This is part of an e-mail message I received nearly a year ago from a former senior trader at Goldman Sachs. I’ve never run it before.
“The only aspect of this that shocks me is that there has not been an armed uprising of the people against GS & Co. [Goldman Sachs] and the Treasury,” he wrote. “Perhaps that is yet to come.”
Well, let’s hope not.
But the point is valid: People are angry. And Congress is, too.
You can tell just how upset both Democrats and Republicans are by the number of times a certain expletive was quoted at yesterday’s hearing (11 times).
The word was contained in an e-mail in which one Goldman employee described the quality of the assets in one of the deals his company was allegedly trying to pawn off on others.
But the Washington circus got to its entertaining best when Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) asked three current and one former Goldman employees on the hot seat what the company’s “vig” was in a certain bond deal.
Wall Street prefers the word “spread” and the Goldman employees corrected McCaskill on that fact.
Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.), had a correction of his own. “Most people in Las Vegas,” said Ensign, “would take offense being compared with Wall Street.” At least in Vegas, Ensign said, people bet with their own money.
I’m not a lawyer, but I’d be shocked if the subcommittee has anything yet that proves Goldman did anything illegal. A public relations disaster, yes. A legal crisis, not yet.
So, it’s also safe to say that the Securities & Exchange Commission, which in a shocking coincidence filed civil charges just days before financial regulation was to be debated in Congress, probably doesn’t have the goods yet, either.
My view of this whole situation stays the same: Goldman did things, perhaps with the tacit permission of the US Treasury, that probably were against the law.
However, Subcommittee Chairman Carl Levin (D- Mich.) didn’t have much time yesterday to understand the real crimes that occurred, not with so many e-mails to read, snarky comments to make and grandstanding to do. But he did make a decent case that Goldman only had Goldman’s best interest in mind when it packaged most of its deals.
I will leave you with some parting words from my e-mail writer, the former senior Goldman trader. “My former employers (several major firms) had an official (if not published) policy that it is only a crime when you get caught,” he wrote.
By the way, if Congress is interested, this e-mail writer would be happy to testify about how Wall Street has gone astray. And the information I have on Goldman’s questionable actions are on my desk. Just come and get it. john.crudele@nypost.com