Other comments point to the scheme using the asset purchased with stolen money as collateral for a loan that the bank is left with in a much depreciated state.

Other comments point to the scheme using the asset purchased with stolen money as collateral for a loan that the bank is left with in a much depreciated state. That would make the ongoing extraction of profits is irrelevant. My alternate set of questions about this loan fraud scheme are in a different comment. Ha. And I don't really get how that "launders" the money trail. The only point at which the transfers of funds seem murky is when they go through the she'll companies in the BVI. This feels like the makings of a great article that some editor said, "write up what you have, we're just going to publish it and move you onto something else." There are just so many things unexplained or unexplored.