In Other Media-eg New Statesman, AJE, FP, Georgia, NYT,  Azerbaijan, CSM Click here to contact us     .

By Matthew Russell Lee, Video, Q&A, HK here

FEDERAL COURTHOUSE, Nov 14 –  Deutsche Bank, which profited as trustee from predatory mortgage lending, has also been raided for money laundering, see below. In the SDNY trial OneCoin trial Inner City Press has been covering daily since November 4, here, Deutsche Bank keeps coming up in connection with money laundering for Ruja Ignatova. Now on November 14 from across the East River in Brooklyn, this: "The United States has reached agreement with Paul Mangione, a former Deutsche Bank executive, to settle a civil action filed in September 2017 in which the United States sought civil penalties for Mangione’s conduct in connection with Deutsche Bank’s marketing and sale of two residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) in 2007. The agreement provides for payment of $500,000 in civil penalties in exchange for dismissal of the complaint. Richard P. Donoghue, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, announced the settlement. “This Office’s settlement with a bank executive in connection with RMBS fraud reflects our commitment to holding individuals accountable for their role in corporate fraud,” stated United States Attorney Donoghue. Mr. Donoghue thanked the Federal Housing Finance Agency’s Office of the Inspector General for its assistance in conducting the investigation in this matter. The complaint in the action, United States v. Paul Mangione, alleged that Mangione, a former Managing Director and head of subprime trading at Deutsche Bank, engaged in a scheme to defraud investors in two Deutsche Bank RMBS, ACE 2007-HE4 and ACE 2007-HE5, by misrepresenting the characteristics of the loans backing the two securities and misleading potential investors about the loan origination practices of Deutsche Bank’s wholly-owned subsidiary, DB Home Lending LLC (f/k/a Chapel Funding, LLC), which originated a number of the loans backing the two RMBS. The complaint stated claims for relief under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA), based on mail fraud and wire fraud."

   We'll have more on this - and this: four months after the arrest for UN bribery of former Senegalese foreign minister Cheik Gadio and Patrick Ho, the head of China Energy Fund Committee full funded by CEFC China Energy, his ultimate boss at CEFC Ye Jianming was brought in for questioning in China. Inner City Press covered the Patrick Ho trial, here:

 Among the hooks for the prosecution was payments of alleged bribes not only through HSBC but also Mashreqbank based in Dubai. On October 10 Mashreqbank has been hit with and settled money laundering charges by the New York State Financial Services Department: "Although the Branch's customer base consists principally of foreign financial
institutions located in high-risk regions, examiners determined that due diligence files
nonetheless lacked robust information about its foreign correspondent customers' markets." We'll have more on this. On October 4 Ho was again denied bail. Periscope video here. Now on October 9 the prosecution has requested that the trial begin later than the scheduled November 5, writing to Judge Loretta A. Preska among other things that "this past Friday, October 5, 2018, the defendant submitted a classified notice pursuant to Section 5 of the Classified Information Procedures Act (“CIPA”). The defendant could have filed such notice a number of weeks ago, but waited until the very last day on which such a filing would be deemed timely under CIPA. The defendant also did not notify the Government that he intended to submit such a notice until the Court directed the parties to confer during last
week’s conference. The Government now has to draft, have approved for submission, and submit
a classified response in opposition, in which it intends to request a hearing concerning the use, relevance, and admissibility of classified information that would otherwise be made public by the defense during the trial, and expects, assuming appropriate authorization is provided, to request that the hearing be held in camera." If Ho's lawyers were slow, the US government's Voice of America is more so: it took it five days to report on the public bail hearing held in lower Manhattan on October 4. Tellingly, the report did not include VOA's long-time UN embedded reporter Margaret Besheer, nor did it mention Ho's arms brokering to South Sudan nor the name of previous and convicted UN briber Ng Lap Seng. Besheer has worked with Secretary General Antonio Guterres' spokesman Stephane Dujarric to bar Inner City Press from even entering the UN and is involved with a pro-UN correspondents group which took $50,000 from Ng then provided the venue for his photo op with the UN Secretary General. (It turns out Guterres maintains a secret "banned" list including political activists, story here.) Similar quid pro quos are expected with Guterres on December 5 on 42nd Street, watch this site. Back on October 4 Ho's lawyers argued that dropping the case against Gadio - who will testify against Ho - means that Ho conspired with no one. But Gadio will say he didn't know Ho had $2 million in cash for Chad President Deby in gift boxes; he's being allowed (or made) to say that Deby didn't know either. But this ham handed bribe was converted into a bogus philanthropic gift -- consciousness of guilt, as it were. The trial date of November 5 may not be set in stone, as the defense is planning a filing under Section 5 of the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) to use classified information. Ho has a $2.1 million account in UBS, but Judge Preska said this wasn't the main factor in denying bail. The sleight of hand on Gadio has no impact on the "Uganda scheme" with Sam Kutesa, with whom UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres has dealings. Guterres still hasn't started an audit of CEFC - which was openly named in the court hearing on October 4 - in the UN. We'll have more on this. This week in court filings the prosecution make it clear how corrupt the UN is, and why it has banned Inner City Press which reports on it: Ho bribed not one but two Presidents of the General Assembly, and brokered weapons not only to Chad but also Qatar, whose Al Jazeera got the exclusive of Guterres' selection as SG and after getting spoonfed by Guterres' spokesman Stephane Dujarric on June 19 collaborated to get Inner City Press roughed up and banned since by Guterres' corrupt UN. And STILL  Guterres, whose son does UNdisclosed business in Angola, Namibia, Sao Tomo and Cabo Verde, has not even started an audit, only roughed up the Press and banned it now for 93 days. From this week's filing: "Evidence of Transactions with Iran The evidence of the defendant’s interest in and willingness to broker transactions in or with Iran principally consists of emails, spanning a multiple-year period. To choose a few examples: In October 2014, the defendant sent his assistant an email stating, “I am going to BJ [i.e., Beijing] this Friday to see [the Chairman of CEFC NGO and CEFC China] on Sat afternoon. The documents I want to send him before hand in separate items are: . . . 7. Iranian connection (brief).”4 On the same date, the defendant sent his assistant another email, attaching a document, which stated, in pertinent part: 7) Iranian Connection . . . Iran has money in a Bank in china which s under sanction. Iran wishes to purchase precious metal with this money. The precious metal is available through a Bank in HK which cannot accept money from the Bank in China which holds the money but is under sanction. The Iranian agent is looking for a Chinese company acting as a middle man in such transactions and will pay commission. (details to be presented orally) The Iranian connection has strong urge to establish trading relationship with us in oil and products . . . . The following year, in June 2015, the defendant received an email that stated, in pertinent part: “The Iranian team will arrive in BJ . . . . See the attached.” The attachment referenced in the email was a PowerPoint presentation entitled “Presentation to Potential Partners Iran Petroleum Investments.” The next day, the defendant forwarded the email to his assistant, stating, “For writing report to [the Chairman of CEFC NGO and CEFC China].”
The following year, in June 2016, the defendant emailed another individual, blindcopying
his assistant, and stated, in pertinent part, “Will get [two executives of CEFC China] to
