It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.S. Accuses Goldman Sachs of Fraud [update]

page: 5
97
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by silent thunder
 


Trying to govern without a government is communism.




You mean theoretical Marxism that has never come to fruition.

I make an important distinction between actual Marxist ideology and Communism, regardless of what Marx calls things.

Communism will never become Marxism.

Furthermore, trying to govern without a government isn't communism, it's anarchic in nature, and even in anarchy you can have a government. Anarchy believes in the dissolution of non-consensual authority and the belief of a state.

"True" communism, Marx's ideal communism, is basically going from a giant government to no government in the course of 2 or 3 generations. It has never happened, and never will happen, because big governments will never voluntarily dismantle themselves.




posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 03:26 PM
link   
I find it funny that the government is basically suing itself. The took control of it, and now its committing SEC Fraud? Awesome.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 03:29 PM
link   
I've been thinking, Goldman probably knew this was coming. Are the evil enough to have shorted their own stock in anticipation of the drop on the news?



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by OldDragger
 


Funny how there is already legislation that would give the Federal Reserve more power in congress right now. Its a bad thing because it will inevitably not work because we're giving more power to a private banking cartel, to regulate corrupt investment firms. Plus Goldman Sachs is closely tied with govt. and the FED, so they won't do anything. They will just get rid of their competition, others that commit huge fraud.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
OK, if you want to be honest, YOU BETTER CHARGE THEM WITH CONSPIRACY TO DESTROY TWO SOVEREIGN NATIONS... the US AND GREECE.

Also, CHARGE PAULSON, BERNANKE, BUSH, OBAMA, MCCAIN, CLINTON, ANYONE WHO RECEIVED MONEY FROM THOSE SCUMBAGS AND PASSED LAWS TO RELAX BANK REGULATIONS...

Those pieces of filth need to go to 40$ and below/share.

Otherwise it's a whitewash.

[edit on 16-4-2010 by Vitchilo]

I'm with this guy!!

Two step...



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by SpectreDC
 


Glad to see you grasp that, most people don't recognize that Marx' theory of communism was a social evolution/revolution in which government would be eliminated.

It is funny that the same people who go on about the evils of communism support the concept of the free market, which has essentially the same goal, with the elimination of government in the belief that the natural functions of the markets are all that is needed.

The whole concept of the free market is eerily similar to communism.

In my opinion, people have been duped into believing in this free market concept, that in reality is just communism repackaged.

You are right, ""True" communism has never happened, and never will happen".

The same goes for a true free market, it has never existed, and never will, and pursuing this foolish ideal state only leads to disaster, such as we are currently experiencing, just like communism.

Look at what Reagan and the Bushes have built, totalitarian police states with large prison populations where most of the government money goes to the military. These three presidents have done more to eliminate individual rights then any other administrations in our nations history, all the while concentrating the wealth and power in our country into the hands of the elites. ADDED with edit, oh, and while they claimed to be for reduction in the size of government, all three increased the size of government. Sure looks like an attempt to create a communist state to me.

A large percentage of the U.S. population has been tricked into allowing a communist state to be created in the U.S., simply by marketing it as a market system, when it is not, it is communism.

The free market is just another attempt at a communistic take over.



[edit on 16-4-2010 by poet1b]



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 04:04 PM
link   
This civil suit sounds like too much "smoke and mirors". Nothing will come of it becuase nothing is intended to come of it. It is for public consumption to make believe your government is all over it and will get the bad guys. Pleeeeeease!!!!

This is theater. What about the current economic team in the administration who used to work at GS? Anything going to happen to them? A wise man would not bet on it.

Until the money is taken out of Washington, the fleecing will continue. The Kleptocrats on Wall Street disguising themselves as Capitalists will continue run their racket and Americans will continue to pay the price.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint
.....Ironic, this very same strategy was discussed
in the Restore America Plan. hmmm

Was the RAP planned by the Fed Reserve
to eliminate prosecution of the world fraud??



Could possibly be. I hope that RAP is for real, but this may be a case of false hope....a diversion tactic.

In any case people should be calling on the guardians to show us *PROOF* of their plan by having the UNITED NATIONS shutdown their operations in America, vacate their buildings and turn off their lights.

@ everyone else. Wow ! some great comments are in this thread !


