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

Wednesday, October 27, 2010

Michael Lewis Exposes Goldman

From Zero Hedge:
Michael Lewis Exposes Goldman's Prop Trading In Flow Clothing

We have long noted that Goldman's feigned change of heart to eliminate its prop desk is nothing but a sham, as the very same traders will continue pursuing principal strategies but merely be given the additional layer of protection that they are "client facing" i.e., make fake flow markets. Today, Michael Lewis confirms this speculation, and identifies precisely how not only Goldman, but all banks are abusing Frank Dodd using legalistic loopholes that do nothing at all to change the actual role of the principal trader, whose existence has always been predicated upon accumulating positions primarily in OTC products (nobody makes money trading stocks any more) and selling when the firm so desires.


Read the rest here


Anonymous said...

At least you know why everyone is getting away with everything...I wonder how many donations are made in the otc derivatives market?...need a supercharged roto rooter to flush these criminals....

This Appears To Be Worthy of JAIL - RIGHT NOW

Worse: Two days before the loan was closed, the DNC apparently changed its privacy policy - it appears they may have effectively pledged their donor and contact lists without the consent of most of the people on them!

The DNC loan agreement as posted online by the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and signed by former Virginia Governor Tim Kaine (D) on September 16, 2010, says the loan collateral included: “All electronic mail (‘E-mail’) addresses and other contact lists, records and other Information (electronic or otherwise) relating to contributors, supporters and subscribers owned by any of the Borrowers.” The borrowers in this case were the DNC and the DNC Services Corporation.

The loan agreement further stipulates that if the Democrats defaulted, Bank of America would be entitled to “proceeds from any fundraising activity, refunds, reimbursements, or proceeds from the rental or sale of mailing, contact or subscription lists or Information (electronic or otherwise).”


More to the point, are those lists worth anywhere near the amount of these loans?

Anonymous said...

The Six Trillion Dollar Problem

In the post I did earlier this week called “The Perfect No-Prosecution Crime,” I laid out several layers of fraud and white collar crime of mortgage and foreclosure fraud. The lack of the Promissory Note is the biggest of all the problems in this chain of chicanery. Here’s why. A Promissory Note is a financial instrument. It is in the same family as a Federal Reserve Note. For example, if you copied a $100 bill and then tried to spend that copy in a store, because you lost the original, is it still money?–Of course not. You need the original financial instrument (in this case, $100 Federal Reserve Note) to make a legal transaction in a store. The same is true for a Promissory Note. You need the original Promissory Note to legally complete a foreclosure. A counterfeit, or copy, of a Promissory Note is not a financial instrument, just like a counterfeit or copy of a $100 bill is not a financial instrument!

Anonymous said...

MUST SEE - Dylan Ratigan Interviews TARP Inspector Neil Barofsky - What The Fed Doesn't Want You To See »

Anonymous said...

Goldman says thank you....

H. R. 4646 - Cited As The "Debt Free America Act"

Just think, if you deposit $5,000.00 into your checking account or savings account the bank has to take out 1% or $50.00 of that money and send it to Washington . Then, any checks or cash you take out of your bank they will deduct 1% from what is still in the bank and send it to Washington . Total put in the Bank $5,000.00. $100.00 of that you give to Washington .

This bill, spells it out that everyone will pay the Government 1% of their gross income.

Anonymous said...

Stiglitz: TARP Returns a "Drop in the Bucket" Compared to Damage Done

"The fact some of the banks paid back what was given to them on very favorable just a drop in the bucket compared to damage done to the economy," Stiglitz says in the accompanying video, taped at The Economist's Buttonwood Gathering.

Including the "enormous hidden subsidies to the banking system," the real economic cost of the bailouts is in the trillions, Stiglitz says.

"If the U.S. government had provided money to ordinary business at zero interest rates, what would our economy be like?," Stiglitz wonders. "What we did is give zero rates to banks, they then lent at much higher interest rates; that's the recapitalization. That's the gift."

JR said...

These links are so depressing to read. Too bad that there isn't a WikiLeaks server for all those financial documents that are redacted when requested by journalists regarding the TARP and Federal Reserve actions (re the Ratigan video). Transparency would be so illuminating! Even a whistleblower who knows what is going on would be nice. I hope it happens soon.

Post a Comment