Griner for Bout: WNBA star freed in US-Russia prisoner swap

  Russia freed WNBA star Brittney Griner on Thursday in a dramatic high-level prisoner exchange, with the U.S. releasing notorious Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout, American officials said. The swap, at a time of heightened tensions over Ukraine, achieved a top goal for President Joe Biden, but carried a heavy price — and left behind an American jailed for nearly four years in Russia.

Viktor Bout during his  animated sentencing in 2012 making his statement pointing to FBI agents

Biden's authorization to release a Russian felon once nicknamed “the Merchant of Death" underscored the escalating pressure that his administration faced to get Griner home, particularly after the recent resolution of her criminal case and her subsequent transfer to a penal colony.

The swap was confirmed by U.S. officials with direct knowledge of the negotiations who were not authorized to publicly discuss the deal before a White House announcement and spoke on condition of anonymity. Biden spoke with Griner on the phone Thursday while her wife, Cherelle, was in the Oval Office. The president was to address reporters later in the morning.

Viktor Bout watching his defense attorney Albert Dayan during his sentencing in 2021 
Artwork by Elizabeth Williams 

In releasing Bout, the U.S. freed a a former Soviet Army lieutenant colonel whom the Justice Department once described as one of the world's most prolific arms dealers. Bout, whose exploits inspired a Hollywood movie, was serving a 25-year sentence on charges that he conspired to sell tens of millions of dollars in weapons that U.S officials said were to be used against Americans.

CNBC What to expect after Elon Musk’s day in court

What to expect after Elon Musk’s day in court
PUBLISHED FRI, APR 5 2019 • 7:15 AM EDT

Lora Kolodny CNBC 

@LORAKOLODNY

 Artwork by Elizabeth Williams

Muzzle? Fine? Removal? What to do about Elon Musk?

The Tesla CEO had his day in court Thursday for a hearing in his ongoing battle with the Securities and Exchange Commission. This time, the financial regulators alleged Musk broke the terms of a prior settlement agreement by posting material company information on Twitter earlier this year. Musk claims he did nothing wrong.

Elon Musk seated in Manhattan Federal Court as his attorney John Hueston argues his case in front of Judge Alison Nathan 

Former SEC prosecutor Elliot Lutzker believes the agency will back down without removing Musk from the CEO position, but only after Musk pays a fine significantly larger than the $20 million he paid last year to settle his original dispute with the SEC, which stemmed from the CEO’s infamous “funding secured” tweet where he suggested he was going to take Tesla private.

But Lutzker says he doesn’t think Musk will be able to stay out of trouble “unless he gives up Twitter

Where the fight stands

The latest round the legal battle started on Feb. 19, when Musk tweeted to his more than 24 million Twitter followers: “Tesla made 0 cars in 2011, but will make around 500k in 2019.”

He later tweeted a clarification stating: “Meant to say annualized production rate at end of 2019 probably around 500k, ie 10k cars/week. Deliveries for year still estimated to be about 400k.”

On Wednesday night, Tesla reaffirmed its full-year forecast of 360,000 to 400,000 vehicle deliveries in 2019 while at the same time reporting disappointing first-quarter deliveries — about 63,000 of its electric vehicles versus analysts’ expectations of 76,000.

So, to hit the low end of its guidance, Tesla would need to deliver 297,000 additional vehicles to customers in 2019, or an average of 99,000 per quarter. That’s more than Tesla has ever delivered in any quarter — its record is 90,700 during the last quarter of 2018.

Judge Alison Nathan speaking to Musk attorney John Hueston during hearing  Artwork by Elizabeth Williams 

Judge Alison Nathan heard oral arguments in Manhattan federal court on Wednesday but rather than rule immediately, she asked Tesla and the financial regulators to try to work out their differences within two weeks.

In response, Musk said in a statement, “I have great respect for Judge Nathan, and I’m pleased with her decision today. The tweet in question was true, immaterial to shareholders, and in no way a violation of my agreement with the SEC. We have always felt that we should be able to work through any disagreements directly with the SEC, rather than prematurely rushing to court. Today, that is exactly what Judge Nathan instructed.”

