ReportWire

Tag: Corporate crime

  • US agency raises ‘serious concerns’ about tech visa lottery

    US agency raises ‘serious concerns’ about tech visa lottery

    BERKELEY, Calif. — The number of applications for visas used in the technology industry soared for a second straight year, raising “serious concerns” that some are manipulating the system to gain an unfair advantage, authorities said Friday.

    There were 780,884 applications for H-1B visas in this year’s computer-generated lottery, up 61% from 483,927 last year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services said in a message to “stakeholders.” Last year’s haul was up 57% from 308,613 applications the year before.

    Each year, up to 85,000 people are selected for H-1B visas, a mainstay for technology giants such as Amazon.com Inc., Google parent Alphabet Inc., Facebook parent Meta Platforms Inc. and International Business Machines Corp.

    Last year, the government began requiring workers who won the lottery to sign affidavits stating they didn’t try to game the system by working with others to file multiple bids under different company names, even if there was no underlying employment offer. By winning at least once, they could market their services to technology companies that wanted to fill positions but didn’t have visas, effectively becoming labor contractors.

    “The large number of eligible registrations for beneficiaries with multiple eligible registrations — much larger than in previous years — has raised serious concerns that some may have tried to gain an unfair advantage by working together to submit multiple registrations on behalf of the same beneficiary. This may have unfairly increased their chances of selection,” the agency wrote.

    The agency said it has “undertaken extensive fraud investigations” based on lottery submissions from the last two years, denied some petitions and is “in the process” of referring some cases to federal prosecutors for possible crimes.

    The number of registrations tied to people who applied more than once rose to 408,891 this year from 165,180 last year and 90,143 the year before.

    “We remain committed to deterring and preventing abuse of the registration process, and to ensuring only those who follow the law are eligible to file an H-1B cap petition,” the agency said.

    H-1B visas, which are used by software engineers and others in the tech industry, have been a lightning rod in the immigration debate, with critics saying they are used to undercut U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents.

    But technology companies say they are critical for hard-to-fill positions even as they have had to lay off workers in other areas. As the number of applications have soared in the last two years, major technology companies have seen winning lottery submissions dwindle.

    Source link

  • Don’t worry too much about losing your bank cash. Bank-failure data don’t support panic over uninsured deposits.

    Don’t worry too much about losing your bank cash. Bank-failure data don’t support panic over uninsured deposits.

    As Silicon Valley Bank was wobbling last month, large account holders with balances exceeding the federal deposit insurance limits panicked, sparked a bank run that ultimately prompted the federal government to step in with a rescue plan, and triggered widespread debate about potential reforms to the federal deposit insurance system.

    All that drama, however, was at odds with federal data showing that bank failures stretching back to the start of the 2007-2009 global financial crisis have in aggregate done very little harm…

    Source link

  • BuzzFeed News to be shuttered in corporate cost cutting move

    BuzzFeed News to be shuttered in corporate cost cutting move

    Pulitzer Prize winning digital media outlet BuzzFeed News is being shut down as part of a cost-cutting drive by its corporate parent that’s shedding about 15% of its entire staff, adding to layoffs made earlier this year.

    In a memo sent to staff, Buzzfeed Inc. co-founder and CEO Jonah Peretti said Thursday that in addition to the news division, layoffs would take place in its business, content, tech and administrative teams. BuzzFeed is also considering making job cuts in international markets.

    BuzzFeed has about 1,200 total employees, according to a recent regulatory filing, meaning about 180 people will be losing their jobs in the latest cuts.

    Peretti said in his memo that he “made the decision to overinvest” in the news division, but failed to recognize early enough that the financial support needed to sustain operations was not there.

    Digital advertising has plummeted this year, cutting into the profitability of major tech companies from Google to Facebook. Waves of layoffs have rolled through the tech industry and more are expected.

    “I’ve learned from these mistakes, and the team moving forward has learned from them as well,” Peretti wrote in the memo. “We know that the changes and improvements we are making today are necessary steps to building a better future.”

    The announcement comes just a few months after BuzzFeed said that it would be cutting 12% of its workforce, citing worsening economic conditions. Job cuts at were also announced in December.

    Christian Baesler, the Buzzfeed Inc.’s chief operating officer, and Edgar Hernandez, its chief revenue officer, are also leaving after they assist with the restructuring.

    The company will have one remaining news brand, HuffPost, Peretti wrote.

    Journalists who previously worked at BuzzFeed News lamented its end.

    “I’m heartsick about it, and proud of the great journalism we did when I was there and after I left,” said Ben Smith, BuzzFeed News’ editor from 2011 to 2020 and now editor in chief of Semafor.

    Smith made the controversial decision in 2017 to publish a “dossier” of information about then-President Donald Trump, though many outlets avoided it as unreliable and even Buzzfeed said there were serious reasons to doubt the allegations. He wrote then that “we have always erred on the side of publishing.

    BuzzFeed News’ shutdown “really marks the end of the marriage between news and social media,” said Smith, author of “Traffic,” a forthcoming history of that era.

    BuzzFeed News won its first Pulitzer in 2021, in international reporting, for a series by Megha Rajagopalan, Alison Killing and Christo Buschek on the infrastructure built by the Chinese government for the mass detention of Muslims.

    That same year, BuzzFeed News and the International Consortium of Journalists were finalists in that category for an expose on the global banking industry’s role in money laundering. A former U.S. Treasury Department employee was sentenced to six months in prison this month for leaking the trove of confidential financial reports that served as the basis for the series.

    BuzzFeed said Thursday that all of the news division’s work will be preserved and available within the BuzzFeed network. The company is also working to make sure that any stories currently in progress will be published and promoted on BuzzFeed properties.

    ___

    Associated Press Media Writer David Bauder contributed to this report.

    Source link

  • BuzzFeed News to be shuttered in corporate cost cutting move

    BuzzFeed News to be shuttered in corporate cost cutting move

    Pulitzer Prize winning digital media outlet BuzzFeed News is being shut down as part of a cost-cutting drive by its corporate parent that’s shedding about 15% of its entire staff, adding to layoffs made earlier this year.

    In a memo sent to staff, Buzzfeed Inc. co-founder and CEO Jonah Peretti said Thursday that in addition to the news division, layoffs would take place in its business, content, tech and administrative teams. BuzzFeed is also considering making job cuts in international markets.

    BuzzFeed has about 1,200 total employees, according to a recent regulatory filing, meaning about 180 people will be losing their jobs in the latest cuts.

    Peretti said in his memo that he “made the decision to overinvest” in the news division, but failed to recognize early enough that the financial support needed to sustain operations was not there.

    Digital advertising has plummeted this year, cutting into the profitability of major tech companies from Google to Facebook. Waves of layoffs have rolled through the tech industry and more are expected.

    “I’ve learned from these mistakes, and the team moving forward has learned from them as well,” Peretti wrote in the memo. “We know that the changes and improvements we are making today are necessary steps to building a better future.”

    The announcement comes just a few months after BuzzFeed said that it would be cutting 12% of its workforce, citing worsening economic conditions. Job cuts at were also announced in December.

    Christian Baesler, the Buzzfeed Inc.’s chief operating officer, and Edgar Hernandez, its chief revenue officer, are also leaving after they assist with the restructuring.

    The company will have one remaining news brand, HuffPost, Peretti wrote.

    Journalists who previously worked at BuzzFeed News lamented its end.

    “I’m heartsick about it, and proud of the great journalism we did when I was there and after I left,” said Ben Smith, BuzzFeed News’ editor from 2011 to 2020 and now editor in chief of Semafor.

    Smith made the controversial decision in 2017 to publish a “dossier” of information about then-President Donald Trump, though many outlets avoided it as unreliable and even Buzzfeed said there were serious reasons to doubt the allegations. He wrote then that “we have always erred on the side of publishing.

    BuzzFeed News’ shutdown “really marks the end of the marriage between news and social media,” said Smith, author of “Traffic,” a forthcoming history of that era.

    BuzzFeed News won its first Pulitzer in 2021, in international reporting, for a series by Megha Rajagopalan, Alison Killing and Christo Buschek on the infrastructure built by the Chinese government for the mass detention of Muslims.

    That same year, BuzzFeed News and the International Consortium of Journalists were finalists in that category for an expose on the global banking industry’s role in money laundering. A former U.S. Treasury Department employee was sentenced to six months in prison this month for leaking the trove of confidential financial reports that served as the basis for the series.

    BuzzFeed said Thursday that all of the news division’s work will be preserved and available within the BuzzFeed network. The company is also working to make sure that any stories currently in progress will be published and promoted on BuzzFeed properties.

    ___

    Associated Press Media Writer David Bauder contributed to this report.

    Source link

  • Facebook settlement: How to apply for some of Meta’s $725 million payout

    Facebook settlement: How to apply for some of Meta’s $725 million payout

    If you used Facebook between May 2007 and December 2022, the social-media giant may owe you some money.

    A California judge preliminarily approved a $725 million settlement between Facebook parent Meta Platforms
    META,
    -1.01%

    and users who say the company allowed their data to be viewed or shared by third parties, notably Cambridge Analytica, without their consent.

    The judge’s approval was a precursor to the final approval hearing, which will take place in September, but people can begin submitting claims now to potentially get a cash payment.

    Who does the Facebook settlement apply to?

    The $725 million settlement applies to anybody who was a Facebook user in the U.S. between May 24, 2007 and Dec. 22, 2022. The class-action form simply states that people who were Facebook users during that period are eligible. It does not mention any required level of activity on the account.

    It’s unclear if someone with multiple Facebook accounts would be entitled to more money than a person with a single account. To find out if you are included in the settlement group, you can email info@FacebookUserPrivacySettlement.com 

    When is the deadline to submit a claim?

    The claim form must be submitted no later than Aug. 25, 2023.

    The form can be completed online or downloaded and mailed to the settlement administrator at the following address: Facebook Consumer Privacy User Profile Litigation, c/o Settlement Administrator, 1650 Arch St., Suite 2210, Philadelphia, PA 19103.

    How much money will you get?

    As is typical with class-action lawsuits, the amount an individual will receive is dependent on a variety of factors.

    The settlement form says the payment will vary based on how many people submit claims. Additionally, administrative costs and attorneys’ fees will be deducted from the settlement fund prior to its release.

    See also: Mark Zuckerberg’s total 2022 pay rose because of the increased use of private aircraft

    “Settlement payments will be distributed as soon as possible if the Court grants Final Approval of the Settlement and after any appeals are resolved,” the claim website notes.

    How many people does this affect?

    Because Facebook has so many users and because of the 16-year time frame for this settlement, there are millions of people who could submit a claim.

    According to data compiled by Statista, total Facebook users in the U.S. numbered roughly 240 million in 2022.

    What has Meta said about the lawsuit?

    In December 2022, Meta agreed in principle to pay the settlement. At the time, a Meta spokesman said settling the class-action suit was “in the best interest of our community and shareholders.” The company added that it had revamped its privacy approach and “implemented a comprehensive privacy program.”

    Despite agreeing to pay the settlement, “Meta expressly denies any liability or wrongdoing,” according to the lawsuit website.

    Representatives for Meta didn’t immediately respond to MarketWatch’s request for comment on this story.

    See also: NPR’s CEO sayd ‘I have lost my faith in the decision-making’ at Twitter under Elon Musk

    The settlement comes as Meta is set to announce another round of layoffs this week.

    Meta shares were down 0.95% in the early afternoon on Wednesday and have gained nearly 80% year to date, compared with the S&P 500’s
    SPX,
    -0.01%

     8.11% gain in 2023.

    Source link

  • Supreme Court says Halkbank not immune from U.S. prosecution for Iran sanctions violations under FSIA

    Supreme Court says Halkbank not immune from U.S. prosecution for Iran sanctions violations under FSIA

    Halkbank in Istanbul, Turkey.

    Kemel Uzel | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that Halkbank, which is owned by the government of Turkey, is not immune from criminal indictment in New York federal court under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 for allegedly violating U.S. economic sanctions on Iran.

    But the Supreme Court kicked back to a federal appeals court the question of whether Halkbank still can claim sovereign immunity from prosecution in the United States under common law.

    That raises the prospect that the Supreme Court will again be asked in the future to rule on the legality of the prosecution.

    The indictment in Manhattan federal court alleges that high-ranking Turkish and Iranian government officials participated in the sanctions evasion scheme with Halkbank and its officers.

    “On Halkbank’s view, a purely commercial business that is directly and majority-owned by a foreign state could engage in criminal conduct affecting U. S. citizens and threatening U. S. national security while facing no criminal accountability at all in U. S. courts,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in the majority opinion, in which he was joined by six other justices.

    “Nothing in the FSIA supports that result,” Kavanaugh wrote.

    However, the Supreme Court told the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider a request by Halkbank to toss out the prosecution based on an argument of common law immunity.

    The Supreme Court previously recognized that a civil lawsuit not governed by the FSIA law may still be barred under by foreign sovereign immunity under so-called common law.

    The U.S. government has argued that the bar would not apply to criminal prosecution of a commercial entity such as Halkbank.

    Halkbank did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the Supreme Court’s ruling.

    Justice Neil Gorsuch filed a separate opinion that concurred in part with the majority but also dissented in part. Justice Samuel Alito joined Gorsuch in his opinion, which says it disagreed with the majority’s ruling that “FSIA’s rules apply only in civil cases.”

    “The same statute we routinely use to analyze sovereign immunity in civil cases applies equally
    in criminal ones,” Gorsuch wrote.

    He added that the majority decision “overcomplicates the law for no good reason,” saying that he would have come to the same conclusion that the 2nd Circuit previously reached, “This case against Halkbank may proceed.”

    Halkbank was indicted in October 2019 by a grand jury in Manhattan federal court for allegedly conspiring for years to evade U.S. economic sanctions imposed on Iran by laundering billions of dollars of Iranian oil and gas money.

    At the time of the indictment, then-Assistant Attorney General for National Security John Demers said, “This is one of the most serious Iran sanctions violations we have seen, and no business should profit from evading our laws or risking our national security.”

    In October 2017, a Turkish-Iranian gold trader named Reza Zarrab pleaded guilty to seven criminal counts related to the scheme.

    In January 2018, former Halkbank Deputy General Manager Mehmet Hakan Atilla was convicted at trial of five of the six criminal counts he was charged with.

    Correction: Former Halkbank Deputy General Manager Mehmet Hakan Atilla was convicted In January 2018 at trial of five of the six criminal counts he was charged with. An earlier version misspelled his name.

    Source link

  • Judge delays start of Fox News defamation trial until Tuesday

    Judge delays start of Fox News defamation trial until Tuesday

    NEW YORK — The Delaware judge overseeing a voting machine company’s $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit against Fox News announced late Sunday that he was delaying the start of the trial until Tuesday. He did not cite a reason.

    The trial, which has drawn international interest, had been scheduled to start Monday morning with jury selection and opening statements.

    The case centers on whether Fox defamed Dominion Voting Systems by spreading false claims that the company rigged the 2020 presidential election to prevent former President Donald Trump’s reelection. Records produced as part of the lawsuit show that many of the network’s hosts and executives didn’t believe the allegations but aired them, anyway.

    Representatives for Dominion and for the two entities it’s suing — Fox News and its parent company, Fox Corp.
    FOX,
    -1.35%

    — did not immediately return requests for comment on the delay. In his statement, Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis said only that the trial, including jury selection, would be continued until Tuesday and that he would announce the delay in court on Monday.

    That’s when Fox News executives and the network’s star hosts were scheduled to begin answering for their role in spreading doubt about the 2020 presidential election and creating the gaping wound that remains in America’s democracy.

    Jurors hearing the $1.6 billion lawsuit filed against Fox by Dominion Voting Systems would have to answer a specific question: Did Fox defame the voting machine company by airing bogus stories alleging that the election was rigged against then-President Donald Trump, even as many at the network privately doubted the false claims being pushed by Trump and his allies?

    Yet the broader context looms large. A trial would test press freedom and the reputation of conservatives’ favorite news source. It also would illuminate the flow of misinformation that helped spark the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol and continues to fuel Trump’s hopes to regain power in 2024.

    Fox News stars Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity and founder Rupert Murdoch are among the people who had been expected to testify.

    Barring a settlement, opening statements are now scheduled for Tuesday.

    “This is Christmas Eve for defamation scholars,” said RonNell Andersen Jones, a University of Utah law professor.

    If the trial were a sporting event, Fox News would be taking the field on a losing streak, with key players injured and having just alienated the referee. Pretrial court rulings and embarrassing revelations about its biggest names have Fox on its heels.

    Court papers released over the past two months show Fox executives, producers and personalities privately disbelieved Trump’s claims of a fraudulent election. But Dominion says Fox News was afraid of alienating its audience with the truth, particularly after many viewers were angered by the network’s decision to declare Democrat Joe Biden the winner in Arizona on election night in November 2020.

    Some rulings by the judge have eased Dominion’s path. In a summary judgment, Davis said it was “CRYSTAL clear” that fraud allegations against the company were false. That means trial time won’t have to be spent disproving them at a time when millions of Republicans continue to doubt the 2020 results.

    Davis said it also is clear that Dominion’s reputation was damaged, but that it would be up to a jury to decide whether Fox acted with “actual malice” — the legal standard — and, if so, what that’s worth financially.

    Fox witnesses would likely testify that they thought the allegations against Dominion were newsworthy, but Davis made it clear that’s not a defense against defamation.

    New York law protects news outlets from defamation for expressions of opinion. But Davis methodically went through 20 different times on Fox when allegations against Dominion were discussed, ruling that all of them were fully or partly considered statements of fact, and fair game for a potential libel finding.

    “A lawsuit is a little bit like hitting a home run,” said Cary Coglianese, law professor at the University of Pennsylvania. “You have to go through all of the bases to get there.” The judge’s rulings “basically give Dominion a spot at third base, and all they have to do is come home to win it.”

    Both Fox and Dominion are incorporated in Delaware, though Fox News is headquartered in New York and Dominion is based in Denver.

    Fox angered Davis this past week when the judge said the network’s lawyers delayed producing evidence and were not forthcoming in revealing Murdoch’s role at Fox News. A Fox lawyer, Blake Rohrbacher, sent a letter of apology to Davis on Friday, saying it was a misunderstanding and not an intention to deceive.

    It’s not clear whether that would affect a trial. But it’s generally not wise to have a judge wonder at the outset of a trial whether your side is telling the truth, particularly when truth is the central point of the case, Jones said.

    The lawsuit essentially comes down to whether Dominion can prove Fox acted with actual malice by putting something on the air knowing that it was false or acting with a “reckless disregard” for whether it was true. In most libel cases, that is the most difficult hurdle for plaintiffs to get past.

    Dominion can point to many examples where Fox figures didn’t believe the charges being made by Trump allies such as Sidney Powell and Rudolph Giuliani. But Fox says many of those disbelievers were not in a position to decide when to air those allegations.

    “We think it’s essential for them to connect those dots,” Fox lawyer Erin Murphy said.

    If the case goes to trial, the jury will determine whether a powerful figure like Murdoch — who testified in a deposition that he didn’t believe the election-fraud charges — had the influence to keep the accusations off the air.

    “Credibility is always important in any trial in any case. But it’s going to be really important in this case,” said Jane Kirtley, director of the Silha Center for the Study of Media Ethics and the Law at the University of Minnesota.

    Kirtley is concerned that the suit may eventually advance to the U.S. Supreme Court, which could use it as a pretext to weaken the actual malice standard that was set in a 1964 decision in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. That, she feels, would be disastrous for journalists.

    Dominion’s lawsuit is being closely watched by another voting-technology company with a separate but similar case against Fox News. Florida-based Smartmatic has looked to some rulings and evidence in the Dominion case to try to enhance its own $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit in New York. The Smartmatic case isn’t yet ready for trial but has survived Fox News’ effort to get it tossed out.

    Many experts are surprised Fox and Dominion have not reached an out-of-court settlement, though they can at any time. There’s presumably a wide financial gulf. In court papers, Fox contends the $1.6 billion damages claim is a wild overestimate.

    Dominion’s motivation may also be to inflict maximum embarrassment on Fox with the peek into the network’s internal communications following the election. Text messages from January 2021 revealed Carlson telling a friend that he passionately hated Trump and couldn’t wait to move on.

    Dominion may also seek an apology.

    The trial has had no apparent effect on Fox News’ viewership; it remains the top-rated cable network. Fox’s media reporter, Howard Kurtz, said earlier this year that he had been banned from covering the lawsuit, but the network has since changed direction. Kurtz discussed the case on his show Sunday, saying he would be in Wilmington for the beginning of the trial.

