Goldman Sachs hearings LIVE now.

[Hamer]

Link : http://news.yahoo.com/video/us-15749625/16709109

[ctiger2]

Too bad we don't have senators like Karl Denninger who would be able to just drill these Goldman people into the ground.

[Hamer]

Too bad we don't have senators like Karl Denninger who would be able to just drill these Goldman people into the ground.

I have actually been impressed, they are hammering pretty good thus far.

[awake]

The actual culprits are admonishing the accomplices.

[lester1/2jr]

"it's a shitty deal you say" "and you want to sell them this shitty deal, shitty deal"


I'm carl levin and my motif for this hearing is shitty deal

http://gawker.com/5525635/us-senator-says-shitty-deal-one-million-times

[specsaregood]

Sen. Coburn is having a good time sticking it to the Goldman CEO.

[Sentient Void]

So they keep asking Blankfein the same stupid/ignorant ass question...

I don't see what 'conflict of interest' there would be. If they want to reduce their risk to 'whatever', NATURALLY they'd want to sell it because they don't want to be exposed to such risk... for every seller theres gotta be a buyer... the buyer obviously must want to be exposed to such risk otherwise he wouldn't buy it.

Regardless of how the sellers are trying to sell them... I think it'd be obvious to anyone with half-a-brain and is involved with investing, that buying something that GS is selling obviously means that GS doesn't want it.

Trust me I don't like the ugly, incestuous and corrupt relationship between the US govt and GS, but seriously they keep focusing on this as if it needs attention... it's ridiculous and really irritating. Move on to the real issues for chrissakes - such as the allegations of FRAUD.

It's as if these guys expect GS to not exist as an investment entity in search for profits. WTF do they want? For GS to say to everyone and run their business as... "Hey - we don't think these are going to work out... we don't want them and want to sell them to reduce our exposure to this horrible risk... so don't buy them! We'll just absorb the hit and prevent you from buying them to protect you from yoruself - whether you want them or not!"

Is it due to the broken liberal mind or am I missing something here?

This is political grandstanding at it's finest, really. Most of these guys have no clue wtf they're talking about, and beating such an 'issue' to death proves it. Levin should shut his 'shitty' mouth.

As for McCain, it seems like he's doing the same thing, and maybe reading from a list of questions - seemingly generally disinterested in the answers. Mostly empty questions anyways.

Looks like (mostly) a horse and pony show to me.

[Sentient Void]

Sen. Coburn is having a good time sticking it to the Goldman CEO.

Yeah he seems to be like the only one who knows what he's generally talking about and knows where to go with the questions.

[Sentient Void]

OMFG McCaskill is going at the fucking same question AGAIN!?!

Ugh... God... it never ends... I think she's the third one to press this 'issue'...

[specsaregood]

Yeah he seems to be like the only one who knows what he's generally talking about and knows where to go with the questions.

I really liked the part where he asked the guy if he thought the FDIC had employees that could step in and run Goldman Sachs in case of a financial calamity. --Of course not -- Because, that is what is in this bill that you support.

Basically exposing this bill as a POS, and hopefully would cause somebody with a brain to wonder why they support it.

I think the ethics question is a good question. The issue is can you serve 2 masters? Goldman was serving two: their clients and themselves. They said they got into both sides because they needed to in order to serve their clients better, but it appears that greed got the better of them and greed caused them to screw over their first master in favor of themselves. This is hardly the REAL issue, just a side show, but a valid issue to raise, no doubt. This however is the "popular" issue....

[Sentient Void]

I really liked the part where he asked the guy if he thought the FDIC had employees that could step in and run Goldman Sachs in case of a financial calamity. --Of course not -- Because, that is what is in this bill that you support.

Basically exposing this bill as a POS, and hopefully would cause somebody with a brain to wonder why they support it.

I think the ethics question is a good question. The issue is can you serve 2 masters? Goldman was serving two: their clients and themselves. They said they got into both sides because they needed to in order to serve their clients better, but it appears that greed got the better of them and greed caused them to screw over their first master in favor of themselves. This is hardly the REAL issue, just a side show, but a valid issue to raise, no doubt. This however is the "popular" issue....

Agreed.

And y'know what... I would never violate the N.A.P. ... but I would really love to punch McCaskill in the face. Blankfein looks really frustrated at times (as he should be)... you can tell when he looks at them with the raised eyebrow and frustrated look on his face... hahah

[Sentient Void]

Now they're asking more about the reform bill and if he supports it...

He's calling for higher capital requirements and other regulations? Well of course he would... because such regulations and ESPECIALLY higher capital requirements would push out smaller competitors... just as such regulations always do.

Ugh... I'm liking this 'reform bill' less and less.

[lester1/2jr]

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/mb/GS

what "the street" is saying (for better or worse)