I hadn’t read Taibbi’s reporting about a jaw-dropping series of events in 2004-05 involving White until just now, when I read his article posted today on the Rolling Stone website, summarizing them. Call me naive–which is what I’m calling myself–but the article really shocked me.
I wonder who recommended White to Obama. White surely isn’t in his “in” crowd, and I’ll go out on a limb here and venture that Obama was unaware of the events Taibbi discusses. The idea, I believe, was to pick someone from outside the SEC and from outside Washington–someone with serious major law enforcement cred who also knows the ins and outs of securities law and securities practices–whose nomination would send a signal that enforcement of finance laws would be a priority in Obama’s second term.
I’m certainly no expert in any of the possibly relevant criminal laws, but I do know that the major federal criminal conspiracy law has a 10-year statute of limitations. The time period, I believe, would include any illegal obstruction of justice, which, if there was any, would have occurred, I guess, in 2004 and 2005.
From Taibbi’s article, the extent of White’s involvement is unclear, but, assuming the accuracy of the facts the article states, she did play a role. The most culpable of the players seem to me to be the people involved within the SEC; there is a whiff of subtle bribery involving jobs with the law firm, but it appears that the subject was broached by the SEC lawyers rather than by the firm. But I don’t see how this won’t be a high-publicity issue during her confirmation hearing if the mainstream media picks it up. The Republican senators won’t question her about it, but at least one Dem probably will. At least I hope so. This is really different than just the usual revolving door situation. This concerns facts about a specific case, and it’s seriously damaging, in my opinion.
