Why isn't Raniere's 1996 consent order with NYS Attorney General on his bio?

If honestly is a quality you look for in a teacher or mentor, then what say you to this?

On Keith Raniere’s bio [www.keithraniere.com], it states:

As an entrepreneur, Keith Raniere transformed a five-person organization into a corporation of nearly 400,000 in a mere two years. His company, Consumers’ Buyline, Inc., was responsible for an estimated one billion dollars in product and service sales in its second full year of business and was featured on the American Spotlight. A millionaire at the age of thirty, Keith Raniere was worth $50 million only two years later.

Somehow – perhaps it was an oversight – Raniere fails to mention how his billion dollar entrepreneurial enterprise wound up.

It was forced to close and went bankrupt.

Here’s how:

CONSENT ORDER AND JUDGMENT

Index No . 2336-93 RJI No. 0193035859

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, by:

ROBERT ABRAMS, Attorney General of the State of New York: Plaintiffs, :

-against- :

CONSUMERS’ BUYLINE, INC., KEITH RANIERE , PAMELA CAFRITZ and KAREN UNTERREINER , :

Defendants .

Plaintiffs having commenced the above-entitled action pursuant to General Business Law ( “GBL” ) §§ 349, 353 and 353-a, and Executive Law § 63(12) for an Order and Judgment, inter alia, enjoining defendants from engaging in the fraudulent, deceptive and illegal acts alleged in the Verified Complaint; and The parties having entered into the annexed Stipulation consenting to the entry of this Consent Order and Judgment;

Now, on motion of Dennis C. Vacco, Attorney General of the State of New York, Thomas G. Conway, Assistant Attorney General of Counsel, attorneys for plaintiffs, it is hereby

ORDERED and ADJUDGED that defendants Consumers’

Buyline, Inc., Keith Raniere, Pamela Cafritz and Karen Unterreiner are permanently enjoined from promoting, offering or granting participation in a chain distributor scheme in the State of New York in violation of GBL § 359-fff; and it is further

2. ORDERED and ADJUDGED that defendants Consumers’ Buyline, Inc. and Keith Raniere shall pay to the Attorney General the total sum of forty thousand dollars ($40,000.00) as the costs of this action; and it is further

ORDERED and ADJUDGED that defendants Consumers’ Buyline, Inc. and Keith Raniere shall pay the $40,000.00 costs by making total payments of $500.00 per month commencing on October 1, 1996 until the $40,000.00 is paid in full. Payments shall be made by cashier’s or attorney’s escrow check and shall be received by the Attorney General no later than the first day of each month; and it is further

ORDERED and ADJUDGED, that upon defendants Consumers Buyline, Inc.’s or Keith Raniere’ s failure to make any payment required by this Consent Judgment and Order, the Attorney General may apply to this Court, without notice to defendants, for entry of a final judgment against defendants Consumers’ Buyline, Inc. and Keith Raniere, jointly and severally, for the full amount of the remaining unpaid balance; and it is further

ORDERED and ADJUDGED, that nothing in this Consent Order and Judgment shall be construed to deprive any person of any private right of action against defendants; and it is further

6 . ORDERED and ADJUDGED that this Consent Order and Judgment does not constitute a finding that defendants have committed any fraudulent, illegal or deceptive acts.

Dated: Albany, New York

August 1996

—————

While it is true that Raniere did not admit to any illegal acts, the agreement closed down his company…. and Raniere stiffed thousands of members of the corporation.

Have you heard that a lie by omission is in a lie in fact?

Not mentioning on your bio that your company, Consumers Buyline, was closed down by an agreement made with the Attorney General, which included a fine, is a lie by omission.

Making it seem like the company was an unqualified success is a lie in fact.

Students of the Vanguard – who study ethics from your master – is lying by omission ethical, according to you and your teacher’s understanding?