On Dec 18, 2015, a group of analysts based in the United Kingdom (UK) reported that JP Morgan Chase & Co. (JP) and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (Goldman), two of America’s foremost financial institutions by net asset worth, came in first and a close second respectively in a global rating system that measured the performance of financial institutions based on fees collected.
According to these analysts, both JP and Goldman had dominated the global securities scene by underwriting massive amounts of debt instruments for various government owned entities.
My team discovered that JP alone had underwritten more than USD4 billion in green and sustainability themed bonds and arranged capital worth approximately USD2 billion for renewable energy in the United States alone.
However, it struck us as weird that these analysts blacked out information pertaining to certain corporations JP had done business with.
One might have thought that to be the least critical of information the bank would have wanted concealed.
Whatever little information we stumbled upon told us something was wrong, that the analysts were hiding something from the general public.
Upon further inspection, we discovered that most corporations doing business with JP were linked directly to the US government, or more accurately, the Obama administration.
Some of this information was classified and deemed a matter of national security.
However, documents we sighted revealed that the analysts did not want the world to know how JP was the vehicle through which the Obama administration raised tons and tons of capital through massive debt instruments guaranteed at “anomalous rates.”
Yet, the media cast its spotlight on Goldman since 2013 for underwriting bonds worth billions of dollars for 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB), a sovereign wealth fund wholly owned by the government of Malaysia.
They accused banking insiders of conspiring with the Malaysian government to guarantee bonds at rates they described were “astonishingly anomalous.”
A May 9, 2013 posting by Bloomberg read as follows:
In the first quarter, New York-based Goldman reported a 36 percent increase in investment banking fees, including a 69 percent rise in fixed-income underwriting revenue. Fees across the industry gained 17 percent, according to a report by Alison Williams, a Bloomberg Industries investment banking analyst.
“1MDB and Goldman are coming under increased scrutiny after the fund sold $3 billion of 4.4 percent, 10-year notes privately on March 19. The sale was hurried because it required a government letter of support, said the person familiar with the process.
That was on JP.
A quick check by my team revealed that Bloomberg had almost nothing on JP other than some positive insights and performance data.
Not once did Bloomberg state the “fixed-income underwriting revenue” or the “percentage increase in investment banking fees” the bank recorded between the years 2013 and 2016 in a single article.
When it came to Goldman, there were a bunch of reports for the first quarter of 2015 alone that presented these figures at astonishingly high rates.
Yes, the heat was on 1MDB, and for very sinister reasons.
Today, we’re about to discover that reason and figure out how it relates to the global media conspiracy to sabotage 1MDB.
As we go along and through an article due by the month end, we will uncover a massively convoluted and multifaceted conspiracy by a laundry list of prominent people to mislead the Malaysian government and to siphon funds from 1MDB.
Mahathir and the conspiracy to implicate Goldman Sachs
In 2012, 1MDB found that it did not have the funds to complete the purchase of two power plants it needed to realise its power ambitions.
In order to raise capital for the purchase, two of its subsidiaries – 1MDB Energy Limited and 1MDB Energy (Langat) Limited – issued bonds worth USD1.75 billion each that were jointly guaranteed by the wealth fund and an Abu Dhabi owned Investment Company, the International Petroleum Investment Company, or IPIC.
It’s a little like taking a loan.
Only in this case, the money is not issued by a bank, but raised through the sale of bonds (or debt instruments) to willing buyers (investors) upon the promise of an interest on the face value of the bonds.
But the end result is quite the same – 1MDB effectively took a ‘loan’ and was obligated to pay an interest on that ‘loan’.
The bank that helped 1MDB sell the bonds to potential investors was none other than Goldman, which guaranteed that the bonds would be sold for no less than a minimum price set by the bank itself.
That guarantee amounted to the ‘act’ of underwriting the bonds, in that Goldman agreed to absorb risks arising from the possibility that it would not be able to find enough purchasers to buy the bonds.
In the event the bonds could not be sold, Goldman would either have had to hold those bonds on their books or sell them below the minimum price and suffer losses.
But none of that happened.
Instead, Goldman was able to rake in profit owing to the sale of those bonds along with some others issued in 2013 at prices higher than the preset minimum.
Now, such dealings are commonplace in the world of banking and isn’t something anyone needs to shout about.
Besides, the actual fee charged by any bank underwriting a bond was subjected to an agreement exclusive to the bank and the issuer of the bond.
Considering that Goldman had committed to potential contingent risks, it was at liberty to rate those risks by evaluating 1MDB’s financial health and its ability to service interests.
I hope you got all of that clear.
Now, when the media (Bloomberg, WSJ and The Guardian in particular) spoke of Goldman’s revenue, it did so by announcing that the bank had raked in earnings worth a certain percentage of the face value of the bonds.
That percentage ranged anywhere from 7.7% to 9.1%, depending on which portal you logged on to and the day you logged on to that portal.
In other words, the media was simply messing with your minds.
At times, it reported revenue by accounting only proceeds from the sale of bonds.
At other times, it clumped together net profits generated through the sale of bonds and the fees collected for underwriting services provided.
In neither instance did the media deliver us the truth.
Yes, the media has been lying to you all this while.
