HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » When Clinton took money f...

Sun Mar 27, 2016, 08:50 PM

 

When Clinton took money from Goldman Sachs she took money stolen from the people.

People like to over look the fact Goldman Sacks profited off selling Toxic Mortgage Derivatives and then bought CDSs knowing the Derivatives they just sold were going to go bad. And of course the American tax payer had to bail out AIG who issued the majority of the Credit Default Swaps (CDS)

Sure Hillary supporters like to point out the TARP funds were paid back. But Hillary fails to point out the $Trillions of dollars the Fed has been pouring into the markets in Quantitive Easing all going to the "Too Big to Fail Banks" she refers to as her constituents.

$Trillions ...

19 replies, 1301 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 19 replies Author Time Post
Reply When Clinton took money from Goldman Sachs she took money stolen from the people. (Original post)
FreakinDJ Mar 2016 OP
Cali_Democrat Mar 2016 #1
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #3
FreakinDJ Mar 2016 #4
daleanime Mar 2016 #5
AzDar Mar 2016 #6
FreakinDJ Mar 2016 #7
R. Daneel Olivaw Mar 2016 #9
djean111 Mar 2016 #2
R. Daneel Olivaw Mar 2016 #8
Armstead Mar 2016 #10
Corporate666 Mar 2016 #11
think Mar 2016 #14
Corporate666 Mar 2016 #17
FreakinDJ Mar 2016 #15
Corporate666 Mar 2016 #18
hill2016 Mar 2016 #12
amborin Mar 2016 #13
lostnfound Mar 2016 #19
Vote2016 Mar 2016 #16

Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Mar 27, 2016, 08:52 PM

1. How much money did Goldman make from selling those derivatives and buying CDSs?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #1)

Sun Mar 27, 2016, 08:58 PM

3. How much money did they make off their aluminum futures scam?

That cost Americans directly every time they bought a can of soda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #3)

Sun Mar 27, 2016, 09:01 PM

4. That put many American manufactures out of business

 

When the Raw material would cost MORE then what the finished part from China cost because Wall St Banks manipulated the price of raw materials

Just like they did Crude Oil when we were paying $4 a gal.

I hope she told them to "Cut it out"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Reply #4)

Sun Mar 27, 2016, 09:09 PM

5. Close, she told them 'cut....

me a check.'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daleanime (Reply #5)

Sun Mar 27, 2016, 09:10 PM

6. ...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daleanime (Reply #5)

Sun Mar 27, 2016, 09:11 PM

7. Kudos - Well played

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daleanime (Reply #5)

Sun Mar 27, 2016, 09:14 PM

9. ...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Mar 27, 2016, 08:55 PM

2. If so, then that just proves the "trickle down" theory - although the

 

trickling down still stops at the 1%, I see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Mar 27, 2016, 09:13 PM

8. Perhaps she thought it was an advance towards her inevitability.

 

That way she could be earning her POTUS dollars from the peoples...sort of.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Mar 27, 2016, 09:14 PM

10. Just watched the Big Short...I almost think Bernie's being too gentle with them

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Mar 27, 2016, 09:19 PM

11. So you're in favor of a debt-for-life model?

They did pay the money back, and $1.4 billion more.

Are you suggesting Goldman is responsible for money the gov't dumped into the markets in general, even if that money wasn't given to them?

Who else should be held responsible for the actions of others? Does that mean Bernie is responsible for the actions of his supporters - like the one that punched the horse? Or the ones that blocked the roads and prevented ambulances and emergency vehicles getting by?

And are you in favor of the old debt-for-life model, that once someone borrows from you, they can never actually pay it back and should be indebted for life?

I thought indentured servitude was something most democrats were against. Or is it OK when it's against a villain? What if the definition of villain changes next week to someone you like?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Corporate666 (Reply #11)

Sun Mar 27, 2016, 09:33 PM

14. Goldman Sachs Misled Congress, Duped Clients, Levin Says

 

Goldman Sachs Misled Congress, Duped Clients, Levin Says

By Robert Schmidt, Clea Benson and Phil Mattingly
April 14, 2011 — 5:36 PM CDT


Goldman Sachs Group Inc. misled clients and Congress about the firm’s bets on securities tied to the housing market, the chairman of the U.S. Senate panel that investigated the causes of the financial crisis said.

Senator Carl Levin, releasing the findings of a two-year inquiry yesterday, said he wants the Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission to examine whether Goldman Sachs violated the law by misleading clients who bought the complex securities known as collateralized debt obligations without knowing the firm would benefit if they fell in value.

The Michigan Democrat also said federal prosecutors should review whether to bring perjury charges against Goldman Sachs Chief Executive Officer Lloyd Blankfein and other current and former employees who testified in Congress last year. Levin said they denied under oath that Goldman Sachs took a financial position against the mortgage market solely for its own profit, statements the senator said were untrue.

“In my judgment, Goldman clearly misled their clients and they misled the Congress,” Levin said at a press briefing yesterday where he and Senator Tom Coburn, an Oklahoma Republican, discussed the 640-page report from the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations...

Read more:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2011-04-14/goldman-sachs-misled-congress-after-duping-clients-over-cdos-levin-says


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to think (Reply #14)

Sun Mar 27, 2016, 11:39 PM

17. You didn't address

what I said. Your post is basically saying "this one guy said they are bad, so don't give them any quarter by pointing out they aren't responsible for the actions of others".

And the guy in question never was brought up on perjury charges, was he? Seems like Levin is full or poop.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Corporate666 (Reply #11)

Sun Mar 27, 2016, 09:53 PM

15. Worse then that - Hillary refuses to regulate them

 

In 2007, then-Sen. Hillary Clinton, now a Democratic presidential candidate, gave campaign speeches attacking a tax break for hedge fund and private equity executives, but did not put her name on Senate legislation to close the loophole. In 2006, Clinton received hundreds of thousands of dollars in direct campaign and super PAC contributions from individuals working for (and PACs representing) financial institutions such as Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan Chase and Lehman Brothers.

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/34528-on-the-corrupting-influence-of-money-in-politics-bernie-sanders-is-dead-right?tmpl=component&print=1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Reply #15)

Sun Mar 27, 2016, 11:45 PM

18. Again..

This post has nothing to do with what I wrote. It's like telling someone they made a big mistake at work and cost the company money, and they reply "Oh yeah? Well, you're a big fat stupid!".

It's irrelevant to the topic. It's a fact that GS paid the money back plus some. If people feel GS should be indebted to the US taxpayer for the rest of eternity, then that person is in favor of indentured servitude. And I thought real democrats were against such things - or, apparently, some democrats are OK with anything, even things democrats stand against, as long as the victim is someone that's considered bad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Mar 27, 2016, 09:25 PM

12. what did the trillions of quantitative easing

 

go to purchase?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Mar 27, 2016, 09:28 PM

13. $14.4 trillion:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to amborin (Reply #13)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 06:01 AM

19. Good god, that deserves page 1A and a mandatory semester class in high school

I occasionally have negotiated billion dollar deals in my lifetime and so I'm not surprised at the complexity of ways that "it's all about the money". People who naively accept that our politicians are like gladiators in the ring fighting against each other over the social issues, or that our foreign policy is about spreading freedom and democracy or about true national security interests, don't know about the realpolitik underneath.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Mar 27, 2016, 09:54 PM

16. tip of the iceberg

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread