Huge Problem: 150 Published Articles on Naked Short Selling

Below are two links to Exhibit I and Exhibit II, they are an accumulation of over 150 articles written at the end of 2008 on the Naked Short Selling cover up by the SEC for over 10 years, the present resulting financial collapse and the real effects on the US and world economy.

Exhibit I and II shows this HUGE PROBLEM has finally been admitted, yet Universal Express and its Chairman and CEO Richard Altomare remain unrelenting on the matter and have now petitioned the Supreme Court to review this landmark case.

Exhibit I (Naked Short Selling articles)

Exhibit II (Naked Short Selling articles)


For media and other inquiries that would like PDF versions of all 17 major posts via email please send request to usxpshareholders(at)gmail(com).

Below are a few sample articles from publications and writers on Naked Short Selling.
____________________________________________________

August 13, 2008

Stocks Under 'Short' Order
Fell During Protection Period
By JUDITH BURNS
August 13, 2008; Page C6

WASHINGTON -- A Securities and Exchange Commission emergency order to tighten short sales in 19 sensitive financial stocks appears to have backfired, a study found.
Shares in federal housing-finance titans Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; Wall Street firms Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Merrill Lynch & Co.; and others covered by the order saw declining prices and deteriorating market quality over the course of the 23-day emergency order, according to the study.

Arturo Bris, a finance professor at IMD business school in Lausanne, Switzerland, conducted the study and said the SEC-imposed restraints "contributed to a decline in share prices for the 19 stocks" while the order was in effect, totaling about $60 billion in losses.

SEC Chairman Christopher Cox characterized the order as a precaution against rumor-driven market turmoil, and the SEC had the rule take effect July 21. The order, which expired at 11:59 p.m. EDT Tuesday, required short sellers to borrow or arrange to borrow shares in advance of short sales in the 19 targeted stocks.

Short sellers sell borrowed shares and profit from price declines that allow them to replace shares at a lower price. Naked short sellers don't borrow shares before selling them short, a practice that critics say can lead to punishing stock-price declines.

The study examined the 19 stocks covered by emergency order, comparing their performance before and after the order took effect. It also compared results for the 19 shares against 59 U.S. and 73 non-U.S. financial companies that weren't subject to the emergency order.

Shares covered by the order lost 3.8% of their value compared with their peers' stock between July 21 and Aug. 4, the study concluded, or roughly $60 billion.

Overall, the study found the 19 shares targeted by the order had been sinking over the past six months, and fared "significantly worse" than comparable stocks.

Click Links Below For Easy Navigation:

1. Supreme Court Case
2. 150 Articles: SEC finally admits Naked Short Selling is a HUGE problem and a cause for financial crisis (July 15th, 2008 et. seq-September 15th, 2008 et. seq)
3. Richard Altomare's "Prison Inc." Book Excerpts
4. Universal Express Statement
5. Universal Express Recitation of Facts by General Counsel
6. Brief in Support of USXP Entitlement to Trial by Jury
7. Universal Express Complaint filed against SEC- March 3, 2004
8. USXP Full Page Ad in New York Times
9. Office of Inspector General Semi Annual Report to Congress- March 31, 2008
10. Richard Altomare's Speech on Naked Short Selling
11. USXP Quarterly and Annual Reports
12. Exhibit A and B: Universal Express Press Releases and Published Articles on Naked Short Selling 1998-2007
13. Universal Express Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
14. Supplemental Declaration of Chris G. Gunderson- Nov 13, 2006
15. Universal Express et al Motion for Reconsideration- March 8th, 2007
16. USXP Memo of Law in Support of Motion for Reconsideration
17. Universal's Declaration of General Counsel in Response to SEC's Request for a Receiver

AP story, August 12, 2008: SEC Short-Selling Ban on Fannie, Freddie to End

Below is a recent story from August 12th, 2008 about the end of the SEC short selling rule on Fannie, Freddie.
__________________________________________

AP
SEC short-selling ban on Fannie, Freddie to end
Tuesday August 12, 6:12 pm ET
By Marcy Gordon, AP Business Writer

SEC ban on naked short-selling in shares of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, others set to expire
WASHINGTON (AP) -- A government order expires Tuesday that temporarily banned a certain kind of short-selling of the stocks of mortgage finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and 17 large investment banks.
The companies' shares have stabilized since the ban took effect July 21. The Securities and Exchange Commission says its order helped prevent stock manipulation, and that regulators will be able to analyze data to gauge its effectiveness. But some experts say that may be difficult to determine.
The SEC instituted the emergency ban last month after a precipitous slide in the shares of Fannie and Freddie, the government-sponsored companies that together hold or guarantee more than $5 trillion in home mortgages -- nearly half the U.S. total. The SEC on July 29 extended the ban until 11:59 p.m. EDT Tuesday, saying it would not be extended further.
By law, the SEC order cannot be extended beyond Thursday, 30 calendar days from its initial effective date.
Going forward, though, the agency plans to consider new rules meant to provide additional protections against abusive "naked" short-selling in the broader market of public companies, while allowing legitimate short-selling.
That prospect has raised concern among advocates for hedge funds and private investment companies, which protested against the SEC's extension of its order.
"What is ... more significant is what long-term rules the SEC plans to propose," Gary Distell, a partner in the financial services practice at law firm Katten Muchin Rosenman in New York, said in an e-mail message.
An expansion of the order into a market-wide rule "would force firms to spend money to automate their systems and would add costs to both brokers and customers in the form of increased borrowers' fees," said Distell, formerly was an attorney at the now-defunct investment firm Bear, Stearns & Co. "In this time of economic uncertainty, that would not be a popular outcome for Wall Street."
Short sellers bet that a stock's price will fall so that they can profit from it. They borrow shares of the stock and sell them. If the price drops, they buy cheaper actual shares to cover the borrowed ones, pocketing the difference.
"Naked" short selling occurs when sellers don't even borrow the shares before selling them, and then look to cover positions immediately after the sale. The SEC's temporary order required short sellers to actually borrow shares before selling them.
SEC Chairman Christopher Cox has said the order helped prevent potential "distort and short" manipulation of stocks, which occurs when rumors and misinformation are used to drive down the price of a stock that has been sold short.
The SEC "will continue exploring other remedies for the broader marketplace to further protect investors from 'distort and short' artists," Cox said in a statement issued July 29, when the order was extended.
"Because the circumstances around the SEC emergency order were so unusual, I'm not sure we can gather any real lessons from trading activity during this period," said Susan Grafton, a former SEC attorney now at law firm Gibson Dunn & Crutcher in Washington.
Regarding trading of the 19 companies' stocks on Wednesday, after the naked short-selling ban runs out, Grafton said, "I think there's curiosity about whether there will be any changes in trading, but I haven't heard any specific concerns."
The SEC's staff "does not have a basis for determining that the 19 companies remain especially vulnerable to the illegal 'distort and short' schemes that the emergency order prevented," agency spokesman John Nester said Tuesday.
Spokeswomen for both Fannie and Freddie declined to comment.
Advocates for smaller banks and investment firms have been urging the SEC to expand the ban on naked short selling to cover additional financial companies.
Analysts and government regulators blamed aggressive short selling for exacerbating the recent plunge in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's stocks, as well as that of big investment house Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.
The SEC's announcement of its order followed a 13 percent drop in the price of Fannie shares and a 22 percent plunge in Freddie's on July 10, when a news report said the government had begun contingency planning in the event the companies failed. The next day, Freddie shares plummeted 33 percent at one point and Fannie stock lost 29 percent of its value.
The shares of Fannie, Freddie and the 17 other financial companies generally have gained since the SEC's initial announcement on July 15.
But shares of regional banks and investment firms nationwide have continued to be targeted, according to the American Bankers Association and other industry advocates.
Fannie Mae shares fell 38 cents, or 4.5 percent, to $8.02 in Tuesday trading, while Freddie Mac dipped 23 cents to $5.37.
Shares of major investment banks covered by the SEC order also were lower, amid general weakness in the financial sector. Bank of America Corp. shares fell $2.25, or 6.7 percent, to $31.13, and Citigroup Inc. dipped $1.28, or 6.5 percent, to $18.54.

