ProPublica

Journalism in the Public Interest

Cancel

NY Fed Fired Examiner Who Took on Goldman

Lawyer Carmen Segarra said she was pressured to change her finding that the way Goldman Sachs managed conflicts of interest was flawed.

« Return to Story

Sort by: Oldest Newest  1 2 >

Ramin

Nov. 6, 2013, 3:12 a.m.

Some examiners become victims of having too much skepticism. I think it is a common practice everywhere that very aggressive findings are being polished before published.
Ambitions and ego oftentimes problematically work agains those who were given power to investigate or examine others. It is Carmen’s subjective opinion that her findings are objective. Lack of description in finding’s description, cause, criteria, effect and risk can make it invalid. For istance, if policies on the conflict of interest have not been provided, it does not necessarily mean those policies are absent. It could be due to: - lack of care and responsibility to make available all the documents to an examiner; or due to intentionally hiding them because of their poor quality or because actual practices do not confirm to policies. As a matter of fact, jumping into a conclusion without in-depth analysis of reasons and causes, is a widespread deficiency in the profession.

ibsteve2u

Nov. 4, 2013, 1:09 p.m.

@Tiffany:  I bet she was told she could give up on becoming a member/associate member of The Metropolitan Club, too.

(And/or the Core, Harvard, Yale, and University clubs…or, of course, the Knick.)

———

There, fixed that…I get so very used to “the bad guy” being just that - a guy - that the gender bias sneaks into anything I say on the subject…even, it appears, when speaking of a victim such as Carmen Segarra.

(In my defense, at least it doesn’t take a startling exception like a Leona Helmsley to remind me to always look both ways.)

Dina J. Padilla

Nov. 3, 2013, 1:48 p.m.

Humans being referred to as a wasteland speaks for itself and why this country has bottomed out because there are people who think that somehow they are better than many others who aren’t afforded real opportunities and I remember when it did happen! No good education,  no good paying jobs and no opportunity leaves people with their devices for their own demise and the insurance (risk) companies are betting on all of it.
WHY give people opportunity to make it better when risk insurance companies are counting on you dying sooner with others investing in it for their retirement and perhaps it is one of those who think of people as wasteland!? AND none of us are off of that list! NONE OF US!

ibsteve2u

Nov. 3, 2013, 5 a.m.

@Tiffany:  I bet he was told he could give up on becoming a member of The Metropolitan Club, too.

(And/or the <i>Core, Harvard, Yale, and University clubs…or, of course, the Knick.)

Tiffany

Nov. 2, 2013, 8:18 p.m.

This is stunning.  I’ve worked at law firms all my life, 11 of those years in administration.  We had to have a competent conflicts policy in order to obtain liability insurance for business practices.  Another firm for which I worked had the entire conflicts process automated, and each and every new case had to go through that process and was eye-balled by a risk manager who had more authority than any of the attorneys in this regard.  There is no excuse for this, other than greed, ego and corruption at the highest levels.  I hope Segarra kicks their asses all over the courtroom.

Barbara

Oct. 28, 2013, 2:49 p.m.

She has integrity, honor and the people who suffers by behind closed doors decisions - to heart. I pray for you.

Dina J Padilla

Oct. 18, 2013, 1:26 p.m.

I remember when good was rewarded and now with corporations in charge of everything, that no longer exists. Yes, once this woman became a whistle blower, her life will be forever changed and not for the good, unless she never regrets blowing the whistle and can live with her self and her decisions to tell the truth for the common good Those that dare persecute the good guy or the good woman, belong in hell!. The corporations who claim citizenship, lack the one thing that whistle blower’s have, a conscience!

Joe Collins

Oct. 18, 2013, 12:54 p.m.

She will spend at least four years defending herself.  It will cost her more than she would ever like to pay.  She will come to doubt herself.  Memory will fade.  She’ll probably win financially but it won’t matter.  She will never get paid and even if she does she will be permanently changed forever- and not for the better.  Until you have been a whistleblower you have no clue what it is like.

ibsteve2u

Oct. 16, 2013, 7:34 p.m.

@R.T. Greenwood, who spake thusly:  When Ron Paul says he does not believe in the FAA he is saying we need freedom so a few hundred plane crashes a year is the price of freedom?

Nah…Paul is saying that the level of passenger safety - like the age a person lives to - should be a function of wealth possessed.

I.e., do away with regulation so that the airlines can selectively let safety slide…some aircraft get all of the maintenance needed to keep them safe, some aircraft get 70% of the maintenance now required, some get [...] only 10%...

After a few gross thousand Americans fall out of the sky, hinging the public’s probability of survival on their ability to pay for seats on various steps of maintained aircraft would become quite the profit generator.

