GoldmanSachs666 Message Board

According to the Collins English Dictionary 10th Edition fraud can be defined as: "deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage".[1] In the broadest sense, a fraud is an intentional deception made for personal gain or to damage another individual; the related adjective is fraudulent. The specific legal definition varies by legal jurisdiction. Fraud is a crime, and also a civil law violation. Defrauding people or entities of money or valuables is a common purpose of fraud, but there have also been fraudulent "discoveries", e.g. in science, to gain prestige rather than immediate monetary gain
*As defined in Wikipedia

Friday, May 15, 2009

What Does Barney Frank Know that Goldman Sachs Doesn't?

As reported here on GoldmanSachs666 yesterday - the media is giving this story two different spins. Why is Barney Frank strong-arming Goldman? Or more importantly, why is Goldman allowing him to? Hmm.

Now call me crazy but if I hadn't done anything illegal and had a few extra million lying around burning a hole in my pocket, the last place I would decide to put that money would be in the hands of a state attorney's office who might be investigating me for shady business practices. Let's keep in mind here that we're talking about Goldman Sachs, though, so maybe they have motivation which I as a mere mortal cannot possibly comprehend. Because we all know I'd never point fingers at $GS. Ha.

Via Bloomberg - what is Goldman up to?

May 14 (Bloomberg) -- Thanks to the commonwealth of Massachusetts, crusading attorneys general throughout the land now have a road map for extracting multimillion-dollar checks from Wall Street banks such as Goldman Sachs Group Inc.: Don’t accuse them of anything at all.

Why did Goldman pay if Coakley’s investigators couldn’t identify any infractions to allege? That’s a mystery. The only statement I could squeeze out of Goldman was a one-liner from a P.R. man, Michael DuVally. “Goldman Sachs is pleased to have resolved this matter,” he said. I’ll bet it is.

Strangely, HuffPo paints it as a settlement, with Barney Frank absolutely overjoyed that Goldman will now be somehow involved in saving Massachusetts homeowners from foreclosure to the tune of $50 million. What? I'm confused.

As much as I love to see Goldman under the microscope, this sounds really odd and opens up a can of worms that we probably don't want to crack open.

Read the full article - click here


Anonymous said...

Isn't Barney and GS cut from the same cloth? I always thought

Post a Comment