Click Links Below For Easy Navigation:

1. Supreme Court Case
2. 150 Articles: SEC finally admits Naked Short Selling is a HUGE problem and a cause for financial crisis (July 15th, 2008 et. seq-September 15th, 2008 et. seq)
3. Richard Altomare's "Prison Inc." Book Excerpts
4. Universal Express Statement
5. Universal Express Recitation of Facts by General Counsel
6. Brief in Support of USXP Entitlement to Trial by Jury
7. Universal Express Complaint filed against SEC- March 3, 2004
8. USXP Full Page Ad in New York Times
9. Office of Inspector General Semi Annual Report to Congress- March 31, 2008
10. Richard Altomare's Speech on Naked Short Selling
11. USXP Quarterly and Annual Reports
12. Exhibit A and B: Universal Express Press Releases and Published Articles on Naked Short Selling 1998-2007
13. Universal Express Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
14. Supplemental Declaration of Chris G. Gunderson- Nov 13, 2006
15. Universal Express et al Motion for Reconsideration- March 8th, 2007
16. USXP Memo of Law in Support of Motion for Reconsideration
17. Universal's Declaration of General Counsel in Response to SEC's Request for a Receiver

Article from Seekingalpha.com on how Illegal Short Sellers May Face RICO Indictments, July 29th, 2008

Below is an article from seekingalpha.com on how illegal short sellers may face RICO indictments.

To read full story go to:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/87653-illegal-short-sellers-may-face-rico-indictments

Illegal Short Sellers May Face RICO Indictments
july, 29,2008
R.J Chopin

RICO, Racketeering Influenced Corruption Organizations Act, the law Rudy Guiliani used to bring down Michael Milken, and other Wall Street crooks, could be revisited in the SEC's struggle to clean up Wall Street's growing threat to the financial markets.

The SEC's crackdown against illegal naked short selling and rumor-mongering resulted in more than 50 hedge funds being slapped with subpoenas last week, according to the Wall Street Journal. Conspiracy theorist and CEO of Overstock.com (OSTK), Patrick Byrne, has embarked on a crusade to expose the nefarious hedge funds that practice illegal short selling. Byrne's web site, Deep Capture.com, has compiled a plethora of facts documenting, names, dates, times and videos of the players and their schemes.

Mark Mitchell, of DeepCapture.com, believes there exist a "hedge fund-orchestrated campaign to cover-up the crime of naked short selling." Depending on how deep the SEC probes, and what insidious facts they discover, we could see hedge fund managers, traders, and other employees facing scandalous, unprecedented charges under the infamous racketeering law, RICO. There is growing pressure for whistle-blowers to sound off or risk becoming the next scapegoat.

Clusterstock.com, reported, "the SEC is demanding both trading records and email correspondences" from subpoenaed firms. The inclusion of cell phone and text messaging records will undoubtedly be scrutinized. Concurrently, the NYSE Regulation Inc. is also investigating how some of its largest firms comply with false and misleading rumors that could undermine a stock's price. This is going to intensify.

Motley Fool, published an article on March 24, 2008, titled "The Naked Truth on Illegal Shorting," in which 100% of a company's shares were purchased by one individual, and were not available for shorting. Nevertheless, 60 million phantom shares were traded, according to owner. Subsequently, he filed a SEC 13-D compliant form.

Dick Fuld, CEO of Lehman Brothers (LEH), told market regulators that he has information that short-selling hedge funds colluded to bring down Bear Sterns (BSC). If Fulds's "information" is of evidentiary value, these hedge fund managers, and their cast of cohorts, could find themselves behind bars.

If the SEC diligently investigates the facts, we could see RICO indictments against illegal short sellers as early as Labor Day. Anyone charged under the RICO statue, even if they are found "not guilty," will become permanently damaged.

After observing the demise of Fannie Mae (FNM), and Freddie Mac (FRE) last week, it is expedient that the SEC move quickly to abolish the practice of naked short selling for all stocks. Short selling should only be allowed after the short seller has successfully borrowed the shares. The practice of selling shares that cannot be borrowed is a crime!

Discloser: No long or short positions in LEH, FNM or FRE.

Click Links Below For Easy Navigation:

1. Supreme Court Case
2. 150 Articles: SEC finally admits Naked Short Selling is a HUGE problem and a cause for financial crisis (July 15th, 2008 et. seq-September 15th, 2008 et. seq)
3. Richard Altomare's "Prison Inc." Book Excerpts
4. Universal Express Statement
5. Universal Express Recitation of Facts by General Counsel
6. Brief in Support of USXP Entitlement to Trial by Jury
7. Universal Express Complaint filed against SEC- March 3, 2004
8. USXP Full Page Ad in New York Times
9. Office of Inspector General Semi Annual Report to Congress- March 31, 2008
10. Richard Altomare's Speech on Naked Short Selling
11. USXP Quarterly and Annual Reports
12. Exhibit A and B: Universal Express Press Releases and Published Articles on Naked Short Selling 1998-2007
13. Universal Express Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
14. Supplemental Declaration of Chris G. Gunderson- Nov 13, 2006
15. Universal Express et al Motion for Reconsideration- March 8th, 2007
16. USXP Memo of Law in Support of Motion for Reconsideration
17. Universal's Declaration of General Counsel in Response to SEC's Request for a Receiver

AP story from July 30th, 2008 on SEC Extending Restrictions on Short-Selling

AP
SEC extends restrictions on short-selling
Wednesday July 30, 4:05 am ET
By Richard Jacobsen, Associated Press Writer

SEC extends restrictions on short selling of Fannie, Freddie, others through Aug. 12
Federal regulators on Tuesday extended through mid-August a temporary order banning a certain kind of short-selling of the stocks of mortgage finance companies Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and 17 large investment banks.
The Securities and Exchange Commission said the ban on so-called "naked" short selling will be in effect until 11:59 p.m. EDT on Aug. 12 and will not be extended.
Short sellers make a bet that a stock's price will fall so that they can profit from it. They borrow shares of the stock and sell them. If the price drops, they buy cheaper actual shares to cover the borrowed ones, pocketing the difference.
"Naked" short selling occurs when sellers don't even borrow the shares before selling them, and then look to cover positions immediately after the sale. The SEC order requires short sellers to actually borrow shares before selling them.
SEC Chairman Christopher Cox said the order was also helping prevent potential "distort and short" manipulation of stocks, which occurs when rumors and misinformation are used to drive down the price of a stock that has been sold short.
"In addition to continuing the existing order against naked short selling, the commission will continue exploring other remedies for the broader marketplace to further protect investors from 'distort and short' artists," Cox said in a statement.
The SEC said that extending the restrictions on short selling will allow regulators more time to collect and analyze data on the order's impact and effectiveness.
After ban runs out, regulators will move to draw up formal rules to provide additional protections against abusive naked short selling in the broader market, while allowing legitimate short selling, the SEC said.
Advocates for smaller banks and investment firms have been urging the SEC to expand the ban on naked short selling to cover additional financial companies.
Analysts and government regulators blamed aggressive short selling for exacerbating the recent plunge in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's stock, as well as that of big investment house Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.
The SEC initially announced the emergency order on July 15 after a perilous slide in shares of Fannie and Freddie, the government-sponsored companies that together hold or guarantee more than $5 trillion in home mortgages -- nearly half the U.S. total.
The regulators' move followed a 13 percent drop in the price of Fannie shares and a 22 percent plunge in Freddie's on July 10, when a news report said the government had begun contingency planning in the event the companies failed. The next day, Freddie shares plummeted 33 percent at one point and Fannie stock lost 29 percent of its value.

Click Links Below For Easy Navigation:

1. Supreme Court Case
2. 150 Articles: SEC finally admits Naked Short Selling is a HUGE problem and a cause for financial crisis (July 15th, 2008 et. seq-September 15th, 2008 et. seq)
3. Richard Altomare's "Prison Inc." Book Excerpts
4. Universal Express Statement
5. Universal Express Recitation of Facts by General Counsel
6. Brief in Support of USXP Entitlement to Trial by Jury
7. Universal Express Complaint filed against SEC- March 3, 2004
8. USXP Full Page Ad in New York Times
9. Office of Inspector General Semi Annual Report to Congress- March 31, 2008
10. Richard Altomare's Speech on Naked Short Selling
11. USXP Quarterly and Annual Reports
12. Exhibit A and B: Universal Express Press Releases and Published Articles on Naked Short Selling 1998-2007
13. Universal Express Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
14. Supplemental Declaration of Chris G. Gunderson- Nov 13, 2006
15. Universal Express et al Motion for Reconsideration- March 8th, 2007
16. USXP Memo of Law in Support of Motion for Reconsideration
17. Universal's Declaration of General Counsel in Response to SEC's Request for a Receiver

Washingtonpost.com article on SEC's Order on Naked Short Selling Taking Effect, July 22, 2008

Below is an article from washingtoonpost.com on July 22nd, 2008 about the Naked Short Selling Order taking effect.

WashingtonPost.com

SEC Order On Naked Short Selling Takes Effect

By Christopher Twarowski
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 22, 2008; D01

An order from the Securities and Exchange Commission aimed at protecting some of the country's largest financial companies against a form of short selling took effect yesterday, provoking complaints from smaller firms that they have been left vulnerable to the practice.
Shares of the 19 large companies in the SEC's order have been rising since the commission announced last week that it would shelter them from the practice, known as naked short selling, while organizations representing banks and investment firms excluded from the list have been pressing to have the protection extended to them.
Edward L. Yingling, president of the American Bankers Association, said yesterday that executives of small banks around the country say they are now being targeted.
"They believe that the short sellers moved to their stocks," said Yingling. "They're not that big, and they don't have that many shareholders, so that if there is a short sell attack on one of these institutions, it really can be very harmful because they could move the stock price a lot, without much effort."
In regular short selling, which is legal, a seller borrows shares of a security, such as a stock, from a broker and then sells it in the hope that the security will decrease in value. The seller buys it back later and returns it to the lender, profiting if the price has in fact dropped.
In naked short selling, the seller doesn't actually borrow the security but conducts the rest of the transaction as if he had. Since the seller is not constrained by the number of available shares, he can sell an unlimited number of securities that may not even exist. In large volumes, naked short selling can depress a company's stock by creating sustained downward pressure and ultimately destroy it, driving down the price until it is worthless, critics say.
The SEC's order, issued last Tuesday, provides further protection against abusive naked short selling -- which was already barred by securities law with only a few exceptions -- to 19 companies, including mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and leading Wall Street investment banks Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch and Lehman Brothers, among others.
The commission required that traders get a commitment from a lender to supply the securities before selling them short. The order differs from existing law, which applies to all securities and requires only that sellers identify actual shares available to be borrowed before proceeding with a short sale.
The order is set to expire July 29, but the SEC may extend it for a full month and could broaden it to cover more companies.
The ABA, which represents 8,500 banks, last week wrote a letter to SEC Chairman Christopher Cox expressing fear that naked short sellers would turn their attention to the banks and bank holding companies not on the list. The Financial Services Roundtable, which represents 100 of the largest financial services companies in the country, sent a similar letter.
Yingling said firms were especially vulnerable because of the repeal last year of the SEC's uptick rule, which restricted short selling if the price of the stock being sold was less than the previous trade. That meant only securities whose prices were rising could be shorted. Now, short sales can have a cascading effect on stocks, driving their share prices continuously downward.
In the current financial environment, short selling can be especially harmful to banks and brokerage firms because customers and investors may view sinking stock prices as a sign of trouble and react by withdrawing deposits, Yingling said.
But the SEC's action could create severe difficulties for regular short selling, which is used by investors to profit on the negative performance of a security, according to the Coalition of Private Investment Companies and the Managed Funds Association. In a letter to Cox yesterday, the groups urged him not to extend the order beyond July 29.
"Restrictions on short sales distort the fundamentals that drive market prices and are, in the long run, counterproductive because they remove liquidity and healthy skepticism from the marketplace," CPIC Chairman James S. Chanos said.
Naked and abusive short selling are not new. Robert J. Shapiro, a former undersecretary of commerce for economic affairs, testified before the SEC's rules committee in 2003 about the then-growing problem. He noted that one form of manipulative short selling that was widespread in the 1990s, called death-spiral financing, created "strong incentives for large-scale naked short sales focused on small and medium-size public companies." His research found that a sample of 200 companies victimized by the technique posted a combined market loss of more than $105 billion.
Shapiro, who is chairman of Sonecon, a District economic advisory firm, said in an interview yesterday that the troubled financial market had made it possible for naked short sellers to affect much larger companies than before, including the major firms covered by the SEC order.
"Finally, the real concern has arisen because the target of it is a financial institution whose failure could pose a systemic risk to the capital markets," Shapiro said. "That's why they're concerned. But the phenomenon has been around in significant scale, and cost thousands, maybe millions, of investors money, who have been in stocks that have been driven down by naked short sellers for years now."


Click Links Below For Easy Navigation:

1. Supreme Court Case
2. 150 Articles: SEC finally admits Naked Short Selling is a HUGE problem and a cause for financial crisis (July 15th, 2008 et. seq-September 15th, 2008 et. seq)
3. Richard Altomare's "Prison Inc." Book Excerpts
4. Universal Express Statement
5. Universal Express Recitation of Facts by General Counsel
6. Brief in Support of USXP Entitlement to Trial by Jury
7. Universal Express Complaint filed against SEC- March 3, 2004
8. USXP Full Page Ad in New York Times
9. Office of Inspector General Semi Annual Report to Congress- March 31, 2008
10. Richard Altomare's Speech on Naked Short Selling
11. USXP Quarterly and Annual Reports
12. Exhibit A and B: Universal Express Press Releases and Published Articles on Naked Short Selling 1998-2007
13. Universal Express Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
14. Supplemental Declaration of Chris G. Gunderson- Nov 13, 2006
15. Universal Express et al Motion for Reconsideration- March 8th, 2007
16. USXP Memo of Law in Support of Motion for Reconsideration
17. Universal's Declaration of General Counsel in Response to SEC's Request for a Receiver

Forbes.com discusses Naked Short Selling as a major contributor to market to market turmoil., July 31st, 2008

Below is an article that appeared on July 31, 2008 on Forbes.com on discussing Naked Short Selling as a major contributor to market to market turmoil.

