Post by kranker on May 26, 2007 9:56:52 GMT -4
the judiciary panel's preliminary findings show "extraordinarily lax enforcement by the SEC and ... may even indicate a cover-up by the SEC," Specter said.
The SEC's handling of the matter, including a review of the attorney's allegations by the agency's inspector general, "has all of the earmarks of the obstruction of justice," he said.
"These findings paint a picture of a troubled agency that faces serious questions about public confidence, the integrity of its investigations" and its ability to protect investors large and small evenhandedly, Grassley said. The SEC "circled the wagons and it shot a whistle-blower," he said.
The sacking of Mr. Aguirre had been "highly suspect", while a probe into the events by the SEC's own inspector-general had been "both seriously and fatally flawed".
Mr. Grassley said: "Taken together, these findings paint a picture of a troubled agency that faces serious questions about public confidence in the integrity of its investigations and its ability to protect all investors large and small. The SEC should have taken Mr. Aguirre's allegations more seriously. Instead . . . it circled the wagons and shot a whistleblower - an all too familiar practice in Washington . . . where whistleblowers are as -welcome as a skunk at a -picnic."
Both senators had particularly harsh words for the S.E.C.s inspector general, Walter J. Stachnik. Mr. Specter said that in all his years in the Senate he could not recall "an I.G. who said less, did less and was thoroughly inadequate in the investigation."
He mocked what he said was the inspector generals defense — that it was not his responsibility to second-guess certain S.E.C. decisions. "Well, thats the purpose of having an I.G.," Senator Specter said.
"The I.G. spoke only to Aguirres supervisors, accepted everything they said at face value and reviewed only documents identified by those supervisors," the report concluded. "We believe the S.E.C. must take corrective and preventative action to ensure that future investigations, internal and external, do not follow the same path as the Pequot matter."
In fact, the report states, one longtime S.E.C. investigator told the committee that he planned to use Mr. Aguirres examination "as a model for how to take testimony in his training of new S.E.C. attorneys."
The report called Mr. Aguirre "a smart, hardworking, aggressive attorney who was passionately dedicated to the Pequot investigation."
"We are concerned about the circumstances under which it was done," investigators said. "Macks testimony was taken five days after the statute of limitations expired, and only a few months after we initiated our inquiry into this matter."
The report concludes that the S.E.C. finally interviewed Mr. Mack to deflect public criticism for not having done it earlier.
The SEC's handling of the matter, including a review of the attorney's allegations by the agency's inspector general, "has all of the earmarks of the obstruction of justice," he said.
"These findings paint a picture of a troubled agency that faces serious questions about public confidence, the integrity of its investigations" and its ability to protect investors large and small evenhandedly, Grassley said. The SEC "circled the wagons and it shot a whistle-blower," he said.
The sacking of Mr. Aguirre had been "highly suspect", while a probe into the events by the SEC's own inspector-general had been "both seriously and fatally flawed".
Mr. Grassley said: "Taken together, these findings paint a picture of a troubled agency that faces serious questions about public confidence in the integrity of its investigations and its ability to protect all investors large and small. The SEC should have taken Mr. Aguirre's allegations more seriously. Instead . . . it circled the wagons and shot a whistleblower - an all too familiar practice in Washington . . . where whistleblowers are as -welcome as a skunk at a -picnic."
Both senators had particularly harsh words for the S.E.C.s inspector general, Walter J. Stachnik. Mr. Specter said that in all his years in the Senate he could not recall "an I.G. who said less, did less and was thoroughly inadequate in the investigation."
He mocked what he said was the inspector generals defense — that it was not his responsibility to second-guess certain S.E.C. decisions. "Well, thats the purpose of having an I.G.," Senator Specter said.
"The I.G. spoke only to Aguirres supervisors, accepted everything they said at face value and reviewed only documents identified by those supervisors," the report concluded. "We believe the S.E.C. must take corrective and preventative action to ensure that future investigations, internal and external, do not follow the same path as the Pequot matter."
In fact, the report states, one longtime S.E.C. investigator told the committee that he planned to use Mr. Aguirres examination "as a model for how to take testimony in his training of new S.E.C. attorneys."
The report called Mr. Aguirre "a smart, hardworking, aggressive attorney who was passionately dedicated to the Pequot investigation."
"We are concerned about the circumstances under which it was done," investigators said. "Macks testimony was taken five days after the statute of limitations expired, and only a few months after we initiated our inquiry into this matter."
The report concludes that the S.E.C. finally interviewed Mr. Mack to deflect public criticism for not having done it earlier.