Not to mention the fact that the labor and equipment costs of the maintenance eliminated (and the pensions of the aircrew of aircraft that go down) become pure profit.

(What, you don’t think the airlines - influenced by modern so-called “conservatives” - would do that?  All of the regulations that protect the American people now were not created in a vacuum…they came into being because somebody, somewhere in America was jeopardizing the financial and/or physical safety of the American people in the name of self-enrichment.

And that “competition” and “the free market” argument won’t hold water, either.  Without regulation, every sector would become dominated by monopolies…

That has been the intent and effect of the merger and acquisition activity of the last 25 post-Reagan years. 

Ya think the rest of America’s CEOs like just watching the way Big Oil can extort “profit” into private taxation with their collusive monopoly?  lolllll….)

James

Oct. 16, 2013, 12:05 p.m.

Our regulatory agencies need to be separated from the institutions they regulate, and the regulators themselves need to be paid a percentage commission based on the fraud monies and penalties they’ve recovered.  That would help incentivise them.

We get what we pay for.

Kudos to Segarra.  Hopefully she’ll get a big settlement.

R. T. Greenwood

Oct. 16, 2013, 6:02 a.m.

More liberal Archie Bunker comments proving my point that every belief of the Tea Party is extreme. I,e, because they oppose some actions of the EPA and its wielding of power that they want to destroy the environment and create health hazards everywhere.

carolyn

Oct. 15, 2013, 9:53 p.m.

ibsteve2u: I like your ProPublica delayed post - an especially well documented rundown on the Koch’s bros. environmental record. Just a piece of a much larger picture which, when combined, clearly shows their agenda to rid this nation of any hindrances towards their goal of rapid, unfettered wealth accumulation. Short term “thinking”, not caring that the end game would result in the destruction of their consumer base along with a degraded environment for future generations.

Soros and Buffet are regarded as traitors to the teaparty “cause” since not only are they very successful, rich, self-made men, they are long term thinkers who make their views about societal needs known. I’m sure neither are saints, but both possess a global view, have a deep understanding of how inextricably tied all countries are to the world economy, how the balances between nations and their economies change with changing politics, and how the US has been rapidly losing its edge domestically due to eroding consumer buying power (accelerating along with our increasingly polarized domestic economic politics ). Soros and Buffet are both strong proponents of economic stability which they realize requires a more equitable spread of wealth along with an even playing field for all populations. They fully understand that an economically healthy consumer base is absolutely vital to maintain the stability and growth required to continue their success into the future.

The SEC and the FED should be staffed with people who, along with Carmen Segarra, also possess this very basic understanding.

so tame

Oct. 15, 2013, 7:20 p.m.

Ok, so where is the SEC prosecution & perhaps whistleblower protection that is provided under Dodd/Franks {gawd the dodd/franks makes me cringe just saying those farcical names)? 

It isn’t like all these the toobigtofail banks are not under Federal contract, with literally billions or millions/day thru The Federal Reserve Board, yanno to be misused in transactions such as this El Paso and whatever else the plaintiff could possibly prove.

so tame;)

Stephanie Palmer

Oct. 15, 2013, 3:47 p.m.

Actually this is the single best news story I’ve heard all day. It’s about time that we held these “pillars of society” to account for their nefarious business practices which have caused so many of us to lose our hard earned savings. I look forward to the scathing evidence that’s presented.

Lavonne Khayyat

Oct. 15, 2013, 3:13 p.m.

RE. Jim’s comment (Oct 10) “Well, there goes the NY Fed’s claims of freedom from conflict of interest.  Of course, everyone knows the folks who ran Goldman Sachs are too important to fail.” 

I like the description I heard from a politico/economist source that shall remain anonymous: “too important to jail”.

Dina J Padilla

Oct. 14, 2013, 2:50 p.m.

The military budget is about what percentage of our government budget? About 2/3rd’s and that’s not counting all of the money corporations gave and made off of the war via KPMG & lots of it made under the table.  The war products are also on the stock market like invest in fighting machines, night goggles or humvees…. anything that our soldiers will need to fight these so called “wars” but one can make a lot of investment money in one’s own portfolio and really isn’t all this is ever about, making money at any cost including wars for oil? OH Yeah, forgot about the oil. What DOE contractor(s) made out on that?
Who owned the oil drills and oil pipes that went into the Mideast?
The poor WERE created because the money was being used for war & the oil,, a well oiled plan…. while everything else, like real jobs were & were not being created. AND when you blame the poor, the real attention to the those who caused the biggest deficit diverted our attention by blaming the newly created “poor”.

R. T. Greenwood

Oct. 14, 2013, 2:41 p.m.