To read the article directly visit:
http://www.forbes.com/opinions/2008/07/31/naked-short-selling-oped-cx_rc_0731regulation.html





Commentary
Protection For All
Roel Campos, 07.31.08, 5:25 PM ET

Naked short-selling is a major contributor to market turmoil.
After years of arguing to the contrary, the Securities and Exchange Commission has finally acknowledged that the practice of short-selling without pre-borrowing or locating shares can be harmful to large public companies. It is time that it acknowledges the harm it does to small ones as well.
The SEC's July 15 emergency order, now extended through Aug. 12, aims to halt the naked shorting of mortgage giants Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and 17 of the largest Wall Street and global financial institutions.
In the broadest sense, this is commendable. The move gives the perception that the SEC is the cop on the beat. It has instilled a renewed vigor that is providing world markets with much-needed confidence.
Still, by extending the emergency order of protection to only the largest and most powerful banks, the SEC is left in an awkward position.
Chairman Cox has hinted several times that the SEC may propose new rules very soon to extend protections against naked short-selling to all companies. This move cannot happen soon enough. Small ''Main Street'' companies have complained for years to the SEC that they too are often the victims of naked short-trading aimed at driving their share prices down.
In the current market environment, the failure of many small companies on America's Main Streets can just as easily threaten the U.S. economy as the fall of one or two large companies on Wall Street.
It is widely agreed that legal short-trading provides liquidity and price discovery to the market. The debate lies in how Regulation SHO, the three-year old set of rules regulating the shares of companies whose stock already have high levels of settlement failures, should work.
Legal short-trading will not be and should not be abolished. Public companies simply want a version of Regulation SHO that works. In the fast electronic environment, traders argue that they cannot pre-borrow shares in advance of unpredictable short trades for hedging.
After intense lobbying, the SEC granted an exception to the emergency rule and exempted registered exchange market makers from pre-borrowing shares.
Presumably, the SEC still favors eliminating a large and abused exception from the current Regulation SHO for option market makers. The regulation, as written, is unenforceable and requires a degree of mind reading to determine whether traders are shorting with intent to manipulate share prices.
Hundreds of public companies are on exchanges' so-called threshold lists for months at a time, indicating that a significant percent of shares from short trades have failed to be delivered, also known as FTDs. This situation creates ''phantom shares'' that leverage the downward pressure on share price.
As proposed, the SEC's new emergency order contains the two necessary elements for fixing Regulation SHO and eliminating naked shorting and settlement failures once and for all.
The first fix addresses the pre-borrowing of shares before shorting; the second, the need for ''hard'' delivery of shares traded short within the three-day settlement period. Both are essential to eliminating FTDs. Enforcement will be straight-forward. Either the shares are borrowed and delivered or there is a violation.
Existing exceptions to Regulation SHO have helped make the rule inoperable. In the future, when the SEC determines that a trader requires an exception, making it narrow with a hard delivery of shorted shares, will provide an adequate solution.
It is critical that the SEC go forward with extending the protections of the emergency order to all public companies. It is imperative that Regulation SHO become an enforceable rule that eliminates both naked shorting and FTDs. It is also imperative that it benefits all public companies, not simply a favored few.
Mr. Campos is the partner in charge of Cooley Godward Kronish's Washington, D.C. office and is a former SEC Commissioner.

Click Links Below For Easy Navigation:

1. Supreme Court Case
2. 150 Articles: SEC finally admits Naked Short Selling is a HUGE problem and a cause for financial crisis (July 15th, 2008 et. seq-September 15th, 2008 et. seq)
3. Richard Altomare's "Prison Inc." Book Excerpts
4. Universal Express Statement
5. Universal Express Recitation of Facts by General Counsel
6. Brief in Support of USXP Entitlement to Trial by Jury
7. Universal Express Complaint filed against SEC- March 3, 2004
8. USXP Full Page Ad in New York Times
9. Office of Inspector General Semi Annual Report to Congress- March 31, 2008
10. Richard Altomare's Speech on Naked Short Selling
11. USXP Quarterly and Annual Reports
12. Exhibit A and B: Universal Express Press Releases and Published Articles on Naked Short Selling 1998-2007
13. Universal Express Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
14. Supplemental Declaration of Chris G. Gunderson- Nov 13, 2006
15. Universal Express et al Motion for Reconsideration- March 8th, 2007
16. USXP Memo of Law in Support of Motion for Reconsideration
17. Universal's Declaration of General Counsel in Response to SEC's Request for a Receiver

MarketWatch Article on SEC Plans to Broaden Rules to Tackle Short Selling, July 30th 2008

SEC plans broader rules to tackle naked short selling

Industry group wants all publicly traded banks included in rules

By Alistair Barr, MarketWatch
Last update: 6:28 p.m. EDT July 30, 2008

SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- The Securities and Exchange Commission is working on broader rules to tackle so-called naked short selling as the regulator tries to protect investors from what it calls "distort and short artists."
Late Tuesday, the SEC extended an emergency order mandating that all short sales of shares in 19 important financial-services firms be subject to a "pre-borrow" requirement. The order was set to expire on Monday but will now run until just before midnight on Aug. 12.
The order won't be extended after that, but the SEC said it will quickly move to come up with longer-term, broader rules to tackle naked shorting.
"The Commission will continue exploring other remedies for the broader marketplace," SEC Chairman Christopher Cox said in a statement late Tuesday.
The SEC, along with other regulators and government agencies, stepped in earlier this month to try to slow a steep slide in shares of large financial-services companies including Fannie Mae (FNM).

