Lewis Silenced, Threatened Over Merrill By Bernanke And Paulson

Naked Short Selling

o date nothing has been done to rectify or settle accounts of myself, friends along with 50,000 other investors who were harmed by this fraud. The DTCC, SEC, DOJ, FBI, CIA,FINRA, countless Congress members, Several State Governors and multiple State agencies, as well as an obsurd amount of elected officials have been notified of this theft, however to date nothing has been done. OH ya and yes the president of the USA included, is now aware of CMKX! Insiders dumped 700 billion shares into the market - 622 billion were unregistered and $250 million was stolen from shareholders. No one is taking any action, why ? If a bank gets robbed the police are on their way in minutes, or the government steps in with funds. This revoked company initiated a cert pull to trap naked short sellers. I believe there is possible insider SEC and DTCC fraud and cover-ups involved in this case hence they will keep this going for years. If people are still unclear as to what exactly NSS is, there is a slide show narrated by Patrick Byrnes, the CEO of Overstock.com. Combine the information in the slide show, coupled with what you are seeing in the financial markets and you will suddenly see an entirely different picture.

We, the shareholders of CMKX, are aiming to make a difference.

http://www.businessjive.com/

We never recieved a report on the results and we believe we have at least a trillion counterfiet shares sold into the market. Regulators have failed to protect us from the obvious fraud even though they were involved long before the halt in trading. Our claims have reverted to many other companies and we don't even know how that was done. The SEC has done nothing to protect the people.

The SEC has, for decades, permitted an illegal action on Wall Street called Naked Short Selling.............Phantom Shares............Counterfeit Shares........Fails to Deliver. This is where a Broker sells shares of a stock that they don't have and never make arrangements to acquire. The money spent by investors simply GOES SOUTH. This act has caused an average of 6 billion dollars to be stolen out of the stock market every day.

The SEC, just two years ago,denied that Naked Short Selling ever existed. The dismal state of economy is a direct result of the ramifications on NSS. Robert Mahue was brought in by a small diamond exploration company named CMKX to expose this illegal activity.

CMKX WENT THROUGH THE LARGEST NAKED SHORT IN THE HOSTORY OF THE U.S. Nearly 7 TRILLION Naked Short Shares were sold. Robert Mahue squeezed the Brokers to come up with Billions of dollars to cover these illegal sales. I am a stock holder in CMKX. The SEC is aware of a huge trust that Mr.Mahue set up to compensate CMKX share holders because of NSS. The SEC and or the government are holding up the distribution of these funds. The money is sitting, waiting to be sent out to damaged share holders. The SEC has the ability to release these funds.............but are not doing so.

Naked Short Selling of CA @ May 05, 2009 20:59:12 PM

CMKX

CMKX SHAREHOLDER HAVE BEEN CHEATED BY THE GOVT. THEY KNEW THE NAKED SHORTING WAS TAKING PLACE AND THEY LEFT IT GO ON AND ON. iNSTITUTIONS WERE MAKING BIG MONEY BY NAKED SHORTING STOCKS [ NOT JUST CMKX AND ALSO OVERSTOCK .COM] THE WHOLE STOCK MARKET IS IN SEVERE DANGER OF THIS PRACTICE.

MARK MCNEELY of PA @ May 03, 2009 18:48:11 PM

CMKX

Just so the world knows, many of us CMKX shareholders are normal people.

We get up go to work, pay our bills on time.

We wish we knew the true story of CMKX but neither Urban Casavant (past Ceo)

Bill Frizzell (current legal) Marl Faulk and Kevin West (current management) cares enough of their shareholders to provide information.

Was cmkx a Government Sting led by Robert Maheu, Oe a Ponzi scheme by past and present management?

Seems we will never know, just a group of honest people taken advantage by a group of dis-honest people.

What is the government doing for us? NOTHING they are to busy paying for a 24/7 make-up artist for Michelle Obama.

Dick w of UT @ Apr 30, 2009 16:52:08 PM

CMKX-CMKM

I ask for fairness and transparency in our market place. Not the deceit and deception of the past. Make those who trade shares buy those shares before they sell them. If Naked Short selling (without covering) continues it will completely ruin our market place, as it has to this point! We share holders of CMKX know what happen and are educating unknowing investor just how the system works. It is time that the SEC pay us our money for the criminal activity that took place under Their watch. We want justice not only for the CMKX shareholders but for all who were involved in this big ponzzi scheme.