I agree with the military stuff completely but it’s everything and yes including the poor who are a drain on resources rather than paying a fair share FOR resources.

Archie1954

Oct. 14, 2013, 2:25 p.m.

But Mr. Greenwood, it isn’t the poor who are destroying balanced budgets. It isn’t welfare that is increasing the deficit. It is in fact a bad choice by all US administrations with help from Congress. The choice to export violence everywhere in the world, the setting up and maintenance of over 700 military bases in foreign countries, the purchase of military armaments. All of these are poor choices and the result of such government errors of judgement is the destruction of American society and American infrastructure. The nation is literally bleeding itself to death. Don’t blame today’s problems on the poor.

Logan

Oct. 14, 2013, 1:25 p.m.

Well, before the comments disintegrate into name calling and agenda pushing, lets all agree that progressives, neo-liberals, neo-conservatives, Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, ‘TeaBags’, Libtards (as the most childish of adults in our society style them) can all agree that this chick has a hell of a case and deserves to hold her entire leaderships feet to the fire on this issue.

Finally, some common ground EVERYONE can agree on. Manipulating regulation for financial gain is BAD. Seems too hard to find something everyone can actually support these days.

Good Job Propublica, on keeping the reporting fact based and unbiased, which you do not always do. Kudos.

James M. Fitzsimmons

Oct. 14, 2013, 6:25 a.m.

“Too big to fail” equals systemic “moral hazard”. Five years since the financial crisis of 2008 and nothing essentially changed. Why not? I can only guess that smart guys from fancy schools consider that protection from risk is a good deal. Some of the smart guys do “temporary duty” in the government but remain sympathetic to a risk free atmosphere that they will rejoin. They are good compassionate liberals not evil capitalists! They will initiate more Dodd-Frank like legislation on the books but maintain the systemic protection from risk. More quality work for smart guy lawyers, by the way. Nothing more to see here, just another phony scandal.
  Zero leadership anywhere that counts. Carmen Segarra seems to be the exception. Will she be rewarded by this administration for her courage, if exonerated? We shall see. Meanwhile, thanks ProP.

Palladio

Oct. 14, 2013, 6:22 a.m.

God bless this woman.

R. T. Greenwood

Oct. 14, 2013, 6:08 a.m.

When Ron Paul says he does not believe in the FAA he is saying we need freedom so a few hundred plane crashes a year is the price of freedom? Ridiculous! MAYBE just maybe he advocates for an aviation group run by a consortium of airlines.  I think it is a safe bet the pilots will demand 100% safe operation or they won;t fly.

Just like that idiot Max Keiser saying that Fukushima Daichi disaster is a libertarian’s dream.  Not quite. Do you think there was no regulation of that power plant by Japanese regulators and IAEA regulators? And did that regulation work? NO

It is Archie Bunker Absurd to say that the Tea party wants to end all welfare, all regulations, end all tax.  The Tea Party wants to stem the tide of big government.  Romney proved that a state under the powers it has under the U.S> Constitution and its own Constitution could have its own health care program under a balanced budget.  Obamacare will be the next govt program to spiral hopelessly out of control with massive inefficiencies in the process.

So the Koch Bros aren’t rich enough? They want to get another 5% of wealth that they would get from deregulation and lower taxes?  Just ignorant stuff man, Archie Bunker ignorant by you liberals.

No folks.  Look at your NSA.  The Tea Party was advocating about loss of freedom (constitutionally guaranteed freedom) long before the NSA spying (still underway) and black boxes in cars (mandated for future autos) to track your every move.

The Tea Party advocates a balanced budget.  $17 trillion in debt and heading for $25 trillion? The only hope is for the US govt to exert massive control on the economy which means loss of freedom and high unemployment for the foreseeable future.

I hope you got to see LIBERAL 60 Minutes explain to you just how disability is being abused.  And the real problem with disability is the 1) the U.S. is discouraging job creation and 2) people who are capable of joining in the prosperity are getting disability, food stamps, and other welfare.  Welfare is once again a lifestyle choice. And I live in one of the poorer counties in Virginia and I see this human wasteland every day on a personal basis.

So get out of your Archie Bunker Liberal arm chairs and open your mind to what is being said by the Tea Party and Libertarians.  And in a free society, no one is trying to drag you into an ideology. Wish Obama was familiar with that concept.

ibsteve2u

Oct. 13, 2013, 6:49 p.m.

lolll…I do so love it when a suspicion on my part that casting a lure tied just so into a particular pool will yield a bite.  I would concur with you that the Koch brothers would like to destroy our government…especially our government’s ability to protect the American people and our nation and economy against them.

Curious, both the interval between our government attaining the power to prevent misbehaviour by large corporations and their owners/operators and the timing of some