You can see how Goldman Sachs always seems to come up smelling of roses no matter what they do. Even though they pressured AIG by driving "the insurer to the brink of failure in September 2008," they become the buyer of AIG "mortgage-related assets with a face value of $6.2 billion." AIG had offered to buy these assets in 2011.
It is offensive that such a transaction is made between a former Goldman Sachs guy, William Dudley, and Goldman Sachs. Is that not a conflict of interest?
Now instead of lobbying madly against the Volcker Rule, Goldman Sachs has found a way to profit from it: Goldman will make wider "bid-ask spreads" that would make trading more expensive to clients and more profitable for Goldman.
Finally, as far as the clawbacks discussed in yesterday's post, "banks were reportedly seeking insurance policies of seven figures or more to cover salaries and bonuses threatened by clawback provisions." So it does not matter what rules and regulations come Goldman's way; they have a penchant for weaseling their way to profit.
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". 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