Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (156997)	4/23/2020 4:30:51 PM
From: carranza2	Respond to of 217944

You want crimes? I’ve got crimes. The most lurid is one that one has flown under the radar but threatens to cost Goldman Sachs a whole lot of money. I do mean a lot, and not only in USD but reputationally. Not that it’s reputation was much to begin with. The fraud may be the biggest in financial history. Repeat: biggest. GS’s PR mavens are doing an incredibly good job of focusing the media’s attention elsewhere. It is a story ripe for attention, especially now that GS is reaping the benefits of government largesse. Might even serve as the basis for a good short play. riskyfinance.com The tale is told in a very interesting Michael Lewis-ish kind of way here: harpers.org GS will lose for a very simple reason even a miniature fish lawyer like me could use to gut GS: When the crooked deal was brought to it, the Committee that approves of new biz (looks for signs of money-laundering, bribes, corruption, etc.) had no trouble turning it down b/c it was quite fishy. A few months later, Blankfein intervened and GS went forward. Some GS folks resigned after that, so they’re not all bad. The rest is history. Harper's does a great job with the details, so no spoilers from me. Enjoy. So, if anyone thinks Wall Street has changed its ways since 2008, the answer is a resounding “No!”