    “The real potential danger is if Fox viewers get the sense that they’ve been lied to. There’s a real downside there,” said Charlie Sykes, founder of the Bulwark website and an MSNBC contributor.

    There’s little indication that the case has changed Fox’s editorial direction. Fox has embraced Trump once again in recent weeks following the former president’s indictment by a Manhattan grand jury, and Carlson presented an alternate history of Capitol riot, based on tapes given to him by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif.

    Just because there has been limited discussion of the Dominion suit on Fox doesn’t mean its fans are unaware of it, said Tim Graham, director of media analysis at the conservative watchdog Media Research Center.

    “There’s a certain amount of tribal reaction to this,” Graham said. “When all of the other networks are thrilling to revealing text messages and emails, they see this as the latest attempt by the liberal media to undermine Fox News. There’s going to be a rally-around-Rupert effect.”

    Fox Corp. and MarketWatch parent News Corp. share common ownership.

    Source link

  • Arrest in Cash App creator Bob Lee’s killing; tech exec Nima Momeni charged with murder

    Arrest in Cash App creator Bob Lee’s killing; tech exec Nima Momeni charged with murder

    The San Francisco Police Department on Thursday arrested Nima Momeni, 38, of Emeryville, Calif., for allegedly stabbing to death tech executive Bob Lee.

    Mission Local, an independent local news site, first reported the arrest.

    City officials held a press conference Thursday afternoon, saying that the arrest occurred earlier in Emeryville,…

    Source link

  • Read the indictment against Donald Trump, details of payments to porn star, Playboy model

    Read the indictment against Donald Trump, details of payments to porn star, Playboy model

    Former President Donald Trump is charged with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in connection with a scheme that directed hush money payments to two women before the 2016 presidential election.

    The 16-page indictment against Trump was unsealed Tuesday as he became the first former U.S. president ever to be arraigned on criminal charges.

    “Not guilty,” Trump said from his seat to Judge Juan Merchan during the hearing in Manhattan Supreme Court.

    The indictment says those payments were part of a broader scheme to suppress claims by the women, porn star Stormy Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal, that they had sex with Trump, in a bid to keep their stories from affecting Trump’s chances against Democrat Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election.

    Follow CNBC.com‘s live coverage of former President Donald Trump’s surrender and arraignment at the Manhattan criminal courthouse.

    Prosecutors also said a Trump-friendly publishing company, American Media Inc., paid $30,000 to a former Trump Tower doorman who claimed to have a story about Trump fathering a child out of wedlock.

    All three payments were part of an alleged “catch and kill” effort by Trump and others, among them then-AMI chief David Pecker, from August 2015 to December 2017 “to identify, purchase, and bury negative information about him and boost his electoral prospects,” prosecutors said.

    Read the indictment against Trump

    Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg at a press conference said each of the false statements in business records, which related to the payment to Daniels, were done to cover up other crimes related to the 2016 election.

    Those crimes included violations of New York state election law, and false statements to tax authorities, he said. Falsifying business records can be charged as a misdemeanor, but it also can be charged as a felony if done to cover up another crime.

    Merchan scheduled the next hearing in the case for Dec. 4. It is possible that the criminal case will not be resolved before the 2024 presidential election, where Trump is seeking the Republican nomination.

    Bragg in a statement said, “The People of the State of New York allege that Donald J. Trump repeatedly and fraudulently falsified New York business records to conceal crimes that hid damaging information from the voting public during the 2016 presidential election.”

    “Manhattan is home to the country’s most significant business market. We cannot allow New York businesses to manipulate their records to cover up criminal conduct,” Bragg said.

    A prosecutor told the judge that the DA’s office was concerned about comments Trump has made on social media that could threaten the DA’s office and the city.

    That included one post depicting Trump wielding a bat over the head of District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

    The judge said that he was taking the harsh rhetoric by Trump about the case very seriously.

    One of Trump’s lawyers, Todd Blanche, told Merchan that Trump has spoken forcefully, but that he was within his rights to do so.

    Before the arraignment, Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr., posted a photo on Trump’s Truth Social site of Merchan’s daughter, who according to a Breitbart news article worked on the election campaign of President Joe Biden.

    “Seems relevant,” the younger Trump wrote. “The BS never ends folks.”

    Hush money payments

    Daniels received $130,000 from Trump’s then-lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen at Trump’s direction, 12 days before the 2016 election. Daniels, whose legal name is Stephanie Clifford, says she had sex with Trump one time in 2006, several months after his wife Melania Trump gave birth to their son Barron.

    Trump later reimbursed Cohen with a series of monthly checks, 11 in total. The checks first were issued by the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, while later ones came from Trump’s bank account, prosecutors said.

    Nine of the checks were signed by Trump, and “Each check was processed by the Trump Organization and illegally disguised as a payment for legal services rendered pursuant to a non-existent retainer agreement” with Cohen.

    Former U.S. President Donald Trump appears in court with his lawyer Joe Tacopina for an arraignment on charges stemming from his indictment by a Manhattan grand jury following a probe into hush money paid to porn star Stormy Daniels, in New York City, U.S., April 4, 2023. 

    Andrew Kelly | Reuters

    McDougal received $150,000 from AMI, the publisher of The National Enquirer, the supermarket tabloid that was allied with Trump. McDougal has said she had a long-term affair with Trump that began in 2006.

    Trump denies having sex with either Daniels or McDougal.

    Cohen pleaded guilty in 2018 to federal crimes, two of which were campaign finance violations for facilitating the payments to both Daniels and McDougal.

    The grand jury indicted Trump on Thursday. The charging document had remained sealed since then.

    The grand jury began hearing testimony in the case in late January.

    News of the proceedings came as a surprise, since a former prosecutor in the district attorney’s office last year had suggested the investigation into Trump was all but dead after Bragg declined to seek an indictment against Trump in connection with allegedly false financial statements involving real estate assets.

    CNBC Politics

    Read more of CNBC’s politics coverage:

    Trump separately is under criminal investigation by the Department of Justice and a state prosecutor in Georgia for efforts to reverse his 2020 election loss to President Joe Biden.

    The DOJ also is probing Trump for retaining government records after leaving the White House and for possible obstruction of justice.

    Source link

  • Frank founder criminally charged with fraud over $175 million JPMorgan deal

    Frank founder criminally charged with fraud over $175 million JPMorgan deal

    Charlie Javice, Founder/CEO of Frank, which is a college financial aid start-up.

    Source: JP Morgan

    The Justice Department on Tuesday criminally charged Charlie Javice, founder of college financial planning platform Frank, with defrauding JPMorgan Chase out of $175 million. 

    Javice, 31, is accused of “falsely and dramatically” inflating the number of customers Frank actually had in a scheme to “fraudulently induce” the bank to acquire the startup in 2021, federal prosecutors in Manhattan said. She stood to gain more than $45 million from the alleged deception, they added. 

    The one-time rising tech star — who was once named as one of Forbes’ 30 Under 30 — was arrested Monday night in New Jersey and is expected in Manhattan federal court Tuesday afternoon.

