Funny, we always thought they were on the same side, while firms that had been charged with securities violations, like Citigroup, were the opponent.  Those defined roles, for better or for worse, no longer apply. Unfortunately, it's becoming an embarassment.  Take the SEC's public relations fight, led by Enforcement Director Robert Khuzami.  Day after day, Mr. Khuzami takes Commission's case to the public, reiterating that settlements with accused firms and individuals work best for the SEC and the public, even if the sanctions are not accompanied by an admission of guilt or responsibility. Then we have the story in today's Wall Street Journal about the expectation that the SEC's Divisoin of Enforcement will recommend that the Commissioners appeal Judge Rakoff's Citigroup ruling.  See the Journal's mocking headline (title of this post), the bleary-eyed snapshot of SEC Enforcement Chief Robert Khuzami that's offset by a photo of Judge Rakoff, whose wise and friendly demeaner are immediately apparent.  The way the WSJournal serves up the story, it would seem the editors are not too keen on the SEC's position or strategy. Finally, there was the December 8th New York Times story that contrasts 2 separate settlements reached with Wachovia Corporation - one by the SEC, the other by a group of federal and state regulators led by the Department of Justice.  Both cases were announced on the same day, were based upon the same facts and circumstances, and pertained to the same offensies - i.e., that Wachovia had rigged bids on offerings of municipal securities.  What doesn't make sense to NYT reporter Edward Wyatt is that the SEC entered into its settlement as it always does, without requiring Wachovia to admit its guilt or responsibility for the charges, while the parallel settlement worked out by the Justice Department included such an admission of guilt.  To date, we don't recall seeing a response from the SEC on this contradiction. The drama continues.   [WSJournal, 12/15/11]