Bernie Madoff Gets 150 Years
June 29th, 2009, 11:47 AM EDT
Madoff will never see daylight again, unless it’s in a prison yard.
“I cannot offer any excuse for my behavior,” Madoff was reported to have said in court this morning. “I made a terrible mistake.”
Federal prosecutors had requested the maximum 150 year-term. Madoff’s attorney, Ira Sorkin, said his client deserved a much more lenient 12-year sentence for, in part, cooperating with authorities and citing Madoff’s limited life expectancy.
Ruth Madoff gets to keep $2.5 million in assets while giving up a claim to more than $80 million in other assets.
150 years, does that mean they will leave his dead body in a cell for another 120 years. Just say life in prision with once a month violations.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
Bernie Madoff, con man and “BIG TIME DEMOCRAT”… get’s 150 years.
Nuff said.
TDro319 Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
“Bernie Madoff, con man and ‘BIG TIME DEMOCRAT…”
…Who acted like a republican. No surprise there. We have lots of blue collar democrats who would vote to line their own pockets.
blissfulconservative Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 1:46 pm
Name 5 democrats in office NOT living high off the hog.
TDro319 Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 2:39 pm
Do you have a reading comprehension problem, Blissful? My exact words were, “We have lots of blue collar democrats who would vote to line their own pockets.”
There’s no doubt we have plenty of blue dog democrats (who I like to refer to as demoplicans)in congress that are on the take.
blissfulconservative Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
Can’t name 5?
blissfulconservative Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 2:49 pm
You said he acted like a republican. I asked you to name 5 democrats not living high off the hog and you can’t. Know why? It isn’t a republican thing, it’s a politician thing.
The faster you learn that the less partisan you will be, and you will actually start making sense instead of just bloviating.
Daddio Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
Blue Dog Democrats are the more moderate and commonsense Democrats.
TDro319 Reply:
July 2nd, 2009 at 1:18 pm
“Blue Dog Democrats are the more moderate and commonsense Democrats.”
Sure they are Daddio. And Fox “News” is fair and balanced.
RDM Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 2:56 pm
“Who acted like a Republican”…nope.
He acted like his blue collar Democrat buddy R. Allen Stanford, the investment banker involved in a $8 billion fraud by the SEC.
OldLefty Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
What does “living high off the hog have to do with deregulation of the financial industry?
blissfulconservative Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
It has everything to do with it when someone makes the assertion that madoff acted like a republican, when really he just acted like anyone who was greedy.
When you try to make it a republican problem you lose credibility. I am still waiting for someone to give me the names of 5 democrats in office who aren’t living high off the hog.
I’ll be waiting for an eternity.
OldLefty Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 3:25 pm
Nobody thinks it’s that important, but:
Jerry McNerney (D-Calif)
Deborah Ann Stabenow (D-Mich)
Artur Davis (D-Ala)
Andre Carson (D-Ind)
Paul Tonko (D-NY)
But still, all the more reason for campaign finance reform.
blissfulconservative Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
The only people who don’t think it’s important are die-hard democrats who tow the party line and never see the wrong-doing within their own party.
I am assuming the 5 you mentioned aren’t millionaires? They don’t have second homes? etc?
OldLefty Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
Or….the only people who think it IS important are the ‘die-hard REPUBLICANS who tow the party line and never see the wrong-doing within their own party.’
Open Secrets, average net worth less than $50,000:
“we added together the lawmaker’s range of assets and then subtracted their range of liabilities. We then calculate the midpoint of the resulting range and use this figure to rank the filers.”
EricG Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
“never see the wrong-doing within their own party.”
This is the Republicans far more than the Democrats unless you buy into the lack-of-facts radio programming coming from the right wing.
Nobody is saying that either party is perfect and nobody said they are all monks living in modest hovels and eating none but bread. But … Sanford.
There are lots of others to look back on in history.
I think Nixon is the one to take a good hard look at and try to say that’s not Republicanism 101.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
June 30th, 2009 at 2:13 am
what’s the definition of “living high off the hog”
I don’t begrudge people just because they have money and worldly goods, democrat or republican…or socialist for that matter.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
He got what he deserved.Is he going to a real prison though or one of the country club types for white collar crime?
Kregg Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Not much of a guess on that one…
June 29th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
I dont see what the big deal is? All Madoff did was take from a bunch of rich white guys
TDro319 Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
Howard:
That’s exactly why Madoff got 150 year. He took money from a bunch of rich white guys. In the U.S., you rob from the poor and give to the rich. Case in point, Goldman-Sachs
blissfulconservative Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
TDRO
There were people from every walk of life who were affected by madoff.
