7 ms·

A serious question: Could this happen in the U.S.? Has a CEO of one of the largest companies in the nation (and world) ever been arrested? I think the odds are

A serious question: Could this happen in the U.S.? Has a CEO of one of the largest companies in the nation (and world) ever been arrested? I think the odds are that someone, some time, has deserved it (though I'm not at all advocating arresting CEOs to meet a quota). It's similar to another practice I've noticed: Other countries will arrest and imprison heads of state and other high officials, including Israel and France. It's hard to imagine that happening in the United States: Has a President or cabinet-level official ever been arrested? In what seems like a corrupt practice to me, in the U.S. they get off with a slap on the wrist. For example, Nixon was pardoned for the sake of the nation. Why is it that other nations can handle it?

vkou 10y ago
It used to be possible. [1] Jeffrey Skilling, former Enron CEO is serving 24 years. However, there is a strong argument to be made that ever since Enron, the SEC has been defanged. Taking a brief look at their list of accomplishments, it seems that these days, they just levy fines, instead of jailing criminals. [2][3] (Contrast the punishments for the financial crisis, vs low-level insider trading. The companies involved in the former pay fines, the people involved in the latter go to jail.) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enron_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enron_scandal [2] https://www.sec.gov/spotlight/enf-actions-fc.shtml https://www.sec.gov/spotlight/enf-actions-fc.shtml [3] https://www.sec.gov/spotlight/insidertrading/cases.shtml https://www.sec.gov/spotlight/insidertrading/cases.shtml
- astrodust 10y ago
  It's almost like they formed a commitee to ensure such a terrible thing would never happen again.
- Analemma_ 10y ago
  It's not just the SEC. McDonnell v United States has basically made official corruption impossible to prosecute unless the participants are paint-drinkingly stupid in how they go about it.
- pcurve 10y ago
  The charges against Samsung and Enron CEOs are completely different. Former, it's bribery. Latter, some insane level of securities fraud / book cooking. Judges would come down harder on the latter. But it's an interesting question. Basically this is equivalent a major U.S. company like Boeing or Disney indirectly bribing close friends of Trump to gain political favor.
  - tornadoboy55 10y ago
    I'm not exactly a Trump fan, but why is Clinton's daughter rolling into a $600.000 job at NBC straight out of college not considered 'bribing close friends for political favor'? The US is so fucked up politically..
    - hackuser 10y ago
      It would be great if you could provide evidence that this occurred, and that it was bribery in particular. There are many possible reasons it could have occurred; I feel that we don't benefit from more speculation about politics.
    - openasocket 10y ago
      Are you talking about Chelsea Clinton? According to Wikipedia, she didn't exactly get that NBC job "right out of college". She graduated from Stanford in 2001, got a masters degree at Oxford in 2003, did some consulting work, went back to school to get another masters degree at Columbia in 2010, and then she got hired by NBC for $600k in late 2011. So yeah, if by "right out of college" you mean "a year after getting her second master's degree" you are correct. Oh, and while she was working at NBC she also got her PhD in international relations from Oxford. That's not really relevant to your claim, I just found it very impressive.
      - DrScump 10y ago
        A better parallel is a USA Vice President's son getting a Board of Directors' slot in a foreign oil company[0]. [0] http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27403003 http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27403003 Regarding Chelsea Clinton: in reading her various writings from the email leaks, she strikes me as both highly intelligent and insightful (speaking as no fan of her parents).
- greeneggs 10y ago
  Good example, but minor correction: Skilling is serving 14 years, resentenced from the original 24 years. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-enron-ceo-jeffrey-skilling-resentenced-168-months-fraud-conspiracy-charges https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-enron-ceo-jeffrey-skil...
droopyEyelids 10y ago
This seems paradoxical, but I believe it's less likely in the USA becasue our companies are less "corrupt". What I mean by that, is Samsung is so big it's like a feudal kingdom. There aren't clear lines between the government, other aspects of life, and samsung. That means any sort of power stuggle has to involve all those different aspects. The head of samsung stands in the way of ambitious people in the whole society, not just ambitious people in that company. Compare that with the USA. If there is a power struggle in a company you don't have to attack the head person with such intensity to advance yourself. It's even possible to advance by moving to another company in the same industry.
hkmurakami 10y ago
Well there's a matter of cultural differences wrt to legal enforcement too. For example in the US we tend to bring lawsuits with large fines to piraters (i.e. large scale distributors of pirated content), but in Japan they just arrest them right away. So an arrest in one country isn't really equivalent to an arrest in another country, because what that arrest actually means can be quite different.
ksherlock 10y ago
