Justice Department may weigh in on battle royale between hedge funds and Argentina

[Zorro]

Source: Washington Post

A 10-year legal and lobbying battle that pits a prominent Republican campaign donor against the government of Argentina has drawn the attention of the Obama administration, which may end up siding with Argentina.

Justice Department officials met Friday with lawyers from both parties in the case as the government ponders whether to take the unusual step of wading into the dispute before the Supreme Court asks it to, according to people familiar with the meeting. A dozen representatives from the Treasury and State departments also attended.

The administration must decide whether to back a foreign government against a group of U.S. hedge funds and other investors who bought Argentine debt, some of which was purchased at a steep discount after the country defaulted in 2002. Argentina says that if the case goes against the country, the investors stand to gain more than $1 billion in profits.

The hedge funds, led by a firm controlled by major GOP donor and billionaire Paul Singer, have been fighting in U.S. courts to force the South American nation to repay what the investor group views as the fair value of the debt. Argentina has reached a settlement agreement with most bondholders to repay a portion of the debt, but Singer and others object to the deal.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/justice-department-may-weigh-in-on-battle-royale-between-hedge-funds-and-argentina/2013/07/12/93bd4096-ea3b-11e2-a301-ea5a8116d211_story.html

[The Magistrate]

1. The Vultures, Sir, Should Not Get One Thin Dime

And ought to have to pay the government of Argentina's costs....

[Mojorabbit]

3. I agree! nt

[BlueMTexpat]

5. Absolutely right! eom

[benld74]

2. NADA to the hedge fund! NADA at all!

[Roselma]

4. The first comment at the end of the

article says that NML is a Cayman Islands operation and more:

""hotsauce
7/12/2013 11:39 PM EST

This article incorrectly labels NML Capital a "U.S. hedge fund" when in fact it's based in the Cayman Islands. The authors repeat what basically amounts to trolling on the part of these vulture funds (whose smears have been refuted by the State Department, Interpol, the FATF, and others), which is all the more ironic because NML was set up in the Caymans for the very purpose of avoing U.S. oversight into its possible (likely) tax evasion, money laundering, and the financing of terrorism and other international crime.

The authors give NML mud slinging ample forum in this article, while leaving out the fact that these aspersions have been refuted by among others the State Department, Interpol, and the FATF. Nor do they even mention that NML has been defeated in every overseas court it has bothered with its demands (usually by way of attempting to illegally seize Argentine Government assets abroad) and that 93% of affected bondholders have already accepted swaps offered in 2005 and 2010.

This last point is central, because NML presumes to violate the 'pari passu' (equal terms) laws governing this kind of bond restructuring; if 93% accept, the remaining 7% must as well - or forfeit payment.

Every court in the world - with the exception of Judge Griesa's in New York (the ruling now in question) - has ruled in favor of Argentina; in at least one case (Ghana) NML's defeat was followed by a suit for damages worth millions. It's worth noting that the only significant figures on the side of Caymans-based NML are a handful of Congressmen who've received NML campaign contributions.

The White House and Wall Street are on the side of Argentina on this one.""