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
Glad to see you’re defending the guy as an equal-opportunity thief.
blissfulconservative Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 1:56 pm
I don’t recall defending him Rocky. I do recall pointing out that he didn’t just steal from white people. Get your facts straight.
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 2:38 pm
I did get the facts straight. You just can’t stand to read the truth.
Daddio Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
“Rob from the poor and give to the rich”..”Case in point” Obama–national health care, GM, Chrysler, AIG, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae.
EricG Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
“All Madoff did was take from a bunch of rich white guys”
No, that’s not true. Where do you get your news? From under the sink? In a dumpster outside your house?
Howard K Fluffenburger Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 4:21 pm
Dude , I get my news from MSNBC too. What are you jumping all up in MY stuff anyways? Sheezis
June 29th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
i hope he gets more that 150 years has a bastard i hope they kick his old ass in jail greety s.o.b !!!!
Howard K Fluffenburger Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
At least his poor wife Ruth gets to keep 2.5 million and whatnot for herself cos she lost about 80 million bucks which is a pretty good chunk of money that she could have used for her older years and somesuch
June 29th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
150 years. Good. I hope he gets a new circle of friends to extort in the can and this time around they’ll just cut off his manhood rather than pursue legal actions.
June 29th, 2009 at 4:07 pm
150 years seems excessive to me, considering the average prison term for a murderer is 7 years and rapist usually get off a lot easier also.
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
Yeah, but he’s a greedy capitalist “F”, so “F” him.
pizzaman Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 9:03 pm
Rocky:
Again, you’re betraying a bias inconsistent with the basic American economics that has allowed you to speak feely. Do you really mean whatr you say? Do you own your own company? Or do you “enslave” yourself to the capitalist who’s given you a job in the free market? If you’re really a slave, man, then have some balls. Sit down!!
Um Cara Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
Bah, with time off for good behavior he will probably only end up serving 127 and a half years.
Daddio Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 6:23 pm
You understand my point though don’t you Cara?
Daddio Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 6:24 pm
I know Rocky don’t, he hates capitalism and thinks anyone who makes a profit in business should go to jail.
Um Cara Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 6:28 pm
You understand my point though don’t you Cara?
Yep, and I do agree with you. I think US prison sentencing is totally out of whack. We have 5% of the worlds population and 25% of the worlds prison population because we like locking people up for extremely long periods of time.
I have less sympathy for him, however, than for drug dealers who also get time in excess of what a murderer or rapist would get.
Daddio Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 6:31 pm
We are in agreement then Cara.
What Bernie did was horrible but it doesn’t equate to murder or rape or terrorism.
jazmine Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 9:22 pm
Your right Um Cara, he stole from the rich, not the poor. ( not that that gives him an excuse) What’s the point of 120 yrs. he’s in his 80’s. He’d be better off serving the last of his 120 yrs. planting trees, to save our environment.
Um Cara Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 9:28 pm
Well, who he stole from is immaterial to me (the wealthy deserve justice just as much as the poor do), but yea – 150 years is just nuts.
Our whole criminal justice system is nuts.
jazmine Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 9:43 pm
Agreed, so let him plant trees!
June 29th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
Un Cara says: “[The] US prison sentencing is totally out of whack. We have 5% of the worlds population and 25% of the worlds prison population because we like locking people up for extremely long periods of time.”
Take it from me, a retired federal (white collar-crime) prosecutor: The laws governing sentencing for white collat crimes are just fine. The problem is the federal judges who think that stealing money through fraud is no big deal. Liberal judges think: “What good would prison do?” See U.S. v. Benson. Conservative judges think: “What’s to be expected in a capitalist system? This is a nice guy with a pretty wife and kids. Give him probation.” See U.S. v. Stubbs. Neither side wants to follow the law, the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, which ensure that whoever handles the case, whether a tough prosecutor or tough judge, the law will be applied equally.
Um Cara Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 9:03 pm
Take it from me, a retired federal (white collar-crime) prosecutor: The laws governing sentencing for white collat crimes are just fine. The problem is the federal judges who think that stealing money through fraud is no big deal.
You have a point, 150 year sentence does show that the federal judge doesn’t thing stealing money is a big deal. He should have gotten 250 years, that would have sent a message.
