Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Non-Tech : The Enron Scandal - Unmoderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (1951)	3/22/2002 11:00:53 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Respond to of 3602

ANDERSEN: FERAL ZOMBIE CAPITALISM MEETS IT'S MATCH Hi Glenn, Re: Andersen's hopelessly fading. Some of us sincerely hope so, for very good reasons: Message 17019591

To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (1951)	4/1/2002 1:25:32 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 3602

Is Andersen furor letting Enron off the hook? By David Greising The Chicago Tribune Published Sunday March 31, 2002 It was quite a week at Firm Woebegone, better known as Andersen. The CEO quit. The former chairman of the Federal Reserve wants to step in. Groups of partners prepared to bail out. And a few dozen associates in New York braved a drenching rain to remind us that "We are Andersen." The government doesn't like all the sloganeering and demonstrating. It warned late last week that the protests might amount to witness intimidation and jury tampering in the matter of the United States vs. Andersen. Simmer down, gumshoes. No pinstriped protesting will sway any jury when "The Andersen 2,300" have their day in court. "The Andersen 2,300?" you ask. The feds made me call them that. No individual is named in the lone obstruction-of-justice charge that could destroy Andersen. All stand accused. The whole firm stands to pay the ultimate price. The Andersen 2,300 fits. But hold on. Wasn't there another outfit involved in the Andersen mess? Wasn't there some company that got Andersen into all this trouble in the first place? It's coming back to me now. A crooked "E." Lots of political cash. Big energy trader. Dense balance sheet. Enron. That's right. Enron. Remember Enron? If you do, good for you. You're apparently one step ahead of the Justice Department, the Securities and Exchange Commission, much of Congress and any other body of power and enforcement in the United States. Andersen has been charged and, in a sense, convicted already. The criminal obstruction-of-justice complaint may put the firm out of business, no matter how hard former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker tries to save it. But what about Enron? It seems to me that Enron was involved in this whole mess somehow. It's coming back to me now. A congressional hearing room. Late January. Stunned lawmakers are learning that an Enron contractor named Shredco is still destroying documents--nearly three months after an SEC investigation began. But still no charges against Enron. A former Enron executive, hair combed back. Smooth talker. Oh yes. Former CEO Jeff Skilling testifying that he knew nothing about shady deals, conflicts of interest and executive enrichment. Enron, he insisted, was in great shape the day he left--two months before the earnings restatement that caused Enron's collapse. Other witnesses stoutly refute Skilling. A congressman raises the prospect of a perjury case against him. But still no Enron charges. Executives dumping their stock while urging employees to buy it. Ignoring Andersen's advice and publishing misleading financial statements. Locking employees' retirement savings into Enron stock before disclosing the deadly earnings restatement. But still no Enron charges. Justice is supposed to be swift. Experience tells us it isn't always so. But justice is supposed to be fair. And it's hardly even-handed that a rough frontier justice could come down so quickly on The Andersen 2,300 while Enron executives have yet to hear a knock at the door. Andersen has been brought to the brink of demise by an indictment stemming from an admitted frenzy of document destruction. Enron and its former officials won't admit anything. And the government so far has not demanded that they answer for any of it. There are those who put the darkest spin on this incongruous picture. They say politics is behind it. That Enron's political money, its executives' close ties to the Bush administration, its involvement in government energy policy and market deregulation all are still paying dividends. I don't buy that. Not yet anyway. But it's a shame that Andersen has been offered up to the TV cameras and the courts while Enron has become the company whose name must not be uttered. Does anyone in the Bush administration--from the president to Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill to Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft to SEC Chairman Harvey Pitt--even know how to pronounce the word? It's time for some arm of justice to put Enron back in the news. ---------- Contact: dgreising@tribune.com Copyright © 2002, Chicago Tribune