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

Saturday, April 14, 2012

Whether Goldman Sachs Pays $22 or $22 million--It Is All the Same to Them and Means Nothing!

"Huddles"--such a cute little euphemism for fraud and insider trading.  There must be thousands of such words that have been used to describe Goldman Sachs activity, activity that really describes fraud.  Not only that, but banks found guilty in civil cases do not have to admit to any guilt whereas in criminal cases they do.  Such fine distinctions hardly matter when the activity is really fraud and the price paid for fraud is an insignificant fine.  All the money made because of the fraud should have been included in the fine.

Sharing confidential information within a company about clients is surely a form of insider trading.  But somehow Goldman Sachs doesn't pay the penalty of a Rajat Gupta, for instance.  We need a definition of fraud that excludes the words now used to describe Goldman activity like huddling, tipping clients, fleecing, spinning, violating, taking risks, sharing asymmetrical information, etc.

Such useless euphemisms now serve to define the justice system and make a mockery of justice and government power.

The words we want to see are subpoenas, indictments, prosecutions and jail time for fraud and felony committed by Goldman Sachs. 

You can read the Administrative Proceeding here and the SEC memo regarding Goldman Sachs's latest fraud here.

Richard (RJ) Eskow tells it best at HuffPost Business:

The Latest SEC/Goldman Sachs Sweetheart Deal Is the Worst One Yet
By Richard (RJ) Eskow - HuffPost Business

The sweetheart deals just keep coming. Lawbreakers at one bank after another are let off the hook as their shareholders write a check. And then they go out and repeat the illegal behavior they promised not to do in the last settlement.

It shouldn't be surprising that this keeps happening over at the SEC -- especially as long as Robert Khuzami continues to serve as Director of the Commission's Division of Enforcement.

But while each of these deals has been shameful, destructive, and outrageous, the $22 million agreement with Goldman Sachs which the SEC announced today -- another one in which the guilty party "neither confirms nor denies wrongdoing" -- looks like the worst one yet.

The SEC has the power to shut Goldman Sachs down for what it did, and the offenses it describes are felonies. But they just gave out another slap on the wrist -- no, make that a pat on the wrist -- with today's announcement.

The Worst Thing
It's not just the fact that the SEC continues to ignore the public's outrage by letting bankers off scot-free. And it's not just that this kind of irresponsible behavior ensures that the lawbreaking will continue. Its not just that crooked bank executives are allowed to "neither admit nor deny wrongdoing."

It's not even the fact that this time around the SEC has worded its announcement in a clumsy attempt to obscure the criminal behavior of Goldman's employees -- although that's one of this agreement's worst features.
Read the complete article here 


Post a Comment