The Journal also gets some nasty dirt on white-shoe law firm Fulbright & Jaworski. It offered a “settlement” (honk) of $500,000 to Aboubakare to get him to not talk to the Journal. Incredible.
The lawyer drafted a letter for Mr. Aboubakare to send the Journal. In it, he was to say that his statements to the Journal and to Mr. Minkow were false and that he had made them partly because stress “affected my judgment and mental well-being.”
I’m assuming PEMGroup had a nasty little run on the bank today.
The Journal has diminished its emphasis on long-form, in-depth reporting under Rupert Murdoch’s ownership, but this kind of story shows that it’s far from gone. Maremont shows the greatness the paper’s still got in it.
It’s a dirty word for Murdoch and Robert Thomson, but dare I say this story is Pulitzer material?
xxxxshows the greatness the paper’s still got in itxxxx
So where was the WSJ on the Madoff story? If this story is validated, it involves $3 million, versus $50 billion or so Madoff made off with. So the WSJ goes after the small fry while letting the big fish off?
#1 Posted by edward, CJR on Thu 16 Apr 2009 at 10:09 AM
Nations must avoid Ponzy schemes. I fear most political heroes are fake. Ponzy Schemes rule the world.
#2 Posted by M. Shahjahan Bhatti, CJR on Thu 16 Apr 2009 at 10:38 AM
Did this guy work for Enron? He would have fit in great there.
It may or may not be a ponzi scheme. Just because you borrow money to pay off prior debt does not mean its a ponzi scheme. A ponzi scheme involves a pyramid structure which in this article, I don't see it.
#3 Posted by Kyle, CJR on Thu 16 Apr 2009 at 04:15 PM
According to a Taiwanese financial reporting agency, 鉅亨網, Pang had fled to mainland China.
#4 Posted by Charles Liu, CJR on Tue 28 Apr 2009 at 02:30 AM
This Journalism does not seem to be balanced, especially for an institution like the WSJ. The primary allegations are made by a fired employee, who admitted many instances of illegal conduct, with an axe to grind.
#5 Posted by Paul, CJR on Wed 29 Apr 2009 at 12:42 PM
Hey, Paul,
I can guarantee you the Journal had much more than just the word of a fired employee.
Also, the federales arrested Pang today and the SEC charged him the other day.
The WSJ had this very right.
#6 Posted by Ryan Chittum, CJR on Wed 29 Apr 2009 at 01:49 PM