The SEC said late Tuesday that staff from the regulator will collect and analyze data on the impact of its emergency order. Once it expires, rule-making will follow.
Mixed impact
The impact on the shares of the companies covered by the order has been mixed. As of the end of trading on Wednesday, 10 stocks have fallen since the order took effect on July 21, while nine have climbed.
Fannie, Freddie and Lehman, among companies under the most pressure from the credit crunch, have declined 8.9%, 4.9% and 4.6%, respectively, in that period.
Other shares have performed worse, with those of Merrill Lynch (MER
CS) , up 22% and 15%, respectively.
To be sure, SEC Chairman Cox announced plans for the order almost a week before it kicked in. Some experts say the expectation that short selling of these stocks might become harder in the future may have triggered a strong rally in the wake of his comments.
Shares of Fannie, Freddie and Lehman jumped 31%, 19% and 32%, respectively, during the week Cox first announced the SEC's plans for an emergency order.
New rules
The SEC staff is considering several new rules, The Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday.
One approach would be a price test limiting short selling during specific situations. A circuit breaker could be triggered when shares fall by a certain percentage, the newspaper reported.
John Heine, a spokesman for the SEC, declined to comment on specific rules that the regulator may be considering.
Banks want to be covered
The American Bankers Association said Wednesday that it was disappointed that the SEC didn't include all publicly traded banks when it extended the emergency order.
"ABA is concerned that those market participants that are actively involved in executing short selling strategies will focus their naked short selling strategies on those publicly traded banks and bank holding companies not covered by the order," Edward Yingling, president of the industry group, said in a statement.
"Without such action to include bank stocks in the ban, the potential exists that the Commission's action could backfire and disrupt an industry that is essential to the functioning of the economy," he said.
The ABA is hoping the SEC considers including all banks when it makes new rules that try to limit naked short selling.
Political will
"It is remarkable that the topic of banning naked short selling across the entire market is being discussed so actively," said Josh Galper, managing principal of consulting firm Vodia Group, which advises investors how to borrow securities. "Six months ago, the subject was as important as it is now but now there's the political will to make change."
The only thing that has changed substantially is the fact that stock markets are under more pressure than they were, said Charles Whitehead, a securities law expert at Boston University's School of Law.
"Putting in a rule that might cushion any downward pressure is a very politically astute thing to do in an election year," he said.
SHO me the stock
With the political wind at his back, Cox may also be able to close a "loop hole" in rules it came up with earlier this decade, Whitehead said.
In 2005, the SEC introduced regulation SHO to try to limit naked short selling.
In a typical short sale, traders sell borrowed shares, hoping to buy them back at a lower price and return them to the lender. The difference is kept as profit. What's different in naked shorting is that a trader shorts a stock without first making necessary arrangements to borrow shares. Naked shorting can distort markets because it artificially creates an extra supply of shares.
Reg SHO required brokers to "have reasonable grounds to believe" that they could locate stock to lend before allowing a short sale to proceed.
That has allowed some brokers to continue to lend stock that they may not be able to locate, Whitehead said.
The SEC's emergency order requires that brokers locate stock in the 19 companies before they lend and before short sales happen.
"Chairman Cox has the wind at his back and is able to point to the general market turmoil to help him overturn this loop hole in Reg SHO," Whitehead said. "This is a great opportunity for him to push through something that the staff has suggested in the past."
Still, groups representing the hedge fund industry have already cautioned against any quick rule-making in this area.
"We hope that any permanent changes be considered through a fair and open process in which the consequences of regulatory involvement in the setting of share prices can be better understood," said James Chanos, chairman of the Coaltion of Private Investment Cos. and head of short-selling hedge fund firm Kynikos Associates LP.
"Markets are best served when there is a level playing field between buyers and sellers, which in turn produces prices that have the greatest integrity," he said.
Alistair Barr is a reporter for MarketWatch in San Francisco.

Click Links Below For Easy Navigation:

1. Supreme Court Case
2. 150 Articles: SEC finally admits Naked Short Selling is a HUGE problem and a cause for financial crisis (July 15th, 2008 et. seq-September 15th, 2008 et. seq)
3. Richard Altomare's "Prison Inc." Book Excerpts
4. Universal Express Statement
5. Universal Express Recitation of Facts by General Counsel
6. Brief in Support of USXP Entitlement to Trial by Jury
7. Universal Express Complaint filed against SEC- March 3, 2004
8. USXP Full Page Ad in New York Times
9. Office of Inspector General Semi Annual Report to Congress- March 31, 2008
10. Richard Altomare's Speech on Naked Short Selling
11. USXP Quarterly and Annual Reports
12. Exhibit A and B: Universal Express Press Releases and Published Articles on Naked Short Selling 1998-2007
13. Universal Express Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
14. Supplemental Declaration of Chris G. Gunderson- Nov 13, 2006
15. Universal Express et al Motion for Reconsideration- March 8th, 2007
16. USXP Memo of Law in Support of Motion for Reconsideration
17. Universal's Declaration of General Counsel in Response to SEC's Request for a Receiver

Journalist, Mark Mitchell's Recent Articles on Naked Short Selling, Part 4 (July 24th, 2008):

Part 4 of journalist Mark Mitchell's recent published stories on Naked Short Selling is below:

To read the article directly visit:

http://www.deepcapture.com/short-sellers-spin-themselves-silly-sec-sounds-strong/
___________________________________________

Short-Sellers Spin Themselves Silly, SEC Sounds Strong

July 24th, 2008 by Mark Mitchell

After years of intermittently ignoring and whitewashing one of history’s biggest financial swindles, the Wall Street Journal today, for the first time, published some basic truths about the crime: “Illegitimate naked short selling is different from [legal short-selling]…this kind of manipulative activity can have drastic consequences…Eliminating the prospect of naked short selling will help assure investors that… when the market declines it is not because of unseen manipulators and `distort and short’ artists.”

Unfortunately, these words were not written by some enterprising journalist seeking to nail the criminal hedge funds who have manufactured billions of phantom shares (shares sold “naked” because they don’t exist) while using other dubious tactics – such as publishing false “independent” financial research, working with a crooked law firm (the recently indicted Milberg, Weiss) to saddle companies with bogus class action lawsuits, hiring thugs and private investigators to harass corporate executives, orchestrating dead-end government investigations, employing armies of basement-dwelling creeps to bash companies and smear reputations on Internet message boards, and feeding distorted and maliciously false information to compliant or naïve journalists – all part of a massive, collusive effort to destroy public companies for profit.

No, sadly for anyone who cares about the state of our financial markets and media, those crimes go mostly unreported. And as for the few basic truths that appeared in today’s Wall Street Journal, they were not products of any journalistic effort. They were, rather, the words of SEC Chairman Christopher Cox, who managed (no doubt, with some difficulty) to convince the Journal to publish an op-ed wherein he explains why he had to issue an “emergency order” to prevent abusive short-selling from crashing the American financial system.

Why is this not front page news? Why is the Journal not clamoring for the criminals to be put away?

We’ve noted that The Wall Street Journal’s “Money & Investing” section, which covers the hedge fund beat, was once under the control of editor David Kansas, who was known for unleashing reporters on companies targeted by his long-time short-selling friends, while ignoring, with seemingly purposeful intent, all evidence suggesting that his friends were up to no good. Kansas, I believe, was the principal reason why the Journal long held back from investigating the naked short selling scandal.

But Kansas and some of his comrades have left the Journal, and I believe most of the paper’s other reporters are well-intentioned. It’s just that this is a complicated story – it can take time to wade through the grim data, to see for yourself the rapes in progress, and to come to terms with the ugly dimensions of the problem. It’s all the harder when you’re having smoke blown in your face by people whom, for whatever mistaken reasons, you have come to respect.

It is no coincidence that Jim Chanos, manager of hedge fund Kynikos Associates, was elected chairman of the Coalition of Private Investment Companies, the hedge fund lobbying and PR outfit. Chanos is the guy who helped Fortune Magazine’s Bethany McLean break the Enron story. Ever since, he’s been the David Koresh of media, convincing a cohort of zombified journalists that he can bestow blessed immortality — the next big scoop. The reporters swoon to this guru’s sermons, even when they sense that there is something untrue – even when, Waco-like, the authorities are closing in and a gruesome end is nigh.

Chanos has been busy dishing out the usual proselytizations: short-selling is good for the markets, short-sellers help root out bad companies like Enron, short-sellers are victims – nice fellows under attack by crazies and people who don’t like free markets. “We’re on the side of the angels,” Chanos proclaimed yesterday, clearly hoping that the media’s cries of “Amen!” would drown out the rumblings of a government that finally seems to be waking up to the notion that while there is nothing wrong with short-sellers, and free markets are swell, there is something not so good, and not so free, about a market getting pummeled by peddlers of fake stock and false information.

Chanos and his followers should throw in the towel. Contrary to our earlier concerns, it seems like the SEC is blowing off the hedge fund lobby and its media followers. Short-sellers of stocks in 19 financial companies have actually been forced to borrow real shares — not just locate them; not just say “yeah, yeah, my buddy in Staten Island’s got ‘em in his drawer,” but have real shares in hand before selling them. Even better, Cox said today that he intends to expand the enforcement across the entire market. We’ll see if he follows through.

Perhaps to avoid panic, the SEC Chairman has said that his emergency order was a preventive step, and was not meant to suggest that naked short-selling of the financial stocks was already rampant. But we know from SEC data that more than $6 billion worth of shares go undelivered every day. We know further that the phantom stock has been targeted at specific companies, including Bear Stearns, which saw as many as 13 million shares fail to deliver in its final days. Much more naked shorting takes place “ex-clearing” – for which no public data exists.

The immediate results of the SEC’s emergency order speak to just how big the ex-clearing problem is. Since Monday, when the order took effect, short-selling of the affected companies has decreased by 70 percent – and 90 percent in the cases of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It is safe to say that a lot of that reduction is attributable to hedge funds that were previously selling shares without borrowing them. Now extrapolate to the entire market. We know that short-sales make up around 30 percent of total market volume. If we knock some points off that 70 percent number and decide that, say, half of short-selling has been naked – then 15% of total market volume on any given day could be phantom stock.

That is an admittedly rough number. The fact is, we just don’t know the exact figure. But as evidence for the hypothesis that the number is, in fact, even larger, consider that Chanos and friends insist that the SEC’s restrictions on illegitimate naked short selling will seriously reduce “liquidity” in the markets. Some Wall Street lobbyists have even suggested to the SEC that the New York Stock Exchange would have to temporarily shut its doors if the SEC were to enforce its emergency order market-wide.

In other words, people like Chanos (who has denied that he has ever participated in naked short selling and has previously expressed surprise that it even occurs) is now saying that the practice is so widespread that the markets cannot function without it. The market’s “liquidity” depends on illegitimate naked short selling. Without the phantom stock which predominates in our markets, nobody would know what to do–prices would go haywire, there’d be total chaos.
All of which is reminiscent of the SEC’s earlier weird statements that naked short selling occurs rarely, but there’s so much naked short selling that enforcing rules against it might “create excess market volatility.”

If you’re a journalist, and you’re still confused, just wrap your head around this: even the hedge funds now admit that a very significant chunk of the stock that they sell cannot be readily borrowed. It cannot be borrowed, because it does not exist. This massive supply of phantom stock is what is setting prices in our supposedly “free market.”

It is a recipe for financial meltdown It is the scandal of a lifetime. And the financial media fiddles.

Click Links Below For Easy Navigation:

1. Supreme Court Case
2. 150 Articles: SEC finally admits Naked Short Selling is a HUGE problem and a cause for financial crisis (July 15th, 2008 et. seq-September 15th, 2008 et. seq)
3. Richard Altomare's "Prison Inc." Book Excerpts
4. Universal Express Statement
5. Universal Express Recitation of Facts by General Counsel
6. Brief in Support of USXP Entitlement to Trial by Jury
7. Universal Express Complaint filed against SEC- March 3, 2004
8. USXP Full Page Ad in New York Times
9. Office of Inspector General Semi Annual Report to Congress- March 31, 2008
10. Richard Altomare's Speech on Naked Short Selling
11. USXP Quarterly and Annual Reports
12. Exhibit A and B: Universal Express Press Releases and Published Articles on Naked Short Selling 1998-2007
13. Universal Express Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
14. Supplemental Declaration of Chris G. Gunderson- Nov 13, 2006
15. Universal Express et al Motion for Reconsideration- March 8th, 2007
16. USXP Memo of Law in Support of Motion for Reconsideration
17. Universal's Declaration of General Counsel in Response to SEC's Request for a Receiver

Journalist, Mark Mitchell's Recent Articles on Naked Short Selling, Part 3 (July 23rd, 2008):

Below is Part 3 in a series of articles by journalist Mark Mitchell on Naked Short Selling.

To read the article directly visit:

http://www.deepcapture.com/we-%e2%99%a5-jim-cramer/
_________________


We Love Jim Cramer

July 23rd, 2008 by Mark Mitchell

“…the most falsely over-weighted topic on Wall Street these days is naked shorting…the concept of not finding shares before you short them, not locating them, is something that happens very rarely…”

- Jim Cramer, TheStreet.com, February 5, 2006

Do you believe in redemption?

In “The Story of Deep Capture,” we noted that CNBC’s Jim Cramer is at the center of a clique of dishonest journalists (most of them former employees of Cramer’s website, TheStreet.com) who have spent many years taking dictation for short selling hedge funds (most of them connected to Cramer). These same journalists, we pointed out, have steadfastly denied that hedge funds commit crimes or that illegal naked short selling is a big problem.

On the day after we published “The Story of Deep Capture,” Cramer went on CNBC to say that illegal naked short selling is a big problem.

This was the first time he had ever said such a thing, and he didn’t mince words. Comparing today’s hedge fund crimes to the short selling that contributed to the great stock market crash of 1929, he said, “We know that there was a lot of time spent in the 30s analyzing this issue and deciding that it was very easy to create a bear raid…What I’m trying to eliminate is the kind of bear raid…where people didn’t borrow stock [i.e., where they conducted illegal naked short-selling].”

Cramer was quiet on the issue after that. But last week, the SEC issued an “emergency order” suggesting that naked short-selling had the potential to topple the American financial system.

That evening, Cramer said, for the second time in his career, that naked short selling is a big problem. He said that, in fact, all along, “We’ve been on a crusade on this show…it’s a crusade to bring back honest short-sellers…Right now hedge funds, if they don’t like a stock, can just attack it by calling brokers and punishing the stocks, blitzing them down [by selling stock that they have not borrowed – naked short-selling].”

Meanwhile, the rest of the CNBC staff went to lengths to suggest that short-sellers are good people who do no wrong – that the SEC’s emergency order was some kind of witch hunt. The folks at CNBC also seemed keen to erase their own culpability in the short-seller attack that is widely believed to have destroyed Bear Stearns.

Strangely, Charlie Gasparino, who has been one of the few CNBC reporters to acknowledge short-seller shenanigans (he once called Deep Capture reporter Patrick Byrne a “hero” for raising awareness of the problem), suddenly pronounced that people who believe that short-sellers destroyed Bear Stearns are all “morons” because hedge funds were pulling their money out of the bank “before all the CNBC chatter” [i.e., before CNBC’s David Faber sparked a panic by airing, as if it were fact, the scurrilous hedge fund lie that Goldman Sachs had cut off Bear’s credit].