meet with [oil executive at company with operations in Iran] in BJ, and [another individual] also on another occasion if he comes. You can start organizing these. . . . Other matters ftf [i.e., face to face].” And also "an email exchange in which Gadio asked the defendant: “Do you think CEFC can intervene with the Chinese state to get an urgent, extremely confidential and significant military weapon assistance to our friend [the President of Chad] who has engaged in the battle of his life against the devils of Bokko Haram?,” to which the defendant replied, “Your important message has been forwarded. It is being given the highest level of consideration. Will inform you once I hear back.”
The defendant also sought to and did broker arms transactions unrelated to the Chad and
Uganda schemes charged in this case. For example: In March 2015, an individual sent the defendant an email, stating, “I have the list and end user agreement. Pls advise next step.” On the same day, the defendant replied, in pertinent part, “Find a way to pass them onto me and we can execute that right away[].” The individual replied, “Attached. [W]e have the funding and processing mechanisms in place. If it works nice there will be much more. Also for S. Sudan.” The attachment to this email was a document entitled “End User Certificate,” certifying that the user of the goods in question would be the Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Libya. The goods listed on the document included numerous arms. The following month, the defendant sent an email that stated in pertinent part: “It so turns out Qatar also needs urgently a list of toys from us. But for the same reason we had for Libya, we cannot sell directly to them. Is there a way you could act as an intermediary in both cases?” The person whom the defendant emailed replied: “Qatar good chance bc there is no embargo. Libya is another case bc going against an embargo is tricky.” The defendant responded: “Qatar needs new toys quite urgently. Their chief is coming to China and we hope to give them a piece of good news. Please confirm soonest.” This is outrageous, that an NGO still accredited under Guterres was selling weapons into South South, Libya and Qatar. Resign. And, on multiple PGAs: "among the individuals whom the defendant [Patrick Ho] is charged with bribing is Sam Kutesa, the Ugandan Foreign Minister. The Government expects that the evidence will show that the corrupt relationship between the defendant and Kutesa developed between in or about September 2014 and September 2015, when Kutesa was serving as the PGA (specifically, the PGA for the 69th session of the UN General Assembly). The evidence, in both the form of emails and a recorded phone call, also shows that, just
as he did with respect to Kutesa when he was the PGA, the defendant sought to cultivate a
business relationship with Kutesa’s predecessor, John Ashe, who served as the PGA between in
or about September 2013 and September 2014. As he did with Kutesa, the defendant began by introducing himself to Ashe as the Secretary-General of CEFC NGO. And just as he did with
Kutesa when he served as the PGA, the defendant invited Ashe to visit CEFC NGO in Hong Kong and to speak at various events.
In mid-April 2014, Ashe traveled to Hong Kong and met with the defendant and others.
After the trip, Ashe’s aide sent a letter to the defendant thanking the Chairman of CEFC NGO (who was also the Chairman of CEFC China) for the contribution of $50,000 to support the PGA. The aide had solicited the contribution from the defendant prior to the Hong Kong trip, and the defendant had confirmed that CEFC NGO would make the contribution.
In or about early June 2014, the defendant requested that Ashe officiate over a forum that
CEFC NGO was planning to hold at the UN, and also attend and officiate over a luncheon at the UN the following day. (The defendant made virtually the same request of Kutesa once he
became the PGA.) The day before the forum (July 6, 2014), the defendant emailed two business associates of Ashe, who assisted him in raising funds, to invite them to the forum and luncheon and to request their assistance in “urg[ing] the PGA to grace the occasion with his presence and to deliver a short remark.”
On or about the same day, the defendant and one of these associates (“Associate-1”)
spoke by phone. (See Ex. A (draft transcript).) During the call, which was recorded, the
defendant confirmed that he wanted Ashe to attend his event. The following conversation then took place:
Associate-1: So the last question, so sorry if I ask too direct. . . . [H]ave you, made some
contribution to him . . . ?
The defendant: Yeah, we already paid.
Associate-1: Oh you did? OkayThe defendant: Well, not a whole lot but it’s—it’s okay. On a couple of occasions. But I
think the major contribution will come in after we talk about what he can—what he can
help us with.
Associate-1: What you—what you mean major contribution? It’s after he return uh—
leave the job?
The defendant: Yes, yes.
. . .
Associate-1: Wonderful . . . okay.
The defendant: That’s not a—that’s not a problem. The problem is—uh, it’s give and
take.
Associate-1: Give and take. That’s—of course. This is the—this is business, right?
The defendant: Yeah, right.
 2 These two business associates subsequently pleaded guilty to bribing Ashe, based on
conduct unrelated to the defendant and CEFC. Ashe was charged with tax offenses arising from
his allegedly failing to disclose bribe payments as income. He passed away before trial, and the