[edit on 16-4-2010 by zzombie]



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldDragger
reply to post by johnny2127
 


And this is bad thing....how?
If public opinion is for Wall street regulation ( and I think it already is), the overwhelming public support would be even better.


I never said it was bad for this case to be out there. What I saying is that many people are reacting as if this case is the 'it' they've been waiting for. It isn't. Just a PR stunt. No one will go to jail from this case. Just a PR stunt.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 04:28 PM
link   
Most Civil suits ask for monetary compensation ( damages).
I have no idea what the complaint says or asks for, but putative damages could be huge in a case like this, and could be a bigger deterrent and punishment than criminal charges. Example, Goldman's suit against OJ.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur
I've been thinking, Goldman probably knew this was coming. Are the evil enough to have shorted their own stock in anticipation of the drop on the news?



Or maybe have someone do it for you? or something along those lines?
www.telegraph.co.uk...



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldDragger

Can anyone even imagine this suit being filed by the Bush administration? Or by a Rommney or Palin Presidency. You can BET that
Obama is behind this. Bush gave a green light to Wall Street, they are not going to take to this at all.


Finally one with enough brain capacity to see the essentials...



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 05:00 PM
link   
can anyone tell me if this(charges) has anything to do with that whistleblower on how they manipulate the metals makert



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 05:02 PM
link   

I've been thinking, Goldman probably knew this was coming. Are the evil enough to have shorted their own stock in anticipation of the drop on the news?


You know it, GS may not be the most corrupt/evil corporation in America (those accolades deservedly go to Enron) but GS insiders have shown the capacity for this sort of thing. Maybe now the contemptible Bush regime is out of power we may see the SEC grow some balls and start taking on these corrupt Wall Street titans. Too bad one of "their own" (Geithner) got into the WH...



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


One thing about the "free market" that boosters never mention is the object of competition is to win! To eliminate your competition.
This leads to monopoly, which is the ideal state, FOR WHOEVER OWNS THE MONOPOLY!
But not necessarily anyone else.
Lack of regulation will invariably lead to trusts and monopoly.
Teddy R saw that happening, history confirms this. Repubs ( mostly0 seek to get a monopoly under the guise of "freedom", capitalism is patriotic, etc.
Communism and unregulated capitalism both have a fatal flaw, GREED!



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by ISHAMAGI
You say Bush gave the greenlight to wall St. Look at the Obama administration.
HIS WHOLE ADMINISTRATION IS WALL ST. Gietner, Emmanuel, Summers, Pinetta et. al. You have to look at reality Obama gave the biggest bailouts to the most industries with little reprocussion.

Every once in a while they'll throw a sacrifical Lamb on the flames, Maddof, CEO of GM, now it'll be some clown at Goldman. Point is its just enough to make it look as if they care. Then the same operations and practices are pushed to the limit behind closed doors.Obama ain't cleaning up a thing, just making good public relations.


People don't get it. The left/right is a facade. There are only the elites versus the regular people.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Communism and unregulated capitalism both have a fatal flaw, GREED!


You got that right. Communism is easy to dismiss since it fails on so many levels, but with Capitalism, it fails when it's left completely unregulated. How many times have we seen a corporation engage in unscrupulous behavior to gain market domination? The Bush failure was to de-regulate these Wall Street titans and banks and they wasted no time in creating the bubble that derailed the world's economy. Worst of all, they were lining up with their hands out to PROFIT at it's recovery!



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maxmars


Seems that the press is finally catching up to us here on the whole "corrupt" banking vehicles and self-serving financial institution business.

While it may seem like no big surprise to us, perhaps more will realize that a scam, no matter how you paint it, is still a scam.

Or do any of you think that the GS 'strategy' we see (in hindsight) was a legitimate form of commerce, in keeping with the social contract... etc. etc. etc.

www.nytimes.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


Their trying to blame Fabrice Tourre and possibly Ergol (his name wasn't mentioned I don't think) for doing this and Goldman Sachs didn't know. This is so much BS that it doesn't even pass the smell test. I have another nytimes article that linked from yours that talks about this back in December and after reading the 4 page document, this was something that was encouraged Paulson and his Hedgfund and then it got the ball rolling for Goldman to make money. Essentially Paulson was able to get not Only Goldman but other big banks to make CDS vehicles for him that they knew wouldn't go long and they took the short of it. In one article that I will post Cramer who worked at Goldman Sachs along with Erin on CNBC said that Paulson's company shorted but they also invested long. It's true once you read it, but the reason they did it is because they where afraid of the appearance of it showing that they rigged the market in a sense

"Pellegrini argued to his boss (boss was Paulson) that they should offer to buy the riskiest slices of these CDOs, the so-called equity pieces that would get hit first if problems resulted. These pieces had such high yields that
they could help pay the cost of buying protection on the rest of the CDOs, Pellegrini said, even though the equity slices likely would become worthless over time, as the debt backing the CDO fell in value. And if their analysis proved wrong and the CDOs held up, at least the equity investment would lead to profits, Pellegrini said.