This was somewhat in contradiction to Gasparino’s earlier suggestion that hedge funds had precipitated the demise of Bear Stearns. “If you look at the way Bear Stearns imploded,” he said in April, “it didn’t go down in a couple of months, it went down in a week. And if you look at what happened, it’s clients, which were hedge funds - these are the people that…trade with the firm. They precipitously started pulling cash while - while they were going short…”

Indeed, we challenge CNBC to name more than one hedge fund that had pulled out its cash before its reporter, David Faber, aired that well-timed fabrication on Wednesday, March 12 . We’ll say it again: The SEC should subpoena Faber to find out which hedge fund (perhaps illegally) fed him the false news.

In any case, Gasparino now says critics of short-sellers are “morons.” The rest of CNBC has not seen fit to interview the many experts who believe illegal naked short selling is threatening the stability of the American financial system, and has instead lined up people like Cramer pal Joe Nocera, of the New York Times, and Michael Steinhardt, the hedge fund manager who incubated Cramer’s first hedge fund. These people have reinforced the party line that short-sellers are the market’s “vital” untouchables while failing to address the data – the billions of phantom shares that crooked hedge funds have manufactured through naked short selling.

Thus, surreally, the only person on CNBC now acknowledging the scope of the problem is the one journalist who has done the most to cover it up – Jim Cramer. And Cramer is not just acknowledging the problem, he’s telling us how angry it makes him. I mean, we at Deep Capture have done our fair share of ranting about naked short selling, but our efforts pale in comparison to the 15-minute tirade that Jim Cramer launched against the SEC for failing to stop the law-breaking short sellers who are “viciously and quickly” driving down stock prices [tirade accompanied, literally, by a soundtrack of emergency sirens].

What to make of this?

We’ve given up trying to psychoanalyze the singular Jim Cramer. Maybe he sees where the wind is blowing and is trying to distance himself from his hedge fund cronies. Maybe CNBC has heard the critics who have been hollering for years that Cramer’s clique was running rampant, while Gasparino was the only reporter on CNBC who could be objective about short-sellers’ crimes. Maybe to neutralize that criticism, CNBC is flipping everything on its head. We’ve seen stranger goings-on at Cirque du CNBC.

But it doesn’t matter. We’d like to give Jim Cramer a hug. Yes, Jim, come on over — you bear, you — and give us a great big hug.

There is always the possibility that you are legitimately horrified by the destruction that illegal short-selling has wrought. Maybe you even feel a bit guilty about the role you have played.
Well, we feel your pain. All is forgiven. Come and give us that hug.

Sure, it’s beyond the pale for you to suggest that you’ve been on our “crusade” all along, but we’ll give you points for chutzpah. We’ll also give you points for taking a stance that will no doubt alienate you from some of your closest friends.

Most importantly, we give you points for speaking the truth – and doing it well. Although your speechifying against the problem of illegal naked short selling seems strangely timed, it has been unequivocal, incisive, and no doubt convincing to a great many people.

“Would you call me crazy?” you asked on CNBC, as a prelude to your 15 minute rant against the naked short selling problem. Yes, Jim, we would — but crazy ain’t such a bad thing to be, so long as you’re saying it like it is, and doing the world good.

Welcome to the Deep Capture team.

(Or….maybe not. Here’s a question for the long-time crusaders – the hundreds of good people who have been hollering about the problem of naked short-selling for years (you’re all members of the Deep Capture team, as far as we’re concerned): Do you believe that Cramer is truly reformed? Is he going to continue highlighting short-seller crimes. Can he really be one of us? Let us know what you think).

Click Links Below For Easy Navigation:

1. Supreme Court Case
2. 150 Articles: SEC finally admits Naked Short Selling is a HUGE problem and a cause for financial crisis (July 15th, 2008 et. seq-September 15th, 2008 et. seq)
3. Richard Altomare's "Prison Inc." Book Excerpts
4. Universal Express Statement
5. Universal Express Recitation of Facts by General Counsel
6. Brief in Support of USXP Entitlement to Trial by Jury
7. Universal Express Complaint filed against SEC- March 3, 2004
8. USXP Full Page Ad in New York Times
9. Office of Inspector General Semi Annual Report to Congress- March 31, 2008
10. Richard Altomare's Speech on Naked Short Selling
11. USXP Quarterly and Annual Reports
12. Exhibit A and B: Universal Express Press Releases and Published Articles on Naked Short Selling 1998-2007
13. Universal Express Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
14. Supplemental Declaration of Chris G. Gunderson- Nov 13, 2006
15. Universal Express et al Motion for Reconsideration- March 8th, 2007
16. USXP Memo of Law in Support of Motion for Reconsideration
17. Universal's Declaration of General Counsel in Response to SEC's Request for a Receiver

Journalist, Mark Mitchell's Recent Articles on Naked Short Selling, Part 2 (July 21st, 2008):

Here is the next story by Mark Mitchell from July 21st, 2008.

To read it first hand visit:

http://www.deepcapture.com/how-naked-short-sellers-and-cnbc-bamboozled-the-sec/
_______________________________________________


How Naked Short Sellers and CNBC Bamboozled the SEC

July 21st, 2008 by Mark Mitchell

You can bet that the hedge fund talking points were rolling off the CNBC fax machine last week, and really, the network did a stellar job – right on par with the high-powered lobbyists in Washington. Yes, the folks at CNBC should join hands with those lobbyists, and take a deep bow. It was a heck of a show – a real extravaganza.

I doubt the American people even know what hit them.

It is hard to believe, given that the news has so quickly disappeared from the front pages, but the SEC last Tuesday issued an historic “emergency order” to head off financial apocalypse by preventing criminals from “naked short selling” the stock of 19 big finance companies.

The SEC’s move was kind of weird (Why only 19 companies?) but it was gratifying to Deep Capture and a band of crusaders who have long been hollering that crooked hedge funds use naked short selling (selling stock that has not been purchased or borrowed, and usually does not exist – i.e., phantom stock) to drive down prices and destroy public companies for profit.

For years, arrogant journalists brushed off the crusaders, while a pack of dishonest, but influential reporters with close ties to hedge funds harassed and ridiculed them (see, “The Story of Deep Capture”). Meanwhile, government agencies denied that phantom stock was a problem. SEC Director of Trading and Markets James Brigagliano once referred to the crusaders as “bozos.”

But on Tuesday…well, here was something altogether different. The SEC said that phantom stock was not just a problem; it was an “emergency” that had the potential to crash the nation’s financial system.

In other words, the bozos were right!

Well, we cheered, and then we closed our eyes to take in that warm glow of vindication. My eyes were closed a bit too long, I’m afraid, because I missed the curtain opening on Cirque du CNBC and its amazing spectacles – great feats of flimflammery, upside down speechifying, all manner of contortionism and illusion.

Within three days, this grim circus, with a lot of help from the mighty hedge fund lobby, would reduce the SEC’s “emergency order” to a twisted joke – a grand gesture to do nothing whatsoever.

The day after the SEC’s declaration, the circus was already well under way, with the hedge funds spinning furiously and their media marionettes singing the party line: short sellers are “vital” to free markets; everybody loves free markets; only bad companies and bad CEOs complain about short sellers – go investigate the CEOs, hands off the “vital” hedge fund managers.

