Archive for the 'Ukraine Crimea Crisis' Category

Did Stanley Fischer, Stanford SIEPR Day and Moodys Leverage help Russia take Crimea?

April 4, 2014

How much did the nomination of Stanley Fischer, Stanford SIEPR Agenda Day giving Fischer 100,000 dollars and Russia’s leverage on Stanford professor Darrell Duffie and thus Moody’s help Russia take Crimea?  Russia took Crimea because it was confident that its world view was correct and that it had leverage over the US decision makers and the West to get away with it.   Putin is an old KGB colonel and if the world is going his way in the old way he understood it, then he is confident to take Crimea while he has leverage over the US and the West.

How much in sanctions can the West impose on Russia?

The following article says not much.

By now, Germany, the UK, France, Italay, Canada, and other countries like Poland, Sweden and other former Warsaw Pact countries are aware that Russia used plagiarism kompromat on Stanley Fischer and Larry Summers (via his uncle Paul Samuelson) to help get IMF loans in the 1990s for Russia. They also know that Harvard, Shleifer, Summers, Fischer, etc. covered that up in US v Harvard, Shleifer and Hay.  They know that the upper levels of DOJ are complicit in this cover-up, as are other parts of the US apparat including CIA and NSA.

Furthermore, Dominique Strauss Kahn likely used this information to engage in sexual harassment at the IMF and other professors at Stanford and elsewhere have also likely used the plagiarism kompromat to engage in sexual harassment.  Larry Summer’s comments that women are not good in math at the NBER was directed at female econ and law profs who knew of this, that if they came forward they would lose their NBER grants.  NBER fronts for grants in law and economics from the federal government so that the university legal entities don’t see the grant directly from US government. Instead, the NBER does and the universities charge NBER fees for use of their facilities in the grant.  This immunizes the universities or so they hope from penalties from using NBER grants as payments to coverup and for silence during FBI background checks or investigations like US v Harvard, Shleifer and Hay.

Russia is aware of this.  Larry Summers was appointed without Senate approval, but nonetheless rehired, by the US government in 2009.  That was after it was public on the Internet that Russia had used this and that Summers, Shleifer and Harvard covered this up.  DE Shaw had hired Summers and paid him 5 million a year.  They had traded Russian government bonds during the 1990s and may have known of Russia’s kompromat on Summers and Stanley Fischer at that time.  LTCM also likely did and traded on it.

These firms and others including Federal Reserve and FRBNY are part of this circle of kompromat.  Moreover, New Economic School Moscow now has an employee at Federal Reserve in Washington as well as at universities and likely financial institutions.   So the kompromat network is much broader and deeper.  Stanford SIEPR Agenda Day with Stanley Fischer and Sergei Guriev was intended to frighten Federal Reserve board employees from Stanford and from New Economic School Moscow to keep quiet.

Stanford Professor Michael McFaul was US ambassador to Russia.  During the entire time he was ambassador the Duffie document that has kompromat on Duffie, Stanford and Moody’s was posted on websites in Russia.  Putin treated McFaul with contempt.  This is part of Putin’s contempt for Berezovsky and KGB need to prove he is smarter than profs like Berezovsky in manipulating and controlling profs like McFaul, Duffie, Stanley Fischer and Larry Summers.

Obama is from University of Chicago which hired Stanley Fischer after his plagiarism at MIT and knew of the plagiarism at at the time. University of Chicago helped coverup Russia’s use of plagiarism kompromat to get atomic secrets.  The use of plagiarism kompromat in econ was going on full blast at University of Chicago in the 1990s when Obama was a lecturer there.  The main cases of plagiarism in the 1990s involved University of Chicago directly or indirectly.

Bernanke’s thesis didn’t cite the Stanley Fischer papers but did cite the Paul Samuelson plagiarism paper but not the Nils Hakansson papers that were plagiarized by Stanley Fischer and Paul Samuelson.  Olivier Blanchard was coauthor with Stanley Fischer of a graduate textbook citing only the Samuelson plagiarism paper and not Nils Hakansson. Blanchard is now chief economist of the IMF.   Others at Federal Reserve are involved.

There are profs and Ph.D.s at major investment banks who know of this or who are involved in some of the plagiarism or going along with it.  They get ratings benefits from Moody’s and regulatory benefits from the Federal Reserve including low interest rates and low credit spreads.  They then fund both parties political campaigns.  This just got easier with the Supreme Court ruling lifting yet more limits on campaign finance contributions from the wealthy and connected, claiming there was no evidence of corruption presented by DOJ.  The reason being that DOJ is part of the corruption that exists of this type.

Because of DOJ complicity, Putin feels he has complete leverage on the apparatus of the state in the United States.  Putin controls the reputation of DOJ itself since it has allowed itself to become part of this.  Thus Putin as a KGB colonel feels he really has the organs of state security and prosecution under his kompromat leverage, not just a few econ profs.  He also has the Federal Reserve, at least one ratings agency, the IMF and other financial institutions that benefit from their silence and complicity.

SIEPR Agenda Day on March 14, 2014 was one day after Stanley Fischer’s testimony to the Senate Banking Committee that did not admit to this history.  This was directly during the Ukraine Crimea crisis.  Russia knew of Fischer’s appointment well in advance of its takeover of Crimea that started in late February 2014.  Moreover, Ukraine has indicated it considers the Russian FSB to be implicated in the sniper fire that immediately led to the Crimea Crisis.

At the point that Russia took over Crimea in late February and early March 2014, Stanley Fischer was concealing info from Senate Banking Committee and the public and Stanford was paying him 100,000 to do so.  This helped Stanford cover up its potential liability from Moody’s ratings benefits not just for Russia but for investment banks involved and the securities they trade and underwrite.  This includes the new generation of subprime mortgage derivatives.  Thus Stanford could be liable for trillions of dollars of losses.  So could other university partners such as Harvard and MIT, University of Chicago, Princeton, Cornell, Moody’s and investment banks.

These are the institutions that make large campaign contributions and that control the upper echelon of the Federal Reserve, SEC, FTC, DOJ Antitrust Division, and other agencies of government and regulation.  Thus Putin really does have the hidden or not so hidden kleptocracy under his kompromat umbrella.

As pointed out above, this gave Putin the feeling that he understood America’s elite and its government’s higher echelons and that he could control their reaction to his taking Crimea.  Putin was reinforced in seeing that things were the same as during the days of the Soviet Union, if not more corrupt in America.  So Putin was able to move freely in Crimea.  He felt he understood the world and that the situation was safe for him to take advantage of.  So he took Crimea without any fear.

So far, Russia has escaped serious consequences.  It has also gained in credibility and respect. The US and NATO have lost respect and confidence even among their own peoples.  In Putin’s view, this is because he has kompromat on the US and European establishments.  Plagiarism, academic, financial, regulatory and government kompromat all come together for Putin to give him leverage and insights into the US and European establishment as well as IMF and the financial institutions.

The above is speculation and hypotheses.  Please restate as questions.  Comments and corrections welcome. All other disclaimers apply.

Obama NATO speech Ukraine Stanford MIT Harvard undermine on Russia

March 26, 2014

Obama is giving a speech to NATO March 26, 2014 on US and NATO policy towards Russia on Crimea and Ukraine.  Obama has made it US policy to isolate Russia and apply sanctions to Russia.  Stanford, MIT, Harvard, Moody’s and the major investment banks have chosen to undermine the policy of President Obama and of the United States.  Obama’s policies are supported by both parties in Congress. Thus Stanford, MIT, Harvard, Moody’s, the banks have chosen to undermine the broad policy of the US government to isolate Russia and apply sanctions to get Russia to stop on its current course as Obama says.

Obama is invoking his grandfather who fought in Patton’s army in World War II.  But Stanford, MIT, Harvard, etc. are undermining this policy, in effect opposing a policy that Obama equates with Patton’s army.

NATO has deployed forces to the East including to the Baltic Republics which are NATO members.  Stanford, Harvard, MIT, Moody’s and the banks are thus undermining the US policy to avoid Russia invading the Baltic Republics and thus triggering a crisis with NATO.

Stanford SIEPR Agenda Day organized by John Shoven of Stanford and James Poterba of MIT to honor Stanley Fischer the day after he concealed information from the Senate Banking Committee and the Securities Exchange commission was done to undermine the US credibility with Putin.  Stanford, MIT, Harvard, etc. know that Russia has used plagiarism kompromat for decades to get its way.  They know Putin believes these are silver bullets that let him do what he want and have leverage over Obama from the Stanley Fischer and earlier Larry Summers’ appointments.

Stanford knows that Russia has posted kompromat on Darrell Duffie who is head of Moody’s.  They know Russia Today has gloated over Moody’s putting the US on credit watch in 2012 when Duffie was head of the MIS Committee of Moody’s with oversight over the credit rating of the United States government.

Darrell Duffie is head of the MIS Committee of Moody’s which oversees ratings of financial securities including the bonds of Russia.

Director since October 2008

Darrell Duffie, Ph.D., age 59, is Chairman of the MIS Committee and is a member of the Audit and Governance and Compensation Committees of the Board of Directors. He is the Dean Witter Distinguished Professor of Finance at Stanford University Graduate School of Business and has been on the finance faculty at Stanford since receiving his Ph.D. from Stanford in 1984. He has authored books and research articles on topics in finance and related fields. Dr. Duffie is a member of The Federal Reserve Bank of New York Financial Advisory Roundtable, and the Board of The Pacific Institute of Mathematical Sciences and is a Fellow and member of the Council of the Econometric Society and a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences. He is Chairman of the Market Participants Group on Reference Rate Reform.  Dr. Duffie served as a trustee of iShares Trust and a director of iShares, Inc. from 2008 to 2011 and was President of the American Finance Association in 2009.

Holdings: 23,307 shares

Duffie “dynamic asset pricing theory” “provisional manuscript”

This document gives Russia leverage over Duffie by virtue of misconduct during the course of his work at Stanford, supervising a Ph.D. thesis of a Chinese student.  This was posted in 2005.  Duffie joined Moody’s MIS Committee in 2008 supposedly to be a trusted outside person who was independent.

The above is draft and preliminary. Comments and corrections welcome. This is hypotheses and speculation. Please restate as questions.  All other disclaimers apply.



%d bloggers like this: