeared on Thursday night after leaving Melbourne Airport following an interstate business trip.

His worried wife Vicky contacted police within two hours after he failed to arrive home, but detectives have been unable to find any trace of the property investor, who is due to turn 52 on Monday.

Mr Rockefeller, of Malvern East, was apparently in good health, and his family don’t believe he has any enemies.

“This is the most baffling case in 31 years of my career. I can’t understand where this person has gone,” Detective Leading Senior Constable Peter Towner told reporters on Sunday.

Central to the investigation is the whereabouts of Mr Rockefeller’s car, a blue 2007 Toyota Prius, which was seen exiting Melbourne airport about 9.30pm on Thursday.

Mr Rockefeller had been in NSW on a four-day business trip with his brother.

He flew from Newcastle to Brisbane on Thursday afternoon and contacted his wife and daughter just before boarding a Virgin flight to Melbourne.

Police say he landed in Melbourne about 9pm and was seen walking alone to the long-term car park. At 9.32pm his car, registration UUP-682, was seen on security vision leaving the pre-paid credit card exit.

The father of two never made it home.

Police say Mr Rockefeller’s bank account has not been touched and his mobile phone remained switched off after the flight.

His Citylink account had not been activated, although the tollways were his logical route home from the airport.

“It’s totally out of character,” a distraught Mrs Rockefeller said.

“It’s just absolutely baffling, there’s nothing. That’s why we just have to appeal to the public to look for that car and for him. We’ve got no other avenues to go down.

“You just can’t imagine what it’s like. It’s just unbearable.”

Police say there is nothing to suggest foul play but have no leads into the mysterious disappearance.

Mr Rockefeller’s brother Robert said the pair had had meetings in Sydney, Bowral and Maitland regarding their family-run property investment business and Herman had been in good spirits.

“Why this is so out of character and so baffling and any family’s worst nightmare (is because) I spent probably the best four days I’ve ever had with my brother,” Robert Rockefeller said.

“Business is going great, a lot of opportunities for our business going forward, we had a strategy and we had a plan. He was thrilled about his daughter getting into Monash medicine, in fact when he heard the news on Monday afternoon he started crying.”

“We’re deeply disappointed in the judge’s ruling,” said EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. “This ruling robs innocent telecom customers of their privacy rights without due process of law. Setting limits on Executive power is one of the most important elements of America’s system of government, and judicial oversight is a critical part of that.”

In the ruling, issued late Thursday, U.S. District Court Chief Judge Vaughn Walker held that the privacy harm to millions of Americans from the illegal spying dragnet was not a “particularized injury” but instead a “generalized grievance” because almost everyone in the United States has a phone and Internet service.

“The alarming upshot of the court’s decision is that so long as the government spies on all Americans, the courts have no power to review or halt such mass surveillance even when it is flatly illegal and unconstitutional,” said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston. “With new revelations of illegal spying being reported practically every other week — just this week, we learned that the FBI has been unlawfully obtaining Americans’ phone records using Post-It notes rather than proper legal process — the need for judicial oversight when it comes to government surveillance has never been clearer.”

The arms manufacturer BAE Systems, which produces a range of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for war zones, is adapting the military-style planes for a consortium of government agencies led by Kent police.

Documents from the South Coast Partnership, a Home Office-backed project in which Kent police and others are developing a national drone plan with BAE, have been obtained by the Guardian under the Freedom of Information Act.