AIG Executives Not Targeted for Criminal Charges
Former American International Group executive Joseph Cassano
/ AP/CBSCBS News confirmed Friday night that federal prosecutors have informed attorneys for executives of American International Group Inc. that they are not targets of criminal charges.
The decision to conclude the two-year investigation into AIG executives comes after CBS News chief investigative correspondent Armen Keteyian first reported on April 6 that the Justice Department was likely to drop charges against Cassano.
The investigation focused on whether the insurer's executives deceived investors and its outside auditor about the company's risky investments in credit-default swaps partly tied to mortgages, the newspaper reports. Those investments nearly brought AIG down in 2008.
Investigators focused on Joseph Cassano, the former head of AIG's Financial Products unit who now no longer works for the company.
"The system worked," Cassano's attorneys, F. Joseph Warin and Jim Walden, said in a statement. "Although a 2-year, intense investigation is tough for anyone, the results are wholly appropriate in light of our client's factual innocence."
The conclusion of the Justice Department's investigation doesn't mean AIG is free and clear from government probes. The Securities and Exchange Commission hasn't ruled out the possibility of filing a civil fraud lawsuit against the insurer for securities violations, the newspaper reports.
Popular on MoneyWatch
- Reverse cell phone lookup service is free and simple
- Chrysler expected to make Jeep recall refusal official
- 6 ways to pay off your student loans
- Why geniuses don't have jobs
- Chrysler agrees to recall of Jeeps at risk of fire
- The Internship: 6 real-life lessons from the movie
- Top 10 professional life coaching myths
- Chrysler continues its refusal to issue a Jeep recall














And if AIG actions are not yet technically "criminal", the lack of a statutory basis for charges is the handiwork of the GOP DEregulatory regime.
In fact, the GOP (1998-2008) led the charge to remove consumer protections from banking.
(With a "defender" like you, the recession is easily explained.)
And you are in bad company, because such corporations plan to buy the next election. You simply make it easier for them.
You (the government) are making a huge deal out of prosecuting the little guy because you are too afraid to go after the big guy. And you're too afraid because you know the the big guy owns your government by owning your representatives.
There is only one way to take back what is otherwise a pretty good thing: public financing (equal spending) of all public elections.
And wouldn't it be appropriate if our representatives made the average of the living wage of their constituencies?
It's not that congress can't make good laws: it's that their next meal ticket (as in next election) is going to be determined by the next lobbyist that interviews them. (Sounds backwards, doesn't it?)
Do we really want to put our representatives into the position of having to be high-priced hookers to big corporations just to get elected, or are we going to insist on representation of, by, and for the people? (That's what the Tea Party was originally about: 'taxation without representation is tyranny'.)
Busyness as usual.
Just the companys change CEO's.
Monopoly of corporations too large to fail.
This is the picture of america as a third world country.
Not all business is evil, just most of it.
Citizens cannot walk away with out some of the blame.
Those who bet on stocks, derivitaves and insurance are guilty as any corporation for placing trust in a gambling operation.
You can go to jail for being too drunk or too stoned on pot, but bilk the country out of billions of dollars. Ya get a medal...what a bunch of jackals.