* LB CEO Defends his $484 Million Salary + Bonuses *

[Deuce_Wyld]

The former CEO of Lehman Brothers Richard Fuld defended his $484 Million Salary + Bonuses.

Four days before filing bankruptcy, Lehman's Brothers compensation committee
requested, that the board give three departing executives over $20 million in "special payments."

"In other words, even as Richard Fuld (Lehman Brothers CEO) was pleading with Secretary Paulson
for a federal rescue, Lehman continued to squander millions on executive compensation," Waxman said.

READ THE FULL STORY
CLICK HERE

 

[Cruise]

I saw the congressional hearings and was disgusted with the way the politicians would ask about his pay package but would not make him give up the money.

The a**hole former CEO of LB had the nerve to say he takes responsibility, but yet won't give back any of the money he took.

It was a real Bush move.

With a system like this, it's so easy to respect the players.

 

[QueEx]

Is there a legal basis for Congress to make him disgorge ???

If not, how could they do it ???

The huge take home doesn't look good, but if its not illegal,
how do you propose Congress make him give it up ???

QueEx

 

[Cruise]

I'll admit, it would take new legislation.

They could force it through the way they did with the $800 billion giveaway legislation signed last week.

It would be called the Government Compensation Recovery Act of 2008.

Any CEO responsible for destabilizing the credit markets in the form of bankruptcy, merger, liquidation, or government bailout must forfeit all compensation received WHILE CEO of said firm.

They could make it a felony for running a company into the ground.

I just wonder why Washington is afraid to do this?

It would solve a lot of the irresponsibility currently seen on Wall Street and the rest of the Fortune 500.

 

[QueEx]

They could make it a felony for running a company into the ground.

I just wonder why Washington is afraid to do this?

It would solve a lot of the irresponsibility currently seen on Wall Street and the rest of the Fortune 500.

Ever hear of Ex Post Facto ???

QueEx

 

[Deuce_Wyld]

I'll admit, it would take new legislation.

They could force it through the way they did with the $800 billion giveaway legislation signed last week.

It would be called the Government Compensation Recovery Act of 2008.

Any CEO responsible for destabilizing the credit markets in the form of bankruptcy, merger, liquidation, or government bailout must forfeit all compensation received WHILE CEO of said firm.

They could make it a felony for running a company into the ground.

I just wonder why Washington is afraid to do this?

It would solve a lot of the irresponsibility currently seen on Wall Street and the rest of the Fortune 500.

What he said

 

[Cruise]

Ever hear of Ex Post Facto ???

QueEx

I looked up the definition.

To me, this is irrelevant because there is no crime for receiving compensation.

The crime or legal action occurs when you declare bankruptcy, get government intervention, etc.

I equate it to drinking and driving. Drink all you want at the bar, but if you drive a car, you are breaking the law.

The CEOs got drunk from compensation and drove the companies while intoxicated with money.

They crashed the company and need to be thrown in jail with heavy fines and penalties.

 

[QueEx]

I looked up the definition.

To me, this is irrelevant because there is no crime for receiving compensation.

Try this. Stated simply it means you cannot pass a law today to make what was legal yesterday illegal today, AND, then use that law to try to punish someone today for what they did, yesterday.

Said another way, an ex post facto law one that is enacted after the occurrence of an event or action which acts retrospectively to change the legal consequences of the event or action.

As Applied Here: If the 484 million in compensation was legal to receive in the manner that it was received; Congress can not now pass a law making it ILLEGAL to receive the compensation in the manner that it was received, AND THEN use that law to have recipient have to return all or a portion of that compensation.

QueEx

 

[Cruise]

Try this. Stated simply it means you cannot pass a law today to make what was legal yesterday illegal today, AND, then use that law to try to punish someone today for what they did, yesterday.

Said another way, an ex post facto law one that is enacted after the occurrence of an event or action which acts retrospectively to change the legal consequences of the event or action.

As Applied Here: If the 484 million in compensation was legal to receive in the manner that it was received; Congress can not now pass a law making it ILLEGAL to receive the compensation in the manner that it was received, AND THEN use that law to have recipient have to return all or a portion of that compensation.

QueEx

Let me explain it like this.

For RICO (racketeering in criminal organizations) cases, the government can seize all assets from an enterprise, whether legal or illegal, if it is deemed any money could have been received from criminal acts.

My point is, criminal fraud occurred, as evidenced by a government bailout, forced merger, bankruptcy, etc. putting all compensation at risk of seizure.

But, I see your point.

No crime has been committed, in receiving compensation, if a Compensation Recovery Act does not exist.

However, they could prosecute Fuld for perjury before Congress for lying about the demise of Lehman Brothers.

It seems like they could prosecute him for criminal fraud for misrepresenting the viability of his company and the securities sold to investors.

Next, they could levy fines for billions of dollars (far exceeding his compensation) for his role in these criminal acts.

They do it all the time with African-Americans (overpunish for crimes, look at OJ or Jena Six or Kwame Kilpatrick).

Of course, none of these things will happen to this honkey.

 

[QueEx]

Hey, if what Fuld did violated RICO or any other criminal law, then he should receive his just rewards.

I didn't see the testimony so I have no idea whether Fuld committed fraud or misrepresentation. What did he do/say to lead you to the conclusion that he did ???

QueEx

 

[Cruise]

For those that missed it, the testimony is on YouTube if you do a search for Fuld.

I didn't want to post the videos because they are rather dull. But, it felt like this criminal was lying with every word he said.

I take responsibility. (what does that mean?)
The compensation committee worked. (for who?)
The company was in a strong financial position Sep. 10 (does strong mean failing?)
I lost all my shares and a lot of money (you also kept a lot of money)

I'm quite sure they could find hundreds of laws this guy broke (you don't make half-a-billion dollars in compensation of a failed firm without breaking the law at will).

Of course, Congress and the FBI will magically absolve him of all responsibility and let him keep all the money and live his comfortable lifestyle at everyone's expense.

 

[QueEx]

<font size="3">
Regarding compensation, see:

Judges in Dispute Over Mutual Fund Fees </font size>
http://www.bgol.us/board/showthread.php?t=297366&highlight=posner

`