SEC Inspector General to probe politics and timing of Goldman-Sachs settlement

The Securities and Exchange Commission inspector general has agreed to a request from Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., to probe the timing and political motivations of the SEC’s $550 million settlement with Goldman Sachs in a mortgage securities fraud case:m SEC Inspector General H. David Kotz agreed in April to a request from U.S. Representative Darrell Issa, a California Republican, that he probe whether politics prompted the lawsuit against Goldman Sachs. (Snip) Aside from the timing, many observers scoffed at the settlement. The $550 million settlement is pocket change compared to Goldman’s $162 billion in assets

SEC inspector general H. David Kotz agreed in April to a request from US Rep Darrell Issa (R-Cali), as to whether politics prompted the govt's lawsuit against Goldman Sachs. Rep. Issa requested that the SEC probe the timing and political motivations of the SEC’s $550M settlement with Goldman Sachs in a mortgage securities fraud case. Aside from the timing, many observers scoffed at the settlement. The $550 million settlement is pocket change compared to Goldman’s $162 billion in assets (Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...

The Ohaha administration is the worst criminal element America has ever seen. The official crimes being committed here are monumental.

Obviously COS Rahm Emanuel is the mastermind ---- Professor Ohaha knows nothing about finance whereas Wall Street Rahm knows every trick in the book. Wall Street knows how to make money disappear faster than a cream puff at a Weight Watcher weigh-in.

A whole lot of spineless Republicans should jump on Issa's bandwagon, and help investigate elected criminals who have committed criminal acts...... I for one, believe it is in our hands to get this going----our reps should be bombarded with the facts and figures....all of it available on FR.

We demand all of Rahm's emails, snail mails and phone records to determine the scope of conversations he had with G/S and the degree to which Emanuel used govt office to benefit G/S insiders.

====================================

THINGS WE KNOW ABOUT RAHM Emanuel was working for Clinton AND was on the payroll of Goldman Sachs, receiving $3,000 per month "to introduce us to people,” in the words of one Goldman partner. QUESTION: Isn't being on the payroll of Goldman Sachs the same as being a "lobbyist?" (/snic)

=========================================

REFERENCE Goldman Sachs Will Be Sitting Pretty With Emanuel in the Obama White House
By: Timothy P. Carney, Examiner Columnist, Nov 21, 2008

Goldman Sachs always has clout in Washington, as evidenced by the firm’s alumni serving as Treasury secretaries under both Presidents Bush and Clinton. Today, in these tumultuous times of bailouts and meltdowns when the investment banking leviathan needs Washington more than ever before, Goldman can leverage its most valuable asset yet—incoming White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel. Goldman Sachs is the giant of Wall Street, and more than any other investment bank, Goldman is surviving the current financial storm.

Traditionally a Democratic booster, and one of Barack Obama’s top sources of funds in this past election, Goldman has always had some particularly strong allies within government. Emanuel is one such ally. An interesting early chapter in the Goldman-Emanuel relationship took place in the setting of Bill Clinton’s campaign for the White House in 1992. Clinton hired Emanuel as his chief fundraiser.

At the same time, however, Emanuel was on the payroll of Goldman Sachs, receiving $3,000 per month from the firm to “introduce us to people,” in the words of one Goldman partner at the time. This is certainly a noteworthy relationship, but it’s one that has almost entirely escaped scrutiny. (snip)

In his four terms in Congress, Emanuel has raised $74,750 from Goldman, making the firm his number four source of funds. Goldman has helped Emanuel. How has Emanuel helped Goldman? The most obvious answer, as mentioned in this column two weeks ago, is in Emanuel’s lead role in shepherding the “$700 billion” bailout—first proposed by former a Goldman CEO, Bush Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson—through the skeptical House.

Of course, back in the Clinton days, Goldman benefited from NAFTA and the bailout of the Mexican currency, with Emanuel pushing NAFTA through Congress, and Rubin hammering out the peso bailout. Did Goldman improperly funnel money to the Clinton campaign by subsidizing Emanuel’s salary in 1992? Did Goldman’s help to Clinton spur the Democratic president to push NAFTA and the Mexican bailout?

The answers to these questions are opaque, and with Emanuel burrowed deep within the Obama White House, the continued relationship between Goldman Sachs and Obama’s right hand man won’t be easy to follow.

