Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Conflict Of Interest? Report Says Goldman Sachs ‘Among Biggest Beneficiaries’ Of Paulson’s Bailout

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
cal04 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-08 05:52 PM
Original message
Conflict Of Interest? Report Says Goldman Sachs ‘Among Biggest Beneficiaries’ Of Paulson’s Bailout
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/09/22/paulson-goldman-bailout/

In making his push to administer the largest federal bailout of Wall Street in history, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson is seeking unfettered authority. McClatchy poses the question today, “can you trust a Wall Street veteran with a Wall Street bailout?,” referring to Paulson, the former CEO of Goldman Sachs:

But the conflicts are also visible. Paulson has surrounded himself with former Goldman executives as he tries to navigate the domino-like collapse of several parts of the global financial market. And others have gone off to lead companies that could be among those that receive a bailout.

In late July, Paulson tapped Ken Wilson, one of Goldman’s most senior executives, to join him as an adviser on what to about problems in the U.S. and global banking sector. Paulson’s former assistant secretary, Robert Steel, left in July to become head of Wachovia, the Charlotte-based bank that has hundreds of millions of troubled mortgage loans on its books.

Goldman Sachs cashed in under Paulson, with earnings in 2005 of $5.6 billion; Paulson made more than $38 million that year. A 2005 annual report shows that “Goldman was still a significant player” in issuing mortgage bonds. The conflict of interest is increasingly clear today, as Bloomberg reports that “Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley may be among the biggest beneficiaries” of Paulson’s bailout plan:

Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley may be among the biggest beneficiaries of the $700 billion U.S. plan to buy assets from financial companies while many banks see limited aid, according to Bank of America Corp.

“Its benefits, in its current form, will be largely limited to investment banks and other banks that have aggressively written down the value of their holdings and have already recognized the attendant capital impairment,” Jeffrey Rosenberg, Bank of America’s head of credit strategy research, wrote in a report today, without identifying particular investment banks.”

McClatchy adds that the administration’s draft law “also would preclude court review of steps Paulson might take.” Joshua Rosner of Graham Fisher & Co. remarked that Treasury’s ability to “without oversight, determine a financial institution an agent of the government” could be used to mask previous illegal activities at Goldman. The Wonk Room notes six months ago, Paulson claimed, “our banks and investment banks, are strong.”

The conflict of interest provides all the more reason for the bailout legislation in Congress to have more stringent oversight that the administration opposes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Booster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-08 05:56 PM
Response to Original message
1. File this under "duh"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-08 05:57 PM
Response to Original message
2. Gee, ya think?
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hydra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-08 05:57 PM
Response to Original message
3. We also need congress to actually FOLLOW THROUGH with the oversight
And to punish where appropriate. I still haven't seen any real oversight regarding FISA or the "terror watchlist" or the Patriot Act...or really much of anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-08 06:03 PM
Response to Original message
4. Thanks, cal04. I had no clue he was still so tight with his buddies
that he now wants to bail out. Fox guarding the henhouse indeed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sad sally Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-08 06:05 PM
Response to Original message
5. what's that ole' Republican mantra?
transparency, transparency, transparency....yeah, right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
barbtries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-08 06:05 PM
Response to Original message
6. this is important
he should recuse himself from the whole shebang. fat chance. no accident that he's in this position. i do not TRUST these fuckers!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
avaistheone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-08 06:08 PM
Response to Original message
7. I believe Paulsen was paid at one point $17 miillion for 6 month work at Goldman.
This is just business. Friends taking care of friends at taxpayer expense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lifesbeautifulmagic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-08 06:08 PM
Response to Original message
8. No wonder he put in that This is final, I have spoken and there will
be no challenges passage in the bill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RufusTFirefly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-08 06:08 PM
Response to Original message
9. Conflict of interest? The Bush administration??!!
Edited on Mon Sep-22-08 06:11 PM by RufusTFirefly


I'm sure -- as with almost everything else -- that this can be readily dismissed using the trusty "incompetence meme." Paulson simply wasn't aware that he used to work for Goldman Sachs. Oops!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-08 06:11 PM
Response to Original message
10. They should all be heading for prison
That is all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-08 06:12 PM
Response to Original message
11. Yet another reason why no such authority can be given to Paulson.
Or any Bush appointee, for that matter.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UK populist Donating Member (147 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-08 06:53 PM
Response to Original message
12. Don't forget the $500M in tax free shares he cashed in before becoming
secretary of the treasury.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fed_up_mother Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-08 06:56 PM
Response to Original message
13. The fox guarding the hen house. What's new?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC