SEC vs Goldman Sachs

[Echewta]

http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/16/markets/thebuzz/?postversion=2010041613

And Goldman Sachs has the most Washington connections of them all, which makes the SEC's targeting of it that much more significant.

Former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, an architect of the bailout, used to be a Goldman Sachs CEO. Neel Kashkari, a former Goldman Sachs vice president, was put in charge of the bailout by Paulson. (Kashkari has since left the Treasury.)

And if that wasn't enough, the controversial decision by the government to prop up insurance company AIG (AIG, Fortune 500) with the biggest bailout of them all has been widely criticized as a sort of second-derivative rescue of Goldman since it was on the hook to the tune of nearly $13 billion in so-called counterparty risk if AIG failed.

You don't need to be a lunatic fringe conspiracy theorist to connect the dots and declare that the U.S. government's best interests and Goldman Sachs' best interests were closely intertwined.


Lets see if the fangs actually sink into its prey.

[yeahwho]

I read about this in the Times this morning. It's a civil suit. It should be criminal suit. I'm elated on one hand because this is the gang that obviously is too big too fail, but I'm frightened on the other hand because this is the gang that is too big to fail. I can't help but think the outcome is already scripted and punishment will roll downhill just as blame did from Goldman Sachs during the recent collapse of our economy.

It is a start, they will not go unnoticed.


Here is the NYTimes article (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/17/business/17goldman.html?hp) this morning and the spot on commentary from readers (http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2010/04/17/business/17goldman.html?sort=recommended).

*edit* after reading the comments Daniel from NYC explained why criminal charges will not be filed;

Just some basic info- the SEC is a regulatory agency and is only empowered by act of congress to bring civil suits. It cannot prosecute someone criminally. There's really no such thing as a "criminal suit." There are criminal prosecutions brought by prosecutors. The SEC is not a prosecutor. The Justice Department and the U.S. Attorney's offices through which it opearates are prosecutors. Martha Stewart was not prosecuted by the SEC. She was sued by the SEC, but she was also prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney's Office, i.e., the Justice Department.

To sum up- SEC = civil suit and no jail, never, not legally possible. Prosecutor's office, e.g., justice department, u.s. attorney's office, your local district attorney = criminal prosecution with jail as a result.

[yeahwho]

Remembering this great article by Matt Taibbi in Rolling Stone (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/28816321/the_great_american_bubble_machine/#) last summer, I figured I would checkout his response to the days events.... Goldman Sachs Busted (http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2010/04/16/goldman-busted/), he just left a short comment.


That was a lonely post I made last summer (http://www.beastieboys.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=91883&highlight=Goldman+Sachs), like most folks, the world of high finance is alien to me. Until it is looked into as crime, then it becomes scary to me. These people were able to con a whole generation of MTV dimwits into thinking they were super-rich.

[yeahwho]

I start to think about this Goldman Sachs corporation and my blood boils. Last year I posted this link from the Seattle P.I. (http://www.seattlepi.com/national/397690_fbiweb28.html) about the lack of resources the FBI had to cover white collar crime, specifically mortgage/securities fraud. The banking industry along with securities exchange such as Goldman Sachs looted us, you, me and every U.S. citizen while we worked for a living.

At the time we may not of known we were going to be fleeced, because if you were like me you watched your credit and paid your bills responsibly. That did not matter, predatory lending ended up being all of our problem. We are paying crooks, people who willingly scammed you to continue on with their fucked up downgrading of the American way.

Why don't the fiscal conservatives get on this? Why don't the Tea Party nutcases checkout Obama's complicity (http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638) with Goldman Sachs (http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000085)?

The thing that bothers me is this, the SEC is filing a Civil Case yet the FBI was monitoring a Criminal Case. How come we do not put intense pressure on this administration to criminalize this case? Will we continue to allow Moral Hazard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_Hazard) as a legal business practice?

I'm going to go to the roof top and yell as loud as I can, I'm Mad as Hello, Hello, anybody else mad?

OK fuck me, here is another great ED/OP piece to help inform you on how to rob your fellow citizens blind and feel just dandy doing it;

Looters in Loafers (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/19/opinion/19krugman.html?hp)
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: April 18, 2010

comments (http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2010/04/19/opinion/19krugman.html?sort=recommended), which are always excellent

[Burnout18]

like most folks, the world of high finance is alien to me. Until it is looked into as crime, then it becomes scary to me. These people were able to con a whole generation of MTV dimwits into thinking they were super-rich.

High finance is a world of cocksuckers who think they are smarter than everyone else. These people should be doctors or scientists, instead they are in it for themselves.

[valvano]

looks like Obama is much more tighter with Goldman Sachs than Bush was with Enron...thats some good change

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Is-Goldman-Obamas-Enron-No-its-worse-91613449.html

[yeahwho]

looks like Obama is much more tighter with Goldman Sachs than Bush was with Enron...thats some good change

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Is-Goldman-Obamas-Enron-No-its-worse-91613449.html

(y)

It's refreshing to see you looking into the Goldman Sachs civil suit. The practice of financial moral hazard has destroyed our country the past four plus decades.

I know you have posted this mainly because it paints Obama in a bad light and I completely agree. Goldman Sachs continues to reap record profits because of practices that allowed them to loot our financial markets many years before Obama showed up. If we don't lose sight of that perhaps the predatory moral hazard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_Hazard) ways of business can be stopped or at best reigned into a reasonable standard that doesn't cost every taxpayer alive trillions of dollars and double digit unemployment.