The article only mentions bribery (and other unspecified corruption). In the US, we call it a campaign donation (or free speech) and it's hard to prosecute. That said, it does happen - Ted Stevens (Alaska Senator) and Bob McDonnell (Virgina Governor) were convicted of corruption only to see it overturned. And pretty much every governor of Illinois ends up in prison.
- danielvf 10y ago
  The mayor of Charlotte, NC went to prison for bribery after accepting a suitcase full of cash from the FBI.
refurb 10y ago
There are quite a few CEOs who have gone to prison in the US[1]. The Tyco scandal was a big one. [1]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/18/top-10-ceos-sent-to-prison_n_1527361.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/18/top-10-ceos-sent-to...
omegaworks 10y ago
There have been a series of pardons that probably should never have happened: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pardon_of_Richard_Nixon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pardon_of_Richard_Nixon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair The Iran Contra people probably helped initiate our present quagmire in the Middle East during Bush II's term: Elliott Abrams served as served as Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director on the National Security Council for Near East and North African Affairs and then Deputy National Security Advisor for Global Democracy Strategy during Bush II's term. John Marlan Poindexter got a job on Bush II's DARPA. Duane Clarridge got involved as Ben Carson's foreign policy advisor during his presidential run. So these people are still tied to the White House to this day.
- matt4077 10y ago
  IT's a tight rope to walk, but there's a system to the madness in regards to presidents: if you punish them to the degree that (parts of) the public demand, you'll almost certainly make it a losing proposition for any of them to ever resign. African countries have traditionally been very good at demonstrating this, unfortunately. Almost any leader of government south of the Sahel and north of South Africa from independence to about 10 years ago could have been thrown into a dark abyss without second thought and even Amnesty International would have just muttered a "Wait, they deserve a fair tr.. oh! never mind!". But because that actually was happened more often than not, each one of them clung to power for as long as possible – which in some cases was (and is!) surprisingly long: Mugabe is at it since 1987. In many cases, these dictators actually started out somewhat promising. Mugabe, for example, came to power against a backdrop or actual injustices, which he actually did something about (although what he did resulted in disaster). But spend enough years with absolute power, surrounded by yes-men, but constantly fearing the yes-I-have-knife-man and it starts to do strange things to your psyche. It's not the only mechanism – there are enough examples in other countries of politicians overstaying their welcome. And it doesn't quite apply as neatly to anyone but the very top. But it's part of it. Which is why it was so encouraging to see how the crisis in The Gambia was solved a month ago. You didn't even hear about it? Well, a decade earlier, you wouldn't have heard the end of the bloody war currently ravaging the west African country of... Part of the solution was guaranteed protection for the outgoing guy (+family and his mysteriously large wealth).
equalarrow 10y ago
Look no further than the Bush's, their connections to the Saudi's, Carlyle group and many others. The short answer is: for conviction, no. We'll see with Trump since he cares about hiding these connections even less than Bush did. He would probably even say they make America more winning.
matt4077 10y ago
This may come as a surprising, but the US is actually pretty far ahead in terms of the fight against corruption. For example, until just a few years ago, many countries (Germany being the one I know specifically) allowed corporations to deducted bribes paid abroad from their taxes. That was changed only under pressure from the US. There's a lot to complain about regarding the willingness of US courts to assume jurisdiction, the willingness of the US government to dictate international norms etc. But it seems that in this regard, it worked out well because the US legal system was always going to be ahead of /some/ competitors, so it became advantageous for US corporations (and, by extension, the government) to root out corruption: it was the one game they had no chance of winning. One recent example is VW, and another recent development may be a strengthening of similar mechanisms in the EU, which may in due course be very helpful, even for the US. It seems that nowadays the problem in the US isn't vast conspiracies where bags of money are secretly handed to politicians. It's that there's so much activity that in any other country of similar level of development, or any other time in the US, would have been regarded as a major corruption – but is now somehow regarded as not just completely legal but also morally sound. I mean: there are (many) companies who give to both presidential candidates each election. There is simply no logical reason to do that except the expectation of getting access. (For donations to parties, I could at least imagine some argument about how donations allow them to do meaningful work on the local level etc. Can't say the same about the presidential level).
daodedickinson 10y ago
Looking at Hillary, no it can't happen in the US because there are so many ways to not make it worth the while of whoever would have to do it. Maybe the population density of Seoul is relevant; I'm not sure...

vkou 10y ago

It used to be possible. [1] Jeffrey Skilling, former Enron CEO is serving 24 years. However, there is a strong argument to be made that ever since Enron, the SEC has been defanged. Taking a brief look at their list of accomplishments, it seems that these days, they just levy fines, instead of jailing criminals. [2][3] (Contrast the punishments for the financial crisis, vs low-level insider trading. The companies involved in the former pay fines, the people involved in the latter go to jail.) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enron_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enron_scandal [2] https://www.sec.gov/spotlight/enf-actions-fc.shtml https://www.sec.gov/spotlight/enf-actions-fc.shtml [3] https://www.sec.gov/spotlight/insidertrading/cases.shtml https://www.sec.gov/spotlight/insidertrading/cases.shtml

astrodust 10y ago
It's almost like they formed a commitee to ensure such a terrible thing would never happen again.
Analemma_ 10y ago
It's not just the SEC. McDonnell v United States has basically made official corruption impossible to prosecute unless the participants are paint-drinkingly stupid in how they go about it.
pcurve 10y ago
The charges against Samsung and Enron CEOs are completely different. Former, it's bribery. Latter, some insane level of securities fraud / book cooking. Judges would come down harder on the latter. But it's an interesting question. Basically this is equivalent a major U.S. company like Boeing or Disney indirectly bribing close friends of Trump to gain political favor.
- tornadoboy55 10y ago
  I'm not exactly a Trump fan, but why is Clinton's daughter rolling into a $600.000 job at NBC straight out of college not considered 'bribing close friends for political favor'? The US is so fucked up politically..
  - hackuser 10y ago
    It would be great if you could provide evidence that this occurred, and that it was bribery in particular. There are many possible reasons it could have occurred; I feel that we don't benefit from more speculation about politics.
  - openasocket 10y ago
    Are you talking about Chelsea Clinton? According to Wikipedia, she didn't exactly get that NBC job "right out of college". She graduated from Stanford in 2001, got a masters degree at Oxford in 2003, did some consulting work, went back to school to get another masters degree at Columbia in 2010, and then she got hired by NBC for $600k in late 2011. So yeah, if by "right out of college" you mean "a year after getting her second master's degree" you are correct. Oh, and while she was working at NBC she also got her PhD in international relations from Oxford. That's not really relevant to your claim, I just found it very impressive.
    - DrScump 10y ago
      A better parallel is a USA Vice President's son getting a Board of Directors' slot in a foreign oil company[0]. [0] http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27403003 http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27403003 Regarding Chelsea Clinton: in reading her various writings from the email leaks, she strikes me as both highly intelligent and insightful (speaking as no fan of her parents).
greeneggs 10y ago
Good example, but minor correction: Skilling is serving 14 years, resentenced from the original 24 years. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-enron-ceo-jeffrey-skilling-resentenced-168-months-fraud-conspiracy-charges https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-enron-ceo-jeffrey-skil...

droopyEyelids 10y ago

This seems paradoxical, but I believe it's less likely in the USA becasue our companies are less "corrupt". What I mean by that, is Samsung is so big it's like a feudal kingdom. There aren't clear lines between the government, other aspects of life, and samsung. That means any sort of power stuggle has to involve all those different aspects. The head of samsung stands in the way of ambitious people in the whole society, not just ambitious people in that company. Compare that with the USA. If there is a power struggle in a company you don't have to attack the head person with such intensity to advance yourself. It's even possible to advance by moving to another company in the same industry.

hkmurakami 10y ago

Well there's a matter of cultural differences wrt to legal enforcement too. For example in the US we tend to bring lawsuits with large fines to piraters (i.e. large scale distributors of pirated content), but in Japan they just arrest them right away. So an arrest in one country isn't really equivalent to an arrest in another country, because what that arrest actually means can be quite different.

ksherlock 10y ago

The article only mentions bribery (and other unspecified corruption). In the US, we call it a campaign donation (or free speech) and it's hard to prosecute. That said, it does happen - Ted Stevens (Alaska Senator) and Bob McDonnell (Virgina Governor) were convicted of corruption only to see it overturned. And pretty much every governor of Illinois ends up in prison.

danielvf 10y ago
The mayor of Charlotte, NC went to prison for bribery after accepting a suitcase full of cash from the FBI.

refurb 10y ago

There are quite a few CEOs who have gone to prison in the US[1]. The Tyco scandal was a big one. [1]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/18/top-10-ceos-sent-to-prison_n_1527361.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/18/top-10-ceos-sent-to...

omegaworks 10y ago

There have been a series of pardons that probably should never have happened: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pardon_of_Richard_Nixon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pardon_of_Richard_Nixon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair The Iran Contra people probably helped initiate our present quagmire in the Middle East during Bush II's term: Elliott Abrams served as served as Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director on the National Security Council for Near East and North African Affairs and then Deputy National Security Advisor for Global Democracy Strategy during Bush II's term. John Marlan Poindexter got a job on Bush II's DARPA. Duane Clarridge got involved as Ben Carson's foreign policy advisor during his presidential run. So these people are still tied to the White House to this day.

matt4077 10y ago
IT's a tight rope to walk, but there's a system to the madness in regards to presidents: if you punish them to the degree that (parts of) the public demand, you'll almost certainly make it a losing proposition for any of them to ever resign. African countries have traditionally been very good at demonstrating this, unfortunately. Almost any leader of government south of the Sahel and north of South Africa from independence to about 10 years ago could have been thrown into a dark abyss without second thought and even Amnesty International would have just muttered a "Wait, they deserve a fair tr.. oh! never mind!". But because that actually was happened more often than not, each one of them clung to power for as long as possible – which in some cases was (and is!) surprisingly long: Mugabe is at it since 1987. In many cases, these dictators actually started out somewhat promising. Mugabe, for example, came to power against a backdrop or actual injustices, which he actually did something about (although what he did resulted in disaster). But spend enough years with absolute power, surrounded by yes-men, but constantly fearing the yes-I-have-knife-man and it starts to do strange things to your psyche. It's not the only mechanism – there are enough examples in other countries of politicians overstaying their welcome. And it doesn't quite apply as neatly to anyone but the very top. But it's part of it. Which is why it was so encouraging to see how the crisis in The Gambia was solved a month ago. You didn't even hear about it? Well, a decade earlier, you wouldn't have heard the end of the bloody war currently ravaging the west African country of... Part of the solution was guaranteed protection for the outgoing guy (+family and his mysteriously large wealth).

equalarrow 10y ago

Look no further than the Bush's, their connections to the Saudi's, Carlyle group and many others. The short answer is: for conviction, no. We'll see with Trump since he cares about hiding these connections even less than Bush did. He would probably even say they make America more winning.

matt4077 10y ago

This may come as a surprising, but the US is actually pretty far ahead in terms of the fight against corruption. For example, until just a few years ago, many countries (Germany being the one I know specifically) allowed corporations to deducted bribes paid abroad from their taxes. That was changed only under pressure from the US. There's a lot to complain about regarding the willingness of US courts to assume jurisdiction, the willingness of the US government to dictate international norms etc. But it seems that in this regard, it worked out well because the US legal system was always going to be ahead of /some/ competitors, so it became advantageous for US corporations (and, by extension, the government) to root out corruption: it was the one game they had no chance of winning. One recent example is VW, and another recent development may be a strengthening of similar mechanisms in the EU, which may in due course be very helpful, even for the US. It seems that nowadays the problem in the US isn't vast conspiracies where bags of money are secretly handed to politicians. It's that there's so much activity that in any other country of similar level of development, or any other time in the US, would have been regarded as a major corruption – but is now somehow regarded as not just completely legal but also morally sound. I mean: there are (many) companies who give to both presidential candidates each election. There is simply no logical reason to do that except the expectation of getting access. (For donations to parties, I could at least imagine some argument about how donations allow them to do meaningful work on the local level etc. Can't say the same about the presidential level).

daodedickinson 10y ago

Looking at Hillary, no it can't happen in the US because there are so many ways to not make it worth the while of whoever would have to do it. Maybe the population density of Seoul is relevant; I'm not sure...