    She faces four counts. They are one count of conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud, one count of wire fraud affecting a financial institution, one count of bank fraud, and one count of securities fraud. Three of the charges each carry a maximum sentence of 30 years in prison. 

    “This arrest should warn entrepreneurs who lie to advance their businesses that their lies will catch up to them, and this Office will hold them accountable for putting their greed above the law,” Damian Williams, U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, said in a statement.

    The Securities and Exchange Commission on Tuesday also sued Javice for fraud in connection with the alleged scheme. 

    “Charlie denies the allegations,” a spokesperson for her attorney, Alex Spiro, told CNBC. Spiro had no additional comments, the spokesperson said.

    JPMorgan did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The bank’s CEO, Jamie Dimon, in January called the acquisition of Frank a “huge mistake.”

    The charges come months after JPMorgan filed a lawsuit against Javice alleging she duped the bank into believing Frank had more than 4 million customers. In reality, the startup had fewer than 300,000, JPMorgan said in its suit. 

    Javice used a data science professor to invent millions of fake accounts after JPMorgan pressed for confirmation of Frank’s customer base, the bank alleged. The suit included emails between the professor and Javice, including when the entrepreneur asked, “Will the fake emails look real with an eye check or better to use unique ID?” 

    JPMorgan only discovered the discrepancy when 70% of emails sent to a batch of about 400,000 Frank customers bounced back, according to the bank. It shut down the startup in January. 

    Javice in February filed a counterclaim, saying it was “implausible” that JPMorgan “was led to believe Frank had 4.25 million registered users when its website publicly claimed the company had helped more than 350,000 people access financial aid.”

    Source link

  • Dominion Voting Systems’ defamation case against Fox News should continue to trial, says Delaware judge

    Dominion Voting Systems’ defamation case against Fox News should continue to trial, says Delaware judge

    DOVER, Del. (AP) — A voting-machine company’s defamation case against Fox News over its airing of false allegations about the 2020 presidential election will go to trial after a Delaware judge on Friday ruled that a jury must decide whether the network aired the claims with actual malice, the standard for proving libel against public figures.

    Superior Court Judge Eric Davis ruled that neither Fox nor Dominion Voting Systems had presented a convincing argument to prevail on whether Fox acted with malice without the case going to trial. But he also ruled that the statements Dominion had challenged constitute defamation “per se” under New York law. That means Dominion did not have to prove damages to establish liability by Fox.

    ‘The evidence developed in this civil proceeding demonstrates that [it] is CRYSTAL clear that none of the statements relating to Dominion about the 2020 election are true.’


    — Superior Court Judge Eric Davis

    “The evidence developed in this civil proceeding demonstrates that [it] is CRYSTAL clear that none of the statements relating to Dominion about the 2020 election are true,” Davis wrote in his summary judgment ruling.

    The decision paves the way for a trial start in mid-April.

    Dominion is suing the network for $1.6 billion, claiming Fox defamed it by repeatedly airing false allegations by then-President Donald Trump and his allies in the weeks after the 2020 election claiming the company’s machines and its accompanying software had switched votes to Democrat Joe Biden. The network aired the claims even though internal communications show that many of its executives and hosts didn’t believe them.

    The company sued Fox News and its parent, Fox Corp.
    FOX,
    +1.36%

    FOXA,
    +1.13%
    ,
    which shares ownership with News Corp
    NWS,
    +1.99%

    NWSA,
    +1.77%
    ,
    parent company of MarketWatch publisher Dow Jones.

    Don’t miss: Top congressional Democrats Schumer and Jeffries seek on-air acknowledgements that Fox News personalities knew Trump lost and election wasn’t stolen

    See: 2020 election ‘was not stolen,’ Fox Chairman Rupert Murdoch said under oath, according to evidence in Dominion case

    Also: Pro-Trump on air, Tucker Carlson privately told his Fox News producer that he hates the former president with a passion

    Fox has said it was simply covering newsworthy allegations made by a sitting president claiming his re-election had been stolen from him. In his ruling, Davis said Fox could not escape potential liability by claiming privileges for neutral reporting or opinion.

    “FNN’s failure to reveal extensive contradicting evidence from the public sphere and Dominion itself indicates that its reporting was not disinterested.” the judge wrote.

    In a statement issued after the ruling, Dominion said it was gratified that the court had rejected Fox’s arguments and found “as a matter of law that their statements about Dominion are false. We look forward to going to trial.”

    Fox emphasized that the case is about the media’s First Amendment protections in covering the news. “Fox will continue to fiercely advocate for the rights of free speech and a free press as we move into the next phase of these proceedings,” the network said in a statement.

    See: ‘A complete nut’: Fox News hosts didn’t believe 2020 election fraud claims

    Also: Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity among potential witnesses at Fox News trial

    The coverage fed an ecosystem of misinformation surrounding Trump’s loss in 2020 that has persisted ever since.

    MarketWatch contributed.

    Source link

  • Trump faces about 30 criminal counts for document fraud in New York indictment

    Trump faces about 30 criminal counts for document fraud in New York indictment

    U.S. President Donald Trump delivers an update on the so-called Operation Warp Speed program, the joint Defense Department and HHS initiative that has struck deals with several drugmakers in an effort to help speed up the search for effective treatments for the ongoing coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, in an address from the Rose Garden at the White House in Washington, U.S., November 13, 2020.

    Carlos Barria | Reuters

    Former President Donald Trump has been hit with about 30 criminal charges related to alleged document fraud in the indictment issued against him by a New York grand jury, NBC reported Friday.

    The indictment, which was approved Thursday, remains sealed in Manhattan Supreme Court.

    Trump, who is the leading contender for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, is scheduled to be arraigned in Manhattan court on Tuesday.

    At least part, if not all, of the indictment is understood to be related to Trump’s reimbursement of his then-lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen for a $130,000 hush money payment made to porn star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 presidential election.

    The Trump Organization recorded payments that Trump made to Cohen for that purpose as “legal expenses.”

    It is a misdemeanor under New York law to misclassify business expenses. That can become a felony if done to cover up another crime.

    Daniels, whose legal name is Stephanie Clifford, was paid to keep silent about her claim that she had sex with Trump in 2006. He denies her account.

    Trump is the first U.S. president, former or otherwise, to be charged in a criminal case.

    A Quinnipiac University poll released this week found that a majority of Americans believe that Trump should be disqualified from running for the White House if he is charged with a crime.

    However, there is no law against Trump seeking the presidency while facing charges.

    Follow our live coverage of the NY grand jury’s indictment of former President Donald Trump.

    Source link

  • Shadowy brokers walk off with billions in Venezuelan oil

    Shadowy brokers walk off with billions in Venezuelan oil

    CARACAS, Venezuela — One startup lists as its address a small home in a working-class district in Venezuela‘s capital whose owner has never heard of the firm. Another is a Hong Kong-based shell company created in 2020. Yet another belongs to a Spanish commodities trader indicted in the U.S. for allegedly helping Russian oligarchs launder ill-gotten profits.

    They are among the dozens of obscure middlemen and go-betweens at the center of a new crackdown in Venezuela on corruption in the state-run oil industry that has government insiders scurrying for cover. At the same time, regular Venezuelans are asking how more than $20 billion in proceeds from oil shipments seemingly vanished.

    The purge began this month when authorities arrested 21 people, including business executives, senior officials and a lawmaker, as part of an investigation into missing payments for oil shipments. In a sign of the government’s desire to promote its anti-corruption crusade, state media this week were filled with images of the defendants dressed in orange jumpsuits walking into their initial judicial hearing.

    Corruption has long plagued Venezuela — the OPEC nation was the fourth-most corrupt in the world in the latest rankings by Transparency International — but those in positions of power are rarely held accountable.

    And when high profile arrests do take place, Venezuelans tend to view them as the result of a behind-the-scenes tug of war among rival heavyweights in the ruling socialist party, and not any impartial meting out of justice in a country where most institutions lack independence.

    An entrenched culture of corruption and the inherently opaque nature of trading illegal crude oil take malfeasance to another level.

    “These are two things that come together at the same time,” said Francisco Monaldi, a Venezuelan economist who heads the Latin America energy program at Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy. “It would be very difficult for even a much less corrupt state to implement all the necessary controls.”

    While the fallout from the scandal continues, it already has felled one major power broker — Tareck El Aissami, the country’s oil czar. He quit in the wake of the arrests, which included the detention of a close associate, Joselit Ramirez, who had been serving as Venezuela’s cryptocurrency regulator. The U.S. already considered both of them fugitives from justice.

    While Venezuelan authorities have not mentioned El Aissami as a target in the investigation, most of the shady transactions at state-run oil giant Petroleos de Venezuela SA occurred under his watch and while Asdrubal Chávez, a cousin of the late President Hugo Chávez, served as president of the company, known widely as PDVSA.

    “As a revolutionary militant, I place myself at the disposal of the socialist party leadership to support this crusade …. against the anti-values that we are obliged to fight, even with our lives,” El Aissami tweeted to announce his surprise resignation as oil minister.

    Internal PDVSA documents obtained by The Associated Press show the state oil company was owed $10.1 billion as of August 2022 from 90 mostly unknown trading companies that have emerged as major buyers of Venezuelan crude since the U.S. imposed economic sanctions in a campaign to oust President Nicolás Maduro.

    An additional $13.3 billion, corresponding to 241 tanker shipments, is owed directly to the national government as a result of an October accounting maneuver by PDVSA that reassigned responsibility for collecting the unpaid invoices directly to the Maduro administration in lieu of cash royalties. That is more than the entire foreign currency reserves held at Venezuela’s central bank.

    All the oil cargoes were sold on consignment at a deep discount owing to the sanctions, which have dissuaded more established traders from doing business with Venezuela.

    PDVSA’s reliance on intermediaries surged in 2020, when the Trump administration expanded sanctions with the threat to lock out of the U.S. economy any individual or company, regardless of nationality or location, that did business with Maduro’s government.

    The punishing action, combined with a pandemic-induced global slump in demand for oil, led PDVSA’s production that summer to drop to as little as 350,000 barrels a day — just 10% of what it produced when Chávez took office in 1999.

    To sell what little is being produced, Maduro, with the help of allies Russia and Iran — themselves under U.S. sanctions — has had to rely on a complex network of intermediaries. Most are shell companies, registered in jurisdictions known for secrecy like Panama, Belize and Hong Kong. The buyers deploy so-called ghost tankers that hide their location and hand off their valuable cargoes in the middle of the ocean before they reach their final destination, usually in Asia.

    To get around Western banks, Venezuela started accepting payments in Russian rubles, bartered goods or cryptocurrency.

    But not everyone paid.

    The internal documents show that uncollected payments owed to PDVSA by the go-between brokers range from as little as $526 to $1.2 billion as of August.

    Among those on the delinquent list is Walker International DW-LLC, which owes PDVSA about $77 million, according to the internal documents. The company is registered in the United Arab Emirates but lists as its Venezuela address a modest house almost at the foot of the mountain range that separate Caracas from the Caribbean Sea.

    The owner of the home, Andres Muzo, expressed shock that his home could somehow be connected to a case of international corruption.

    “I’m finding about this right now,” Muzo said after seeing his address in Dubai corporate records, which were first unearthed in a November report by the Venezuelan investigative news website Armando.info. He shook his head and said he would ask the people who rent his adjacent garage for a car wash and oil-change business if they knew anything.

    “They have tools in there, but no, we don’t know anything,” Muzo said standing outside the home with decorative clay tiles on the roof and brown ceramic tiles on the weathered façade. “They must be clandestine companies, I would say. They have nothing, nothing under my name, not even a piece of paper.”

    A small lock keeps shut the rolling garage door with a message that instructs drivers not to block it.

    At least 15 of the 90 defaulters accumulated debts for two consecutive years.

    The broker with the largest debt is M and Y Trading Co. Little is known about the company, which was registered in Hong Kong in late 2020. But it owes PDVSA more than $1.2 billion, according to the internal documents, which someone knowledgeable about the transactions shared with AP on the condition that they remain anonymous.

    Another preferred vendor was United Petroleo Corp, which was registered in Panama in 2021 and owes more than $468 million to PDVSA. One of United’s cargoes — a 600,000-barrel shipment last September — is at the center of a controversy on the Dutch Caribbean island of Curacao, where the Venezuelan crude is being stored at a facility tied to U.S. investors in possible defiance of sanctions.

    Yet another of PDVSA’s go-to partners was Treseus International. The commodities broker took possession of only $16 million worth of oil from PDVSA, almost all of which it has paid. But the company, which did not respond to an email seeking comment, stands out for the alleged criminal activity of its chief executive officer, Juan Fernando Serrano.

    Serrano, a commodities trader, was indicted last year on money laundering charges in a New York federal court for conspiring to smuggle oil on behalf of wealthy Russian businessmen. That court also wants El Aissami and Ramirez on charges of violating U.S. sanctions stemming from El Aissami’s 2017 designation by Washington as a “drug kingpin” for allegedly helping cartels smuggle multiple cocaine shipments through Venezuela.

    Venezuelan authorities have yet to say how much money may be missing, nor has the government mentioned specific companies it is investigating. But Maduro has used some of his recent evening appearances on state TV to warn ministers and other officials against corruption and urge them to do their jobs. Ruling party supporters even gathered for an anti-corruption protest in Caracas.

    “I think it’s a horrible thing. One trusts people and doesn’t know they are a lion in sheep’s clothing,” said Lidia Rondón, a housewife who participated in the demonstration. “This destroys us all.”

    Past crackdowns — like the arrest of a former PDVSA president in 2017 — did little to clean up the Venezuelan oil industry, which is responsible for almost all of the country’s hard currency earnings. Many analysts suspect Maduro is looking to finally address critical cash flow problems and stabilize the economy before next year’s presidential election.

    “Coffers are bare and the country is entering an election year in which Maduro wants to convey a message that Venezuela is getting back on track,” said Geoff Ramsey, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council. “The more it becomes clear that the economy remains in dire straits, the more Maduro will look for people to take the fall.”

    ___

    Goodman reported from Miami.

    Source link

  • Sam Bankman-Fried pleads not guilty to latest round of federal fraud, bribery charges

    Sam Bankman-Fried pleads not guilty to latest round of federal fraud, bribery charges

    Sam Bankman-Fried pleaded not guilty in New York federal court Thursday to five additional charges related to the collapse of his former crypto exchange FTX and hedge fund Alameda Research.

    Bankman-Fried’s attorney, Mark Cohen, said he plans to file a motion that his client not be tried on all the counts, arguing that he cannot be tried on charges brought after his extradition.

    The U.S. attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York unveiled its third round of criminal charges against the disgraced ex-CEO of FTX in a superseding indictment that was unsealed on Tuesday. This time, the focus was on Bankman-Fried allegedly bribing a foreign government.

    Prosecutors allege that Bankman-Fried — who arrived at the courthouse about an hour before the hearing, looking disheveled after an intense media scrum — directed the payment of at least $40 million in cryptocurrency to one or more Chinese government officials to an attempt to unfreeze trading accounts tied to his crypto hedge fund, Alameda Research.

    Bankman-Fried and his associates considered and tried “numerous methods” to unfreeze the accounts, which contained around $1 billion worth of cryptocurrency, prosecutors allege. Ultimately, after both legal and personal efforts failed, Bankman-Fried agreed to and directed a multimillion-dollar bribe to have the frozen accounts unlocked, prosecutors alleged.

    Bankman-Fried’s hedge fund then allegedly used the unfrozen assets to continue to fund Alameda’s loss-generating trades, continuing on what the government says was a fraud upon customers and investors for another year.

    The onetime crypto billionaire, who did not speak during the entirety of the hearing, also pled not guilty to charges related to bank fraud, money laundering, as well as operating an unlicensed money transmitting business and making unlawful political contributions in the U.S. The 13-count indictment gives details of hundreds of political donations that Bankman-Fried allegedly directed in violation of federal campaign finance laws. Bankman-Fried already pleaded not guilty to eight other counts.

    FTX and Alameda imploded in November 2022 after concerns about their balance sheet turned into a veritable bank run. In addition to this federal indictment, Bankman-Fried also faces civil charges from both the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Meanwhile, Bankman-Fried’s collapsed FTX remains mired in Delaware bankruptcy court proceedings.

    The trial is set to begin in October.

    CNBC’s Dawn Giel contributed to this report.

    Source link

  • FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried charged with bribing Chinese government officials: court document

    FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried charged with bribing Chinese government officials: court document

    Sam Bankman-Fried, the founder and former chief executive of bankrupt crypto exchange FTX, is facing new charges for bribery, according to an indictment on March 28.

    It claims Bankman-Fried in 2021 transferred over $40 million worth of cryptocurrency to Chinese government officials. The founder allegedly made the transfer to “influence and induce them to unfreeze the accounts” of Alameda Research, which contained over $1 billion in cryptocurrency that Beijing had frozen, according to the document.

    The indictment contains 12 charges that Bankman-Fried previously was facing, plus the additional one for conspiracy to violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, bringing the new tally to a 13-count indictment.

    Bankman-Fried’s lawyer didn’t immediately respond to a MarketWatch request for comment.

    Bankman-Fried has been restricted from using messaging apps, but prosecutors and Bankman-Fried’s attorneys have asked U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan to approve a new set of proposed restrictions that would limit his access to electronic devices and the internet.

    He has pleaded not guilty to eight counts over the collapse of FTX and is currently under house arrest with his parents in Palo Alto, Calif.

    U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan set a new hearing for Thursday.

    Source link

  • Texas energy company paying $3.4B for nuclear plant owner

    Texas energy company paying $3.4B for nuclear plant owner

    Amid a federal corruption case, a company that owns nuclear plants in Pennsylvania and northern Ohio will be sold for more than $3.4 billion to a Texas-based company

    AKRON, Ohio — Amid a federal corruption case, a company that owns nuclear plants in Pennsylvania and northern Ohio will be sold for more than $3.4 billion to an Irving, Texas-based company.

    Under the deal announced Monday, Ohio-based Energy Harbor will become part of a newly formed Vistra subsidiary called Vistra Vision. Both companies’ boards of directors have approved the deal and a majority of Energy Harbor stockholders support the move, according to the statement announcing the deal.

    Vistra will not be buying Energy Harbor’s two coal plants along the Ohio River, according to the release.

    Energy Harbor is at the center of an alleged $60 million bribery scheme that federal prosecutors call the largest corruption case in Ohio history. They allege ex-Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder and others orchestrated a scheme funded by Energy Harbor’s parent company, Akron, Ohio-based FirstEnergy Corp., to secure the speakership, elect legislative allies, then pass and defend a $1 billion nuclear power plant bailout benefiting FirstEnergy, an electric utility. Householder has maintained his innocence and closing arguments in his ongoing trial were scheduled for Tuesday.

    The companies anticipate closing the deal sometime in the second half of this year, according to the release. Several federal regulators must still sign off on the purchase.

    Source link

  • Ericsson to pay $206M for breaking US deal in bribery case

    Ericsson to pay $206M for breaking US deal in bribery case

    STOCKHOLM — Swedish telecom equipment maker Ericsson has agreed to plead guilty to U.S. foreign corruption violations and pay more than $206 million for breaking a deal with the Justice Department over charges of bribery and falsifying records in countries from China to Kuwait.

    The U.S. Justice Department said the company, based in Stockholm, violated a 2019 agreement by failing to provide documents and information the agency needed for its investigation and to bring charges against individuals accused of misconduct.

    Ericsson, which provides equipment for high-speed 5G wireless networks, used intermediaries to bribe government officials and manage illicit stashes of cash in Djibouti, China, Vietnam, Indonesia and Kuwait, prosecutors say.

    “The company’s breach of its obligations … indicate that Ericsson did not learn its lesson, and it is now facing a steep price for its continued missteps,” U.S. Attorney Damian Williams for the Southern District of New York said in a prepared statement Thursday.

    Ericsson was accused of drawing up fake contracts and invoices to pay third-party agents carrying out the bribes and then not properly accounting for the payments from 2000 to 2016.

    CEO Börje Ekholm says Ericsson has made important changes and is committed to enforcing strict controls and improved oversight and ethics.

    “This resolution is a stark reminder of the historical misconduct” that led to the deal with the Justice Department, Ekholm said in a prepared statement. “We have learned from that, and we are on an important journey to transform our culture. To be a true industry leader, we must be a market and technology leader while also being a leader in how we conduct our business.”

    Facing a criminal indictment in New York over violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, Ericsson in 2019 paid a $520 million penalty and agreed to have an independent compliance monitor for three years.

    Now, the Justice Department says the company has failed to “truthfully disclose” all information and evidence in the Djibouti and China cases and in other potential bribery or accounting violations. Ericsson also failed to turn over details in a 2019 Iraq internal investigation that has raised allegations of illegal business behavior, the agency said.

    As a result, Ericsson agreed to plead guilty to the charges put off by the 2019 deal: conspiracy to violate the foreign corruption law’s anti-bribery and bookkeeping provisions.

    Ericsson will pay $206.7 million, serve probation through June 2024 and keep the independent compliance monitor for another year.

    It’s the latest hit for the company, which said last week that it’s cutting 8% of its global workforce as it looks to reduce costs.

    Source link

  • Ozy Media founder Carlos Watson denies federal fraud charges

    Ozy Media founder Carlos Watson denies federal fraud charges

    NEW YORK — The founder of the troubled digital start-up Ozy Media pleaded not guilty Thursday to federal fraud charges accusing him of scheming to prop up his financially struggling company, which hemorrhaged millions of dollars before it shut down amid revelations of possibly deceptive business practices.

    Federal agents arrested Carlos Watson at a Manhattan hotel earlier in the day after two of the company’s top executives pleaded guilty this month to fraud charges, including Ozy’s then-chief operating officer, Samir Rao, who prosecutors say impersonated a YouTube executive during a pitch to Goldman Sachs, a potential investor.

    The indictment unsealed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn accuses Watson of conspiring to commit securities fraud and wire fraud, as well as identity theft for his role in the impersonation of several media executives.

    In a parallel civil case, the Securities and Exchange Commission also charged Watson and the company with defrauding investors of about $50 million “through repeated misrepresentations concerning the company’s basic financial condition, business relationships, and fundraising efforts.”

    Ozy advertised itself as a progressive digital platform for “the New and the Next,” saying on its website that it sought to create a “space for fresh perspectives, introduces you to rising stars and breakthrough trends, and offers new takes on everything from news and culture to technology, business, learning and entertainment.”

    Watson cofounded the company with Rao in California’s Silicon Valley a decade ago.

    But the company imploded under insurmountable debt and questions over its fundraising tactics. As its expenses mounted, it relied on high-interest loans and began to more aggressively court investors.

    Scrutiny over the company deepened after the New York Times reported in October 2021 that an Ozy official had masqueraded as a YouTube executive in a failing attempt to get Goldman Sachs to infuse money into the struggling enterprise.

    Shortly after, Ozy said it was shutting down.

    Watson’s attorney, Lanny Breuer, said he was “deeply disappointed by the arrest” and thought that “good faith and progressive dialogue” with the government were progressing.

    “Given the government’s claims of promoting such dialogue in general,” Breuer said, “I simply do not understand the dramatic decision to arrest Carlos this morning.”

    Watson was released following his arraignment after posting $1 million bond partly secured by his house. He is expected to next appear in court April 3. Company representatives are back in court March 8.

    Rao pleaded guilty in federal court this week, while Han did so last week. The guilty pleas and arrests were first reported by the Wall Street Journal.

    In a statement posted on its website Thursday, the SEC said Rao and Ozy’s former chief of staff, Suzee Han, “agreed to resolve the charges against them.”

    Authorities say Watson and his business partners, between 2018 and 2021, attempted to defraud investors and lenders of “tens of millions of dollars through fraudulent misrepresentations and omissions” about the company’s debts and other key financial information.

    “As alleged, Carlos Watson is a con man whose business strategy was based on outright deceit and fraud,” said Breon Peace, the U.S. Attorney for the Brooklyn-based Eastern District of New York. “He ran Ozy as a criminal organization rather than as a reputable media company.”

    Michael J. Driscoll, the assistant director-in-charge of the FBI’s New York field office said Watson “repeatedly attempted to entice both investors and lenders through a series of deliberate deceptions and fabrications.”

    On multiple occasions, the U.S. attorney’s office said, Watson and his colleagues pretended to be other media executives to cover up earlier misrepresentations.

    If convicted, Watson faces at least two years in prison up to a maximum of 37 years, the U.S. attorney’s office said.

    The SEC’s civil complaint, also filed in the U.S. District Court in Brooklyn, accuses Watson and the company of violating anti-fraud provisions of federal securities laws.

    “We allege that over the course of several years, the defendants raised approximately $50 million from victim investors on the basis of fraudulent documents and repeated misrepresentations, including, at least in one case, falsely impersonating a potential business partner during a meeting with an investment bank,” said Gurbir S. Grewal, the SEC’s director of enforcement.

    The agency, whose regulatory responsibilities include protecting investors, accused Ozy officials of “routinely and purposely” presenting potential investors with dubious financial information, including falsely claiming that the company’s revenues were at least twice what they actually were.

    In addition, the SEC said, Watson and Rao also sought investments by allegedly telling prospective investors that they were securing money from high-profile companies and investors.

    In one case, the SEC and federal prosecutors contend, Watson and Rao launched a ruse that had Rao impersonating a YouTube executive to convince a prospective investor that it was getting licensing revenue from the online video-sharing behemoth.

    When the potential investor discovered the alleged ploy, Watson asserted that Rao was suffering from a “mental health crisis,” the SEC said.

    Source link

  • Minister: 1 in 5 crimes in Spain now committed online

    Minister: 1 in 5 crimes in Spain now committed online

    MADRID — Spain’s government on Wednesday pledged stronger action against cybercrime, saying it has come to account for about a fifth of all offenses registered in the country.

    Interior Minister Fernando Grande-Marlaska said police would be given additional staff, funding and resources to address online crime. He said reported cases of cybercrime were up 72% last year compared to 2019, and 352% compared to 2015.

    “The … decline in conventional crime and the increase in cybercrime has brought us to a turning point: today, one in every five crimes in Spain is committed online,” he told a press conference in Madrid.

    Almost 90% of cybercrimes reported last year involved online fraud schemes, Grande-Marlaska said. “This … has a remarkable and negative impact on national interests, institutions, companies and citizens,” he added.

    On Tuesday, Spain’s defense minister approved the creation of a new military cyberoperations training school to further reinforce national security online.

    Spain is among the countries that suffer the largest numbers of remote online attacks in the world, according to data from antivirus protection specialist ESET. Small businesses are particularly affected.

    José Cano, Research Director at market intelligence firm IDC Spain, said a lack of talent and skills had left Spanish businesses exposed to the increasing sophistication of online criminals, who are innovating to bypass multi-factor authentication and other safeguards.

    “Cyber-resilience is not only about enterprise value and reducing business risk, but also about national economic security,” Cano said. “European companies, especially Spanish companies, will increasingly incorporate cyber-resilience planning into their business and security strategies.”

    Source link

  • Adani Offshore Investor Has Links to Adani Family

    Adani Offshore Investor Has Links to Adani Family

    A short seller’s allegations of fraud by Gautam Adani’s conglomerate center on whether his family wielded influence over Mauritius-based investors

    [ad_2]
    Source link