FAIRNESS AND TRANSPARENCY....that is what we were promised from this administration. Shareholders of CMKX will continue to educate the masses till this problem is taken care of and will not be going anywhere till we are given the truth!!!

Brad Prough of TX @ Apr 30, 2009 12:14:31 PM

CMKX LARGEST NAKED SHORT IS HISTORYOF THE WORLD!!!!

The SEC, just two years ago,denied that Naked Short Selling ever existed. The dismal state of economy is a direct result of the ramifications on NSS. Robert Mahue was brought in by a small diamond exploration company named CMKX to expose this illegal activity.

CMKX WENT THROUGH THE LARGEST NAKED SHORT IN THE HISTORY OF THE U.S. Nearly 7 TRILLION Naked Short Shares were sold. Robert Mahue squeezed the Brokers to come up with Billions of dollars to cover these illegal sales. I am a stock holder in CMKX. The SEC is aware of a huge trust that Mr.Mahue set up to compensate CMKX share holders because of NSS. The SEC and or the government are holding up the distribution of these funds. The money is sitting, waiting to be sent out to damaged share holders. The SEC has the ability to release these funds.............but are not doing so.

CMKX DIAMONDS, THE LARGEST NAKED SHORTED STOCK IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES/WORLD" Trillions of stock shares traded and changed hands UNTIL CMKX revoked itself and had every stock holder pull stock certifcates out of brokerages out of street name and into Investors name to safely hold in their possesion. CMKX is also the LARGEST STOCK CERTIFICATE PULL IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES"

I Hope the the SEC did not create a regulational rule during this period the above action was commited to absolve them from liability of cmkx "counterfeit shares." from this compnay or anyother company that used this tactic to steal from all markets. This naked shorting fraud rule be passed without a second to lose

I want the people responsible to go to jail and to be fined. Naked Short Sharing has ruined Hundreds if not Thousands of small upstart companies in America and is responsible for the Market Disarray as we see it happening before our eyes. I want the DTCC, the SEC and Congress and whomever else was involved in letting this go unenforced to be held LIABLE. I want JUSTICE for the 40,000 shareholders of this stock.

Lou Manhien @ Apr 30, 2009 11:42:00 AM

CMKX DIAMONDS, THE LARGEST NAKED SHORTED STOCK IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES/WORLD

CMKX DIAMONDS, THE LARGEST NAKED SHORTED STOCK IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES/WORLD" Trillions of stock shares traded and changed hands UNTIL CMKX revoked itself and had every stock holder pull stock certifcates out of brokerages out of street name and into Investors name to safely hold in their possesion. CMKX is also the LARGEST STOCK CERTIFICATE PULL IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES"

I Hope the the SEC did not create a regulational rule during this period the above action was commited to absolve them from liability of cmkx "counterfeit shares." from this compnay or anyother company that used this tactic to steal from all markets. This naked shorting fraud rule be passed without a second to lose.

Naked shorts in the United States: "counterfeit shares."

Naked short selling is a case of short selling the shares without first arranging a borrow. The Securities Exchange Act of 1934 stipulates a settlement period up to three business days before a stock needs to be delivered, generally referred to as "T+3 delivery".

If the stock is illiquid or simply has a small number of outstanding shares, finding the borrow can be difficult to arrange. In these cases the trader normally arranges for the borrow before making the trade, to ensure delivery. In the case when a borrow cannot be arranged within that time period and the shares cannot be given to the buyer, the trade is considered to have "failed to deliver". The SEC states that "Naked short selling is not necessarily a violation of the federal securities laws or the Commission's rules," and clarifies that in some circumstances, it can contribute to market liquidity.

Naked shorting to drive down share prices violates US law. In recent years, a number of companies have been accused of using naked shorts in order to make profits at the expense of share prices. To do this, the trader simply enters a naked short with no intention of ever delivering the shares. A large enough short sale could cause the price to fall, as is the case with any stock being sold, so as long as the trade is large enough to move the share price, the short is likely to be profitable. Normally this would be risky if the price did move back up for other reasons, the trader would be driving the price up with every purchase, a condition known as a "short squeeze". But as long as the buyer turns around and shorts it back into the market, the price continues dropping, making the trades profitable even though no one actually holds any of the shares.

"Legal" naked shorting would normally be invisible in a liquid market, as long as the short sell is eventually delivered to the buyer. However, if the covers are impossible to find, the trades fail. A sudden rise in number of fail reports will alert the SEC that something irregular is going on. In some recent cases, it was claimed that the daily activity was larger than all of the available shares, which would normally be unlikely.