Possible outcomes

CNBC asked former Lutzker, now a corporate and securities partner at Davidoff Hutcher & Citron, for his take on the case.

“When they entered into the settlement, the SEC thought they’d solve the problem. And Musk thought he didn’t have to get preapproval of his tweets. He’s wrong.”

He suggests that the SEC will probably have to walk back the contempt matter.

“It is clear what both sides want right now,” Lutzker said. “The SEC wants compliance with the settlement. Musk’s attorneys want the SEC to drop the contempt proceedings, which they will need to do as he is not a recidivist securities law violator, just a recidivist tweeter.”

But he also thinks Musk’s attorneys went a bit far with their argument. “They keep saying the SEC is trying to violate his First Amendment rights. That’s going too far. It’s not a vendetta.”

What happens next?

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/05/elon-musk-vs-sec-what-happens-next-according-to-ex-sec-prosecutor.html

REUTERS Four found guilty in insider trading case linked to U.S. health agency

Four found guilty in insider trading case linked to U.S. health agency

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-crime-healthcare/four-found-guilty-in-insider-trading-case-linked-to-u-s-health-agency-idUSKBN1I42P4

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Two partners at the hedge fund Deerfield Management and two others were found guilty on Thursday of charges stemming from what prosecutors have described as an insider trading scheme based on leaks from within a federal healthcare agency.

Assistant US Attorney Joshua Naftalis presents case to jury

Rob Olan and Ted Huber, partners at Deerfield Management who are on leave, were convicted of counts including wire fraud, securities fraud and conversion of government property, as was David Blaszczak, founder of political consulting firm Precipio Health Strategies.

Christopher Worrall, who worked for the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), was also convicted of wire fraud and conversion of government property, but acquitted of securities fraud. The verdict was handed down by a jury in Manhattan federal court after nearly four days of deliberations, following a four-week trial.

Ted Huber defense attorney,  Barry Berke presents defense case to jury.
Lawyers for Huber and Worrall had no immediate comment. Lawyers for Olan and Blaszczak could not immediately be reached. A Deerfield spokesman declined to comment.





This case is being handled by the Office’s Securities and Commodities Fraud Task Force.  Assistant U.S. Attorneys Brooke Cucinella, Ian McGinley, and Joshua A. Naftalis are in charge of the prosecution.   

Citibank Defends Trade Valuations To Open $2B Lehman Suit

By Alex Wolf

Law360, New York (April 25, 2017, 9:41 PM EDT) -- Lawyers for Citibank NA came out swinging Tuesday to open a bankruptcy court trial over the nearly $2 billion valuation of about 30,000 derivatives trades that went into default after Lehman Brothers’ 2008 collapse, saying Citibank used proper methods to determine the cost of replacing those trades.

Jay Cohen gives opening statement in the LBHI v Citibank trial in SDNY Bankruptcy trial

On the first day of a multiweek bench trial in front of U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Shelley C. Chapman, attorneys Jay Cohen and Claudia Hammerman of Paul Weiss Rifkind Wharton & Garrison LLP delivered opening arguments for Citibank.

Claudia Hammerman gives opening statement to Judge Shelly Chapman in SDNY Bankruptcy Court.

A question before U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Shelley C. Chapman is whether a creditor holding a claim secured by a right of setoff can recover post-petition interest under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. Citi says its $2.2 billion in claims against Lehman are secured by setoff rights against $2 billion in Lehman cash it has held since 2008, and it wants the post-petition interest based on the argument that it is oversecured.

Citibank Trial Team: L-R Jay Cohen, Liza Velazquez, Claudia Hammerman, Julia Wood
Courtroom Art by Elizabeth Williams

Lehman's objection to the post-petition interest is part of a larger lawsuit over the validity of Citi's claims, which arose from clearing and settlement services it provided before Lehman’s collapse as well as credit and derivative contract debts.

The trial is expected to last into September 2017.