charges against him were therefore dismissed." We'll have more on this. On July 19, the lawyers for Patrick Ho, led by Benjamin Rosenberg of Dechert LLP, argued before U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska that count after count of the indicts should be dismissed. Edward Kim of Krieger Kim & Lewin LLP tried to get Ho's emails and text messages suppressed, without success. On August 9, Ho's appeal to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals to get out on bail was again denied. Now the prosecution, opposing yet another Ho bail application, has written: "Gadio has been meeting with the Government for some time and he is expected to testify at trial pursuant to a recently executed non-prosecution agreement.  And far from weakening the case, Gadio’s testimony will provide substantial evidence of the defendant’s guilt. As the defendant is well-aware from a written disclosure made by the Government more than four months ago, Gadio is expected to testify, in sum and among other things, that (i) the defendant provided $2 million in cash, concealed within a gift box, to the President of Chad in connection with a business meeting in Chad in or about December 2014, (ii) the President refused to accept this obvious bribe, which Gadio understood was connected to the defendant’s interest in business opportunities in Chad, and (iii) the defendant thereafter drafted a letter to the President, purporting to pledge this $2 million to charitable causes, but the defendant appeared to have no interest in doing charitable works in Chad, and indeed, the defendant never asked Gadio about the status of the purported “donation” or made any other reference to the subject. (See Def. Ltr. Ex. A.) This expected testimony considerably strengthens the Government’s proof beyond the
already-strong case reflected in the detailed Complaint. The Complaint explained that, following a December 2014 business meeting in Chad, the defendant drafted a letter pledging a $2 million so-called “donation” to “the people of Chad at [the President of Chad’s] personal disposal to support [his] social and other programs as [he] see[s] fit.” (Compl. ¶ 28(a).) The Complaint did not, however, explain whether—and at what point—any money was actually paid. Gadio’s expected testimony makes clear that, in fact, the defendant provided $2 million in cash directly to the President, concealed within a gift box, and that the pledge letter was drafted after the bribe had already been offered. Thus, the evidence of the defendant’s intent to bribe the President of Chad is, on the whole, much more robust in light of Gadio’s expected testimony." On September 24, a letter from May was disclosed: UN accredited executive of an NGO still in ECOSOC handed Deby of Chad $2 million in a box, for oil. This is the UN, which won't even audit this scandal. Guterres is corruption - and on September 26 even banned Inner City Press which reports on this from a human rights event. We'll have more on this. On September 15, the day after Ho's co-defendant Cheik Gadio had the case against him dropped by Prosecutor Douglas Zolkind, who ask worked to convict Ng Lap Seng using testimony of apparently still free Francis Lorenzo. Sean Hecker, a lawyer for Mr. Gadio said that “Dr. Gadio looks forward to continuing to cooperate with U.S. authorities." But when Agence France Presse reported it, as picked up in the media in Nigeria, it was "Gadio Is Cleared." Is that how they report, for example, Manafort? It is, you see, a serious UN bribery case, even as UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres not only does not start an audit of who else has been bribed by CEFC and Ho, but audaciously ousts, roughs up and imposes a ban on -- extended on August 17 to life or at least #UNGA73 when representatives of China and Chad, Uganda and Senegal will be in the UN -- the only media, Inner City Press, which asks him about it. Instead his team solicits the same trolls army as before, to monitor and leak files to try to post-facto justify Guterres' censorship. This is corruption, to the heart of the UN. The trial of the still incarcerated Ho begins in November. Somewhere, one imagines, UN PGA Sam Kutesa worries, Chadian head of state Idriss Deby less so. And the UN of Antonio Guterres, implicated, doesn't even audit who at the UN took CEFC's money, preferring instead to rough up, oust and ban the Press which asks. Fox News story here, GAP blogs I and II, Independent here.  On July 19 first Rosenberg argued that under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, if Patrick Ho is a "domestic concern" some counts of the indictment must be dropped. The prosecution called the argument absurd -- Ho is a national of China and a resident of Hong Kong who acted for the "Energy NGO" China Energy Fund Committee in allegedly bribing UN President of the General Assembly Sam Kutesa, as well as Chad's President Idriss Deby - and the judge agreed. Next they argued that even a series of transfers from HSBC in Hong Kong to HSBC in New York to Mashreq Bank in NY to Mashreq Bank in Dubai did not fall under the money laundering statute. The judge, citing the the Daccarett case and Julius Baer cases from DC, disagreed. Periscope video here. The motions to dismiss were denied, and Inner City Press left the court to deal with the UN, where Guterres even has Inner City Press banned from covering his July 20 meeting with US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and Pompeo's press remarks with Nikki Haley, UNwisely held inside the UN. We'll have more on this. Inner City Press made this connection: the president of ECOSOC is Marie Chatardová, Permanent Representative of the Czech Republic to the UN. Her president, in Prague Castle, is Miloš Zeman -- who, like Uganda's Foreign Minister Sam Kutesa when he was UN President of the General Assembly, made Ye Jianming an official adviser. (Inner City Press' CEFC investigative covered has been picked up in the Czech media, for example here.) Now on April 17, Zeman is set to meet this week with another Chinese state owned firm, CITIC and its chairman, Chang Zhenming. CITIC is reportedly seeking to buy a stake in CEFC's Czech-based unit CEFC Europe. So Inner City Press asks, would CITIC buy its way into China Energy Fund Group's consultative status with ECOSOC, presided over by the Czech Republic? The Czech Mission to the UN, and ECOSOC's supposed spokesperson Paul Simon, have yet to answer any of Inner City Press' written questions. This is today's UN, under Antonio Guterres.

Earlier, Zeman sent two officials to Chinese to inquire into the status or, or help, Ye Jianming: chancellor Vratislav Mynár and economic advisor Martin Nejedlý flew to Shanghai on March 13, along with CEFC  European division head Jaroslav Tvrdik, and have now returned. They said Ye “is being investigated for a suspicion of breaking the law,” after meeting CEFC President Chan Chauto. CEFC’s Czech-based unit CEFC Europe said: “CEFC Europe has been informed about the planned change in the shareholder structure in which Mr Ye Jienming will no longer be active as a shareholder nor in the company’s leadership. NOW might Zeman's Representative Chatardová belatedly take action in the UN ECOSOC of which she is President? 

 Inner City Press has repeatedly written to the Czech Mission to the UN, to the attention of
Marie Chatardová as President of ECOSOC, asking how China Energy Fund Committee given all of the above can remain in special consultative status with ECOSOC. The Czech Mission has not answered, including when the question is raised at the UN's televised noon briefing, as Inner City Press asked again on March 19, UN transcript here: Inner City Press: Deputy SG Amina J. Mohammed is going to the Czech Republic about ECOSOC [Economic and Social Council].  So, I was going to and may still ask Brenden [Varma] this, but I wanted to ask you this.  It has arisen that the China Energy Fund Committee, the ultimate owner in Shanghai has purportedly been brought in for questioning, and it turns out he was not only an adviser to Sam Kutesa as PGA [President of the General Assembly], but also an adviser of the Czech Republic President.  The Czech Republic has sent people to sort of look into his situation, but the Czech Republic also has the presidency of ECOSOC.  So, noting that I haven't gotten any answer from the Czech Mission, my question is…

Spokesman:  I think those are questions that you should address to the Presidency of ECOSOC.

Inner City Press: I guess but my question is an overall UN question.  Is there… is there any… it seems like it might be a conflict of interest if your President has a business relationship with an NGO to be in charge of the committee that is either… how do we get an answer if…?

Spokesman:  That is a question for the… that’s a question for Member States.  Member States elect the Presidency of ECOSOC.  They elect the bureau.  Those are Member State questions.  I struggle to answer the questions directed to the Secretary-General.  I think Member States need to answer other questions."  But again, the Czech Mission has not answered repeated written questions. For example:

"Hello - this concerned ECOSOC, reiterating Inner City Press' question from November 28: yesterday in US Federal Court, China Energy Fund Committee was described as a front for bribes paid to former PGA Kutesa and others.

See, e.g.,  HlidacipPes.org, Czech Republic: “Global corruption scandal. The CEFC scrap, which the Czech Republic does not notice much, though it should” [citing Inner City Press' UN corruption coverage]

***

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com

Past (and future?) UN Office: S-303, UN, NY 10017 USA
For now: Box 20047, Dag Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017

Reporter's mobile (and weekends): 718-716-3540

Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.

 Copyright 2006-2018 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com for