Both Bloomberg and WSJ implied that Goldman had dissipated half its proceeds through offshore entities, a portion of which ended up in Najib’s accounts.
Now, I have sighted enough material and evidence to tell you with conviction that all of what the media reported, including that which was reported by Sarawak Report, was fabricated in ways that made it seem as if 1MDB had conspired with unnamed Goldman insiders to receive kickbacks from the sale of the bonds.
The media was not alone.
It was assisted by analysts, politicians and journalists who possessed enough information to showcase the bank’s actual earnings to the fourth decimal.
That information is currently being withheld to drag investigations into Goldman and 1MDB until such a time that Najib Razak is forced to step down as prime minister (PM) of Malaysia.
Among those who conspired to conceal similar evidence from authorities are former premier Mahathir Mohammad, former deputy premier Muhyiddin Yassin, Sarawak Report chief editor Clare Rewcastle Brown, Malaysia Chronicle chief editor Tian Chua and Malaysian MP Tony Pua.
Now, if you’re thinking that Muhyiddin was Mahathir’s choice candidate for the post of prime minister, you’re dead wrong.
That person is none other than Mahathir himself, who entered into an agreement my team stumbled upon last Thursday Dec 22, 2016.
Accordingly, Mahathir promised George Soros that he would supplant Najib as prime minister in the event the ruling Barisan Nasional loses the 2017 general election.
Believe me, I speak the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
One sure way to establish the validity of this information is for Mahathir to trigger a lawsuit against me if he thought I was lying.
Both of us could then meet in court and let all hell break loose until the sun comes up and we see who is left standing.
What other lies did the media and the analysts spew?
For the past three years or so, JP has been the bank with the largest-growing-investment-banking fees worldwide.
Last year alone, it chalked up quite a huge profit through the sale of bonds it underwrote for the US government.
These gains were not inclusive of fees it charged the Obama administration and accounted only for the sale of government bonds.
The remaining of JP’s recorded earnings since 2013 was derived through equity financing, mergers, acquisitions, and syndicated loans.
Goldman never came close to JP and barely made it to the second spot last year regardless the rating system employed.
But the media has been saying something entirely different.
In 2013, several news channels declared Goldman to be the securities firm with “the largest-growing-investment-banking fees.”
Not only was that an outright lie, it amounted to a deliberate attempt by the media to impress upon the people that Goldman had benefitted immensely from the Malaysian government through the sale of 1MDB bonds.
Yes, not many are aware that the conspiracy to put the spotlight on Goldman began in 2013 itself – sometime after the 13th Malaysian General Election (GE13).
A prominent Malaysian politician was the first person approached to participate in the conspiracy.
If what I am told is true, that person is none other than Muhyiddin Yassin, the former deputy PM of Malaysia.
So who were the analysts, and what did they have to do with Soros and the world media?
The people who rated JP and Goldman were from Dealogic, a financial markets platform headquartered in London that offers integrated content and analytical services to financial institutions worldwide.
Established in 1983, the company was the brainchild of Sir Peter Ogden, a Soros associate the media keeps referring to as a multimillionaire.
However, not only is Ogden worth billions, it was he who helped found Computacenter, UK’s fastest growing independent company worth a staggering three billion British pounds.
Ogden’s links run deep with both Soros and Marcus Ambrose Paul Agius, the non-executive director of the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC).
It was Marcus who insisted that Clare Brown be roped into Soros’ team to lead the Malaysia chapter of the media campaign against 1MDB.
On Nov 5, 2014, the Carlyle Group (Carlyle) snapped up more than 50% of Dealogic’s shares for a meagre USD700 million.
Overseeing the purchase was Carlyle’s chairman, Daniel A. D’Aniello, who founded the company together with two of his associates on Soros’ advice.
At the time of acquisition, D’Aniello sought advice from JP Morgan, the same bank that conspired with former British Premier Tony Blair to leak confidential information that pertained to 1MDB and its dealings with the Mideast.
In a quid pro quo arrangement not known to many, D’Aniello agreed to absorb one of JP’s employees into Carlyle as the company’s deputy president.
That employee was Michael Cavanagh, who served under JP’s chief executive officer (CEO) Jamie Dimon for more than two decades.
Some months after the acquisition, it was revealed that Cavanagh was promised USD26.1 million in stock and USD5 million in cash bonus despite being a fresh face in the company.
A year later, Cavanagh raised many eyebrows when he quit Carlyle after receiving all that wealth.
Unbeknown to many, the person who arranged Cavanagh’s multimillion dollar walk through Carlyle was none other than Tony Blair, a staunch Dimon associate.
In 2008, Dimon appointed Blair as JP’s advisor, a role that earned the former British premier two million pounds a year without him having to enter office on a regular basis.
It was through Blair’s association with Dimon and Cavanagh that the former British premier first got to know of 1MDB’s dealings with the Mideast.
Cavanagh’s brief stint with Carlyle and the company’s acquisition of Dealogic left an information trail that told analysts everything they needed to know about 1MDB.
Cavanagh was there to assist Dealogic crunch figures in ways that toned down JP’s performance and to conceal evidence the public did not need to know.
And yes, he was there to make it seem as if Goldman had struck the jackpot through its dealings with 1MDB.
Could that be the reason why he was paid a sum of money Carlyle veterans could only dream of earning?