Was the AIG Bailout a Goldman Bailout by Proxy?

0 votes

Joe Hagan has a big story on Goldman Sachs (GS) in this week’s New York, and Moe Tkacik and Matt Taibbi both pick up on the way that Hagan deals with Goldman’s share of the AIG (AIG) bailout funds. It’s worth quoting at some length:

Goldman Sachs was AIG’s biggest banking client, having bought $20 billion in credit-default swaps from the insurer back in 2005…

By that weekend in September, Goldman Sachs had collected $7.5 billion from its AIG credit-default swaps but had an additional $13 billion at risk—money AIG could no longer pay. In an age in which we’ve become numb to such astronomical figures, it’s easy to forget that $13 billion was a loss that could have destroyed Goldman at that moment.

Hank Paulson and then–New York Fed chief Tim Geithner called an emergency meeting for the following Monday morning…

At the meeting, it was hard to discern where concerns over AIG’s collapse ended and concern for Goldman Sachs began: Among the 40 or so people in attendance, Goldman Sachs was on every side of the large conference table, with “triple” the number of representatives as other banks, says another person who was there. The entourage was led by the bank’s top brass: CEO Blankfein, co-chief operating officer Jon Winkelried, investment-banking head David Solomon, and its top merchant-banking executive Richard Friedman—all of whom had worked closely with Hank Paulson two years prior…

http://seekingalpha.com/article/151612-was-the-aig-bailout-a...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The Old Analogy

The money given to AIG passed immediately through AIG "like corn through a duck".

Simple Answer

YOU BET YOUR ASS IT WAS.

_________________________________

My liberty-minded home base of thought:

www.ponderthis.net

_________________________________

Freedom - Peace - Prosperity

Perhaps the FBI needs to get involved

to conduct a full-blown investigation of the Federal Reserve, House and Senate Finance Committees, the investment banking sectors, and even the administrations of both Bush and Obama.

Because there are too many dots that connect and too much SEC blindfolding to overlook.

"Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies."
Thomas Jefferson, 1799

"Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies."
Thomas Jefferson, 1799

I agree!

Thomas Jefferson once said, "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground."

Well, I guess he called that one.

In word: Always....

...It's what they don't do in public that we should be concerned of..

It all needs to be revealed, every last bit of it....