The North American Securities Administrators Association (NASAA) held a conference on naked short selling in November 2005. An official of the New York Stock Exchange stated that NYSE had found no evidence of widespread naked short selling, and alleged "fear mongering that there's this rampant naked shorting that's gone unregulated." Cameron Funkhouser, NASD senior vice president of market regulations, noted that although companies have alleged stock manipulation through the Berlin stock exchange, the NASD has seen not one instance of naked short selling on the Berlin stock exchange". Ralph Lambiase, head of the Connecticut Securities Agency and the NASAA, declared his disappointment at how the industry was handling the issue as a whole.

A report issued in early 2006 found no evidence of naked short selling in US markets, despite allegations from many companies. The SEC's short selling FAQ also cites common misconceptions about the practice, such as the belief that naked shorting causes "phantom" shares to enter the market, as one source of confusion over the practice's market effect. Naked short selling, the SEC said, would not increase a company's shares outstanding shares nor result in "counterfeit shares."

Statistics on failures to deliver securities are sometimes used as evidence of naked short selling in specific stocks. However, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission stated in January 2008 that "fails-to-deliver can occur for a number of reasons on both long and short sales. Therefore, fails-to-deliver are not necessarily the result of short selling, and are not evidence of abusive short selling or 'naked' short selling."

Current legal naked shorting rules allow brokerages to make large profits doing "bona-fide market making" while stock markets are falling. The market maker exemption to the rules governing the practice is intended to allow market makers to naked short sell on a very temporary basis, in order to increase liquidity and stabilize markets.

However, Robert J. Shapiro, former undersecretary of commerce for economic affairs, has claimed that naked short selling has cost investors $100 billion and driven 1,000 companies into the ground.

The Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation has been criticized for its approach to naked short selling. DTCC has been sued with regard to its alleged participation in naked short selling, and the issue of DTCC's possible involvement has been taken up by Senator Robert Bennett and discussed by the NASAA and in articles -- disagreed with by DTCC -- in the Wall Street Journal and Euromoney Magazine.

While there is no dispute that illegal naked shorting happens, there is a fight as to the extent to which DTCC is responsible. Some blame DTCC as the keeper of the system where it happens, and say DTCC turns a blind eye to the problem. DTCC says naked shorting is not widespread enough to be a major concern. "We're not saying there is no problem, but to suggest the sky is falling might be a bit overdone," DTCC's chief spokesman Stuart Goldstein said. DTCC General Counsel Larry Thompson calls the claims "pure invention." The SEC, however, views naked shorting as a serious enough matter to have made two separate efforts to restrict the practice. And in July 2007, Senator Bennett suggested on the U.S. Senate floor that the allegations involving DTCC and naked short selling are "serious enough" that there should be a hearing on them with DTCC officials by the Senate Banking Committee. The committee's Chairman, Senator Christopher Dodd, indicated he was willing to hold such a hearing. The North American Securities Administrators Association, representing state stock regulators, filed a brief saying that if the claims were correct, its shareholders "have been the victims of fraud and manipulation at the hands of the very entities that should be serving their interest."

Critics also contend DTCC has been too secretive with information about where naked shorting is taking place. In 2007, WayPoint Biomedical sued DTCC for DTCC's refusal to comply with a subpoena request for documents Waypoint needs to track trades in the company's shares. Ten suits concerning naked short-selling filed against the DTCC were withdrawn or dismissed by May 2005.

A suit by Electronic Trading Group, naming major Wall Street brokerages, was filed in April 2006 and dismissed in December 2007.

Two separate lawsuits, filed in 2006 and 2007 by NovaStar Financial, Inc. shareholders and Overstock.com, named as defendants ten Wall Street prime brokers. They claimed a scheme to manipulate the companies' stock by allowing naked short selling. A motion to dismiss the Overstock suit was denied in July 2007.

Why has everyone tried to COVER UP NAKED SHORTING, is it because all the Wall Street banks have naked shorts in Level 3, and hidden in derivatives where there are Trillions of fake shares?

The illegal practice of short selling shares that have not been affirmatively determined to exist. Ordinarily, traders must borrow a stock, or determine that it can be borrowed, before they sell it short. But due to various loopholes in the rules and discrepancies between paper and electronic trading systems, naked shorting continues to happen.

Naked shorting is illegal because it allows manipulators a chance to force stock prices down without regard for normal stock supply/demand patterns.