Watch which regulations of Wall Street Obama fights for. Watch where the bailout money goes. And don’t be surprised Goldman soon sitting pretty once again.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/TimothyCarney/ Goldman_Sach_Will_Be_Sitting_Pretty_With_Emanuel_in_the_Obama_White_House_112108.html

This will be an extension of the investigation on timing of bringing the phony lawsuit against Goldman Sachs just a day before the FinReg was starting to be debated in Congress - Obama and Dems needed a scapegoat and demonstration of "get-tough" approach in their "War on Wall Street," and of course, as soon as FinReg was a shoo-in, the settlement was in place. It was a "show lawsuit," of the kind that Marxists' "show trials" have been used since early 20th century.

SEC Inspector General Expands Probe to Include Goldman Sachs Settlement - BL, 2010 July 22, by Jesse Westbrook

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s internal watchdog said he will expand his probe into whether politics drove an agency lawsuit against Goldman Sachs Group Inc. to include the timing behind a $550 million settlement with the company.
SEC Inspector General H. David Kotz agreed in April to a request from U.S. Representative Darrell Issa, a California Republican, that he probe whether politics prompted the lawsuit against Goldman Sachs. Today, in response to another request from Issa, Kotz said in a letter to the congressman that he will broaden the probe to review the agency’s July 15 accord with the New York-based bank.
Issa requested that Kotz examine whether there was any political reason that the SEC’s announcement of the settlement came two hours after the Senate approved legislation overhauling financial regulation. .....

You betcha it was political, from the very beginning to the very end. The infamous SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro (the former Chairman of NASD that missed Madoff $65B scam) was the deciding vote in both decisions:

SEC Split Over Goldman Deal -
Republicans Disputed Move to Impose Big Fine While Diluting Charge; 3-2 Vote - WSJ, 2010 July 17, by Kara Scannell and Susanne Craig

The Securities and Exchange Commission split in its decision to settle its landmark lawsuit against Goldman Sachs, The Wall Street Journal has learned, in a dispute over the agency's move to levy a $550 million fine even after diluting its fraud allegations against the giant bank.
Mary Schapiro, the SEC chairman appointed by President Obama, cast the deciding vote in the decision to settle the SEC's landmark lawsuit against Goldman Sachs.
The 3-2 decision on party lines Thursday came after a 30-minute closed-door session where the SEC's two Republican commissioners voted against settling, said people familiar with the matter. Mary Schapiro, the SEC chairman appointed by President Obama, cast the deciding vote, the people said.
Thursday's settlement—in which Goldman agreed to pay a $550 million fine, but didn't have to admit it committed fraud—capped one of the most closely watched cases in the SEC's 76-year history. The agency had charged Goldman with intentionally duping clients by selling a mortgage-security product that secretly was designed by another Goldman client betting that the housing market would crash.
People familiar with the matter say Republican Commissioner Kathleen Casey questioned the SEC staff Thursday on their decision to abandon the strongest fraud charge and strike a settlement involving a lesser allegation, and given that, how the SEC could justify such a large penalty on a lesser charge.
The political split over the case comes at a time when the agency remains under fire for its policing of the financial markets during the financial crisis. The SEC commissioners often split on party lines over policy decisions, but rarely do so on such high-profile enforcement cases.
The disclosure of the dispute also raises fresh questions about how strong a case the SEC had against Goldman.
Russell Ryan, a former SEC enforcement lawyer, said the negotiation to drop the strongest fraud charge is "usually a strong indication the SEC had some doubt whether it could prove intentional fraud."
Mr. Ryan, now a defense lawyer at King & Spalding, said the SEC typically insists a defendant settle on the strongest allegation made in its complaints. Watering down the toughest charge, as in this case, is unusual. .....

The SEC had no case, but Goldman from the beginning was looking to settle, not having a prolonged fight in court, which could cost them more in business than in fines - as long as the charge of fraud was dropped, which would subject them to subsequent third-party lawsuits.
Goldman Sachs SEC Settlement: The Generals Who Ended Goldman Sachs' War - CNBC / NYT, 2010 July 17

..... Goldman, according to people with knowledge of the settlement talks, never focused on the scope of possible financial penalties because it believed that its coffers were flush enough to absorb a fine. .....
According to people familiar with the internal workings of the S.E.C., the agency’s five-member commission was split 3 to 2 in a vote about whether to accept the settlement, reflecting the same political divisions that existed at the agency about whether to file the lawsuit in the first place. .....

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.