“We’re willing to buy the equity if you allow us to short the rest,” Pellegrini told one banker"

Cramer was right that they had "skin" in the game but the reasons for it was for appearance to show that they didn't rig it and also for some form of deniability. So imagine that this hedge fund was going to Goldman and others having them make these CDS that where toxic as hell and then going to the rating agencies to rate them and then sell them to these "savy investors" (like that is protection from being conned). Lets say that they where told that Goldman was shorting the deal, I'll bet my last dollar that they weren't told that this CDS vehicle they bought was made by a hedge fund that was shorting it and then rated as AAA. They wouldn't buy this or touch this with a mile long pole. Because it's in the interest of the hedge fund to make this vehicle as toxic as possible so they can win and it's in the best interest of Goldman Sachs to make a good sale so they can get a win on the shortening also and it's definitely in the best interest of the rating agencies (Tell me why in gods name all these rating agencies aren't under investigation, Oh I know if they did put these rating agencies under investigation then they would have to know rate things in reality and guess who wouldn't like that US TREASURIES and MUNIBONDS) who get paid from the people who sell the debt securities.

I started to hear in the afternoon people backing up Goldman Sachs that they didn't do anything wrong and such. Goldman Sachs didn't lie, they just didn't tell you information or obfuscated. My good friends on top of the Front Running and such, we just found out how the game is played on wallstreet. Powerful bankers and their friends help each other to make money and if they are caught, they blame the low ranking person making the deals. Please, do you and anybody believe that this man could do it alone and allow a prominent Hedge fund to dictate and help in making a CDS/vehicle without Goldmans bosses knowing what is going on, I don't think so. If he was dealing in millions maybe, but in the billions they need a sign off or nod from the people up the chain in case it goes bad or is illegal (from their legal dept. hmmmmmmm why would the legal dept. not think this was illegal. Maybe at the offset it may break the spirit of the law but not the law if you disclose). The market took a tank because Goldman Sachs or on the other side of alot of deals (from commodities to equities) and by their stock taking a 20 pt hit they may have been covering for it or selling positions. Goldman is everywhere in the market and it seems that if your in wallstreet you don't talk ill about the company.

www.nytimes.com...

blogs.wsj.com...



[edit on 16-4-2010 by hoghead cheese]



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Britguy
 


It seems to me that gold is even risky due to it's market manipulation by those wealthy brokers who own lots of it. Problem is that last time gold holders lost their gold to the US government under Roosevelt who confiscated it in return gave less value for it in money. Gold certificates? I have heard that banks will accuse holders of having 'forged' certificates, or deny the holder the gold, flat out. Maybe other metals or gems which would be more portable could be a better hedge. I don't know and am no expert but I am suspicious of those who try to push us into 'buying gold' when the market is high and some of us have no secure place to store it (DEFINITELY NOT a safety deposit box in a bank...in California people have found out that the state has cleaned out their boxes, using any excuse).

More than gold, expertise in needed skill resources sounds like the best bet.

And I can hardly believe my eyes that the SEC is going after Goldman Sachs!! Who
would have thought! Intent is one thing; can they actually indict them and send them to jail??? When are the creeps under Obama who run the financial scene going to get the boot (and prison time)? I guess we will wait and see...



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer

Communism and unregulated capitalism both have a fatal flaw, GREED!


You got that right. Communism is easy to dismiss since it fails on so many levels, but with Capitalism, it fails when it's left completely unregulated. How many times have we seen a corporation engage in unscrupulous behavior to gain market domination? The Bush failure was to de-regulate these Wall Street titans and banks and they wasted no time in creating the bubble that derailed the world's economy. Worst of all, they were lining up with their hands out to PROFIT at it's recovery!


If enough of you realize this...theres still hope for you



new topics

top topics



 
97
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join