As for billions of dollars of phantom stock threatening to topple the American financial system – don’t even mention it. If somebody does, repeat, over and over, “Only bad companies complain about shorts…shorts are vital”

I sketch out the hedge fund party line only for those who are new to the so-called “debate” over naked short-selling. If you’re a long-time crusader, you’ve heard it all before. You’ve heard it on CNBC so often that you’re probably now banging your head against a wall and saying something like, “oogly oogly oogly,” half-mad with incomprehension – still unable to come to terms with the utterly surreal spectacle of an important television news network, in the United States of America, completely whitewashing a massive crime.

By the time CNBC interviewed SEC Chairman Christopher Cox on Wednesday, the top market cop seemed to have become rather befuddled by it all. Amidst the incessant chants — “bad CEO’s…vital short-sellers” — Cox backed away from his earlier suggestion that he might extend the emergency order to protect the entire market, rather than just 19 big financial firms with ties to Wall Street.

Meanwhile, Chairman Cox suggested, preposterously, that it’s somehow more acceptable to naked short smaller companies because their shares are harder to locate and borrow. This is something only a hedge fund contortionist would say. There are always shares to borrow at some price, and a tough borrowing environment hardly justifies selling millions of non-existent shares to drive down prices.

But we sympathize with Mr. Cox. While the CNBC lady suggested that the SEC should investigate bad companies instead of shorts, and questioned whether the SEC had initiated some kind of “witch hunt” against short-sellers generally, the chairman labored valiantly to point out the obvious (though apparently not to CNBC) distinction between legal short-selling and the blatantly illegal practice of spreading maliciously false information while selling non-existent stock to create panic and drive down prices.

Mr. Cox seemed like he wanted to do the right thing. It’s just that Cirque du CNBC can be a rather discombobulating place.

Moments before the SEC Chairman was interviewed, circus clown Joe Nocera, who doubles as the New York Times’ top business columnist, was on CNBC, working up the crowd by suggesting that Mr. Cox had lost his mind and was doing the bidding of bad companies and stupid people “saying woe is us, woe is us, blame it on the shorts.”

Remember, Joe Nocera is the anti-investigative journalist whom Deep Capture has tape recorded telling some of his media colleagues that the naked short-selling scandal “makes his eyes glaze over,” and he isn’t going to look into it because “life is too short.”

Far easier to read from the script: “Bad companies! Vital shorts!”

The next day, CNBC had yet to televise any of the CEOs, economists, and many other experts who agree that the phantom stock problem is, indeed, an “emergency.” Instead, the network brought on hedge fund cronies to say that their hedge fund cronies are “vital.”

Predictably, CNBC did a long interview with the dreaded Michael Steinhardt, a mentor and incubator of some of the most notorious short-and-distort hedge funds in the land. Steinhardt, for example, once employed David Rocker, who has regularly used the media (most notably, CNBC’s Herb Greenberg) and a dubious financial research shop called Gradient Analytics to disseminate misleading information about target companies, most of which are also victimized by massive levels of phantom stock. Jim Cramer, CNBC’s top-rated “journalist,” once ran a hedge fund out of Steinhardt’s offices, and CNBC’s “Money Honey,” Maria Bartiromo is married to the top partner in Steinhardt’s newest fund.

These are the sorts of relationships that prevail at CNBC. Our critics say it is too “conspiratorial” to point out these relationships, but we believe otherwise. Watch CNBC. Observe the lubrications that are lathered on favored hedge funds. Then judge for yourself.

Steinhardt didn’t have much to say about hedge funds that destroy public companies by selling billions of dollars of phantom stock while publishing false financial information, colluding with crooked law firms to file class action lawsuits, orchestrating dead-end government investigations, hiring convicted criminals and thugs to harass CEOs, and feeding false information to compliant journalists. Indeed, he didn’t have much to say at all, except the predictable mantra that all the “moaning and groaning” about short-sellers comes from bad companies and silly people who are angry about falling stock prices.

Participating in this interview was Paul Roth, another hedge fund manager who was mentored by Steinhardt. When asked whether it would be a problem if, say, a hedge fund were to sell ten times as many shares as actually exist in a company, Roth said, “That’s not illegal…the problem is sometimes you located the shares [and sold them] but somebody scooped them up [before you could deliver them to their rightful owners].”

CNBC’s Joe Kernen, who conducted the interview, characteristically let this statement go unchallenged. So let us state, for the record, that it would be a crime of monumental proportions to sell, say, 1,000 shares in a company that had only 100 shares outstanding.

It is a crime because you cannot possibly “locate” or “scoop up” 900 shares that do not exist. It is a crime because there is only one possible reason why a hedge fund would sell ten-times a company’s public float, and that’s to manipulate the stock price.

But understand how these people think: If you can get away with it, it’s not illegal.

Around the same time that CNBC was massaging Steinhardt and Roth, members of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, the leading Wall Street lobbying outfit, were on a conference call with some high-level SEC officials.

As it were, none of the hundreds of companies victimized by phantom stock got to be on any conference calls. But they’re used to that.

They’re also not too surprised that after CNBC aired the hedge funds’ talking points for three days, and the lobbyists wailed on the conference call, and uncounted other hedge fund billionaires bellowed in the name of “efficient markets” and the right to destroy “bad” public companies, the SEC announced that it would preserve its “market maker exemption,” which allows some brokers to sell stock they don’t have in order to “make a market.”

The “market maker exception” is one of several loopholes that hedge funds have been using for years to create billions of dollars worth of phantom stock. Market makers are, in fact, required to eventually deliver the stock they sell. But the name “market maker” imbues magic powers. If the SEC asks why you haven’t delivered the shares you sold, stick the words “market maker” on your forehead, mutter something about keeping things “liquid”, and the SEC goes away — even when you’ve sold ten times the float and even when the phantom stock goes undelivered for months or years at a time.

Since it was already against SEC rules to use naked short selling to drive down prices, the most exceptional feature of the commission’s “emergency order” was that it was going to close the “market maker exception” loophole – at least as it applied to trading in 19 big financial companies. By retaining that exception, the SEC has, in essence, decided that it isn’t going to do anything after all. Hedge funds and their “market makers” can go right on selling phantom stock and threatening the stability of the American financial system.

From “emergency” to “exception” in a few short days…Behold the powers of Cirque du CNBC and its hedge fund choreographers.

Click Links Below For Easy Navigation:

1. Supreme Court Case
2. 150 Articles: SEC finally admits Naked Short Selling is a HUGE problem and a cause for financial crisis (July 15th, 2008 et. seq-September 15th, 2008 et. seq)
3. Richard Altomare's "Prison Inc." Book Excerpts
4. Universal Express Statement
5. Universal Express Recitation of Facts by General Counsel
6. Brief in Support of USXP Entitlement to Trial by Jury
7. Universal Express Complaint filed against SEC- March 3, 2004
8. USXP Full Page Ad in New York Times
9. Office of Inspector General Semi Annual Report to Congress- March 31, 2008
10. Richard Altomare's Speech on Naked Short Selling
11. USXP Quarterly and Annual Reports
12. Exhibit A and B: Universal Express Press Releases and Published Articles on Naked Short Selling 1998-2007
13. Universal Express Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
14. Supplemental Declaration of Chris G. Gunderson- Nov 13, 2006
15. Universal Express et al Motion for Reconsideration- March 8th, 2007
16. USXP Memo of Law in Support of Motion for Reconsideration
17. Universal's Declaration of General Counsel in Response to SEC's Request for a Receiver