Prelaunch editorial prototype. Each file carries its own source-verification notice at the top of the article.
Preview

"I Know All About the Fund. You Don't Have to Tell Me About That."

The Senate Judiciary Committee asked the Justice Department why the Sackler family faced no criminal charges, and where a $315 million corporate penalty actually went. Both questions were asked more than once.

I know all about the Fund. You don't have to tell me about that. I just want to know how much money is--went to it.

The hearing was about whether corporate executives are ever actually prosecuted. The head of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division sat for it. The chairman started with Purdue Pharma.

The Sacklers

DurbinMs. Argentieri, let me talk a little bit about Purdue Pharma. I think everybody's aware of what happened.

DurbinA bankruptcy proceeding was filed, and somehow, the Sackler family which owned Purdue Pharma, was trying to engineer a possibility that they would not only escape civil liability, but even criminal liability in the process. Tell me about your reaction to that outcome.

ArgentieriAs to the Purdue Pharma settlement from 2020, that--in that case, Purdue pled guilty to 3 felony counts. It's a case the Criminal Division was not involved in, but I can speak to parts of it. They pled guilty to 3 felony counts that were very serious. And it was a substantial step toward Purdue taking responsibility for their part--their part in the opioid epidemic.

DurbinWhy was no criminal action brought against the Sacklers?

ArgentieriSo, pursuant to long-standing Government policy, I can't speak to whether--how we make charging decisions. What I can say, Senator, is that we follow the facts and the law, and we apply the principles of Federal prosecution.

DurbinWell, I'm glad to hear that. But I will tell you this, when the Sackler family ends up with billions of dollars and walks away from the devastation they created, it's just unacceptable.

DurbinThe message is, basically, if you've got enough money, you can game the system and walk away with the plenty of billions when it's left over. Don't you see that?

ArgentieriWe share your concern about the opioid epidemic. As I said, the Criminal Division was not involved in that agreement--that 2020 agreement, but it was a significant--I'm sorry?

DurbinWhy didn't they bring their own action against the Sacklers?

ArgentieriSo that was an investigation out of a different Office. But as I said, we follow the facts and the law where we can. We do prosecute individuals. But that as to why no one else was prosecuted, I can't say further.

DurbinWell, that's at the heart of this hearing, is the understanding that some people have found how to game the system.

DurbinBut the problem we see here is that these people lawyered up and put themselves in a political position where the family basically escaped liability when it was over. And that strikes me as a sad condemnation on our justice system.

[Hearing transcript, questioning by Chair Durbin.]

This file continues

Read the rest of the record.

The rest of this file continues from here, with the remaining exchanges reproduced in full from the same primary source.

  • Three hundred and fifteen million dollars
Subscribe on Substack