WHAT DID RUBIN KNOW?

How do you write a piece about a shady deal with Enron at Citigroup without mentioning Robert Rubin? The same Rubin who placed calls to protect Enron to the Bush administration? The same Rubin who has the gall to demand a change of course in the current administration, while he presided over the bubble we’re now recovering from? We all know the Times is tight with Rubin, but this lacuna screams for further investigation. Rubin joined Citigroup in the fall of 1999. The deal was cemented orally that year, before Rubin was ensconced. But it was controversial even within the bank throughout that year, and keeping the loan off the official books would surely have required a decision at some point after the fact. Was Rubin apprised of this? Did he know about it when he contacted Treasury to ask for even more kid-glove treatment of Enron the following year? Isn’t this a no-brainer phone-call from a Times reporter? According to the Washington Post, today, “Enron would have increased its debt by $4 billion, a 40 percent hike, in 2000 alone had the company accounted for its prepaid debt, according to a congressional analysis released today.” So Rubin might have been instrumental in the Enron con? And the Times isn’t interested? Figures. But if the Times won’t tackle this, others might. Here’s a great new test for the new editor at Slate, Jake Weisberg. Jake has a fat-cat book deal with Rubin detailing Rubin’s allegedly glorious record as Treasury secretary. Let’s see if Slate will take on the architect of the bubble. Why doesn’t Jake commission a story pronto? I’m sure he can pass along the relevant phone numbers to an enterprising muck-raker.