Neither side wants to follow the law, the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, which ensure that whoever handles the case, whether a tough prosecutor or tough judge, the law will be applied equally.
The mandatory sentencing is a big problem in our system. It basically leaves it to the prosecutor to decide what the sentence will be based on what you guys charge him with.
The judge should decide sentencing, not the prosecutor.
pizzaman Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 9:58 pm
You have no idea what you’re talking about. Read the cases I cited and get back to me. Because of the prior inequalities in sentencing, federal prosecutors are duty-bound to charge the most serious offense that the facts will bear. Those prosecutors who do their duty fight this fight every day. NO law or policy will contain prosecutors or judges who skirt the law, but on the whole, it’s a more equitable system than before, when the sentence a defendant got depended almost entirely on who the prosecutor or judge was. I value equality before the law. I’ve got many years of federal prosecution to back up what I say. Don’t pretend knowledge you don’t have — Alan’s website doesn’t tolerate falsehood.
Um Cara Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 10:12 pm
Don’t pretend knowledge you don’t have
I’m afraid this is something I do know about. Now, if I were looking for a good brand of Pepperoni, I’d have tons of questions for you.
Those prosecutors who do their duty fight this fight every day.
I have a great deal of respect for all officers of the court. I think our legislature has overstepped its boundaries with the mandatory sentencing, however.
I think it started with good intentions, the inequities in sentencing you mention, however at some point it just became mindless ‘lets show we are tougher on crime than the other guy’ rather than ‘lets see justice served’.
And of course, once they started splitting out different mandatory sentencing based on whether it was crack or powder, the legislature found ways to make mandatory sentencing just as racist as the previous system.
pizzaman Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 10:05 pm
From what I understand, he got the maximum under the guidelines, which was within an appropriate range of months for what he did. A “friendly” judge with total discretion may have sentenced him to far less. Again, read some financial fraud sentencing cases before you spout off.
Um Cara Reply:
June 29th, 2009 at 10:17 pm
Again, read some financial fraud sentencing cases before you spout off.
Hey, you were the one saying judges go easy on these guys, yet the case we were talking about the judge went max sentencing.
I’ll trust you and believe that in general white collar crime doesn’t get the attention in should, and appreciate the good fight you put up when you were a prosecutor.
I think it crazy that some poor shlep gets life in Cali for his third strike stealing a car, when others steal millions and get a couple years.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
June 30th, 2009 at 2:20 am
Just wondering…was restitution any part of the sentence. I’ve always wondered why, for the most part we seperate the criminal and civil portions of crimes like these. First and foremost he should be liable for returning all monies deposited or whatever equitable divvying up of his assets will cover, secondly he should be in jail, the specific length isn’t relevant, just so long as it’s a long time.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:55 pm
UmCara: You’re exactly right. Federal judges aren’t gods. Ironically, the one who was the very BEST at applying the guidelines faithfully and equally was the one who disliked them the most — Honorable James Fox of Wilmington, NC. I love this man dearly. When he put on the robe, he submerged himself and followed the law come what may, even when it visibly pained him (as it surely did; no decent human beig enjoys sending another to prison). Liberals will tell you that such “submersion” is not possible. Judge Fox is proof that it is indeed possible when a judge sees the law as the will of the PEOPLE rather than his OWN will. Judge Fox is an extraordinarily honorable man.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:47 pm
im confused- mrs. madoff helped keep bernie’s books but she was “shocked” by what he had done? uh huh.
well, i’m sure that the 2.5mil is little comfort 2 her. but there will be a movie and a book soon enough for her 2 make bank on.
libpatriot Reply:
June 30th, 2009 at 2:24 am
A possible movie title: “How Madoff Made Off”
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
June 30th, 2009 at 2:34 am
I like the simple “Madeoff” better…
libpatriot Reply:
June 30th, 2009 at 2:40 am
You’re right, Guido, that IS better!
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
June 30th, 2009 at 2:44 am
thanks!
but my point isn’t what is a better title…just my personal preference. How Madoff Made Off just seems a bit corny and redundant (to me)
I’m pathetic…these are the things I think about.
libpatriot Reply:
June 30th, 2009 at 2:54 am
Hey, Guido, I don’t think you’re pathetic! Of course, I’m a corny and redundant guy, so what do I know?
:)
Gotta go get some rest for now.
Have yourself a good night, Guido!
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
June 30th, 2009 at 2:56 am
the night is young…just getting going.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:22 pm