This Rule must be passed and not covered up. As it looks today on Wall street the word is out on naked shorting and must be stopped , and all who profited from stealing trillions be put in jail.

Thank you.

Anton Abahamsen of CA @ Apr 30, 2009 00:37:03 AM

CMKX DIAMONDS, THE LARGEST NAKED SHORTED STOCK IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES/WORLD

CMKX DIAMONDS, THE LARGEST NAKED SHORTED STOCK IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES/WORLD" Trillions of stock shares traded and changed hands UNTIL CMKX revoked itself and had every stock holder pull stock certifcates out of brokerages out of street name and into Investors name to safely hold in their possesion. CMKX is also the LARGEST STOCK CERTIFICATE PULL IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES"

I Hope the the SEC did not create a regulational rule during this period the above action was commited to absolve them from liability of cmkx "counterfeit shares." from this compnay or anyother company that used this tactic to steal from all markets. This naked shorting fraud rule be passed without a second to lose.

Naked shorts in the United States: "counterfeit shares."

Naked short selling is a case of short selling the shares without first arranging a borrow. The Securities Exchange Act of 1934 stipulates a settlement period up to three business days before a stock needs to be delivered, generally referred to as "T+3 delivery".

If the stock is illiquid or simply has a small number of outstanding shares, finding the borrow can be difficult to arrange. In these cases the trader normally arranges for the borrow before making the trade, to ensure delivery. In the case when a borrow cannot be arranged within that time period and the shares cannot be given to the buyer, the trade is considered to have "failed to deliver". The SEC states that "Naked short selling is not necessarily a violation of the federal securities laws or the Commission's rules," and clarifies that in some circumstances, it can contribute to market liquidity.

Naked shorting to drive down share prices violates US law. In recent years, a number of companies have been accused of using naked shorts in order to make profits at the expense of share prices. To do this, the trader simply enters a naked short with no intention of ever delivering the shares. A large enough short sale could cause the price to fall, as is the case with any stock being sold, so as long as the trade is large enough to move the share price, the short is likely to be profitable. Normally this would be risky if the price did move back up for other reasons, the trader would be driving the price up with every purchase, a condition known as a "short squeeze". But as long as the buyer turns around and shorts it back into the market, the price continues dropping, making the trades profitable even though no one actually holds any of the shares.

"Legal" naked shorting would normally be invisible in a liquid market, as long as the short sell is eventually delivered to the buyer. However, if the covers are impossible to find, the trades fail. A sudden rise in number of fail reports will alert the SEC that something irregular is going on. In some recent cases, it was claimed that the daily activity was larger than all of the available shares, which would normally be unlikely.

The North American Securities Administrators Association (NASAA) held a conference on naked short selling in November 2005. An official of the New York Stock Exchange stated that NYSE had found no evidence of widespread naked short selling, and alleged "fear mongering that there's this rampant naked shorting that's gone unregulated." Cameron Funkhouser, NASD senior vice president of market regulations, noted that although companies have alleged stock manipulation through the Berlin stock exchange, the NASD has seen not one instance of naked short selling on the Berlin stock exchange". Ralph Lambiase, head of the Connecticut Securities Agency and the NASAA, declared his disappointment at how the industry was handling the issue as a whole.

A report issued in early 2006 found no evidence of naked short selling in US markets, despite allegations from many companies. The SEC's short selling FAQ also cites common misconceptions about the practice, such as the belief that naked shorting causes "phantom" shares to enter the market, as one source of confusion over the practice's market effect. Naked short selling, the SEC said, would not increase a company's shares outstanding shares nor result in "counterfeit shares."

Statistics on failures to deliver securities are sometimes used as evidence of naked short selling in specific stocks. However, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission stated in January 2008 that "fails-to-deliver can occur for a number of reasons on both long and short sales. Therefore, fails-to-deliver are not necessarily the result of short selling, and are not evidence of abusive short selling or 'naked' short selling."

Current legal naked shorting rules allow brokerages to make large profits doing "bona-fide market making" while stock markets are falling. The market maker exemption to the rules governing the practice is intended to allow market makers to naked short sell on a very temporary basis, in order to increase liquidity and stabilize markets.

However, Robert J. Shapiro, former undersecretary of commerce for economic affairs, has claimed that naked short selling has cost investors $100 billion and driven 1,000 companies into the ground.

The Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation has been criticized for its approach to naked short selling. DTCC has been sued with regard to its alleged participation in naked short selling, and the issue of DTCC's possible involvement has been taken up by Senator Robert Bennett and discussed by the NASAA and in articles -- disagreed with by DTCC -- in the Wall Street Journal and Euromoney Magazine.

While there is no dispute that illegal naked shorting happens, there is a fight as to the extent to which DTCC is responsible. Some blame DTCC as the keeper of the system where it happens, and say DTCC turns a blind eye to the problem. DTCC says naked shorting is not widespread enough to be a major concern. "We're not saying there is no problem, but to suggest the sky is falling might be a bit overdone," DTCC's chief spokesman Stuart Goldstein said. DTCC General Counsel Larry Thompson calls the claims "pure invention." The SEC, however, views naked shorting as a serious enough matter to have made two separate efforts to restrict the practice. And in July 2007, Senator Bennett suggested on the U.S. Senate floor that the allegations involving DTCC and naked short selling are "serious enough" that there should be a hearing on them with DTCC officials by the Senate Banking Committee. The committee's Chairman, Senator Christopher Dodd, indicated he was willing to hold such a hearing. The North American Securities Administrators Association, representing state stock regulators, filed a brief saying that if the claims were correct, its shareholders "have been the victims of fraud and manipulation at the hands of the very entities that should be serving their interest."

Critics also contend DTCC has been too secretive with information about where naked shorting is taking place. In 2007, WayPoint Biomedical sued DTCC for DTCC's refusal to comply with a subpoena request for documents Waypoint needs to track trades in the company's shares. Ten suits concerning naked short-selling filed against the DTCC were withdrawn or dismissed by May 2005.

A suit by Electronic Trading Group, naming major Wall Street brokerages, was filed in April 2006 and dismissed in December 2007.

Two separate lawsuits, filed in 2006 and 2007 by NovaStar Financial, Inc. shareholders and Overstock.com, named as defendants ten Wall Street prime brokers. They claimed a scheme to manipulate the companies' stock by allowing naked short selling. A motion to dismiss the Overstock suit was denied in July 2007.

Why has everyone tried to COVER UP NAKED SHORTING, is it because all the Wall Street banks have naked shorts in Level 3, and hidden in derivatives where there are Trillions of fake shares?

The illegal practice of short selling shares that have not been affirmatively determined to exist. Ordinarily, traders must borrow a stock, or determine that it can be borrowed, before they sell it short. But due to various loopholes in the rules and discrepancies between paper and electronic trading systems, naked shorting continues to happen.

Naked shorting is illegal because it allows manipulators a chance to force stock prices down without regard for normal stock supply/demand patterns.

This Rule must be passed and not covered up. As it looks today on Wall street the word is out on naked shorting and must be stopped , and all who profited from stealing trillions be put in jail.

Thank you.

Anton Adobe of CA @ Apr 30, 2009 00:34:12 AM

CMKX the largest Naked Shorted stock in the history of the US stock marked.

IMO, Dodd, Shumer and Shelby are flagrant self-serving lickspittles who have betrayed their offices to curry favor from the bankers (and wall street). They should be first banned from office and then run out of the country, perhaps after a few years in jail.

Shocker: Banks Gave Big to Senators

Friday, April 17, 2009 11:03 AM

When banks were actually making money, they weren’t tossing it around just for their own compensation.

Bank execs also happily lined the pockets of senators involved with banking legislation. Surprise, surprise.

Forbes put together a ranking of senators who received by the highest share of their campaign contributions from the finance, insurance, and real estate industries between 2003 and 2008.

Not surprisingly, Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), chairman of the Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, comes in first. And the committee’s ranking Republican, Richard Shelby of Alabama, places second.

Here are the top five, with the share of their donations received from the finance industry and the total dollar amount of those donations:

• Chris Dodd (D-Conn.): 35.7 percent, $9.1 million.

• Richard Shelby (R-Ala.): 33.4 percent, $2.5 million.

• Charles Shumer (D-N.Y.): 32.8 percent, $3.3 million.

• Tom Carper (D-Del.): 32.5 percent, $1.5 million.

• Mike Crapo (R-Idaho): 32.2 percent $947,000

Simon Johnson, former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, points out that this situation resembles what often happens in an emerging-market economy: simple cronyism.

“The financial sector boom that happened in the United States and in other countries had this characteristic very much like an emerging market boom,” he said in a recent speech.

Jay Adobe of CA @ Apr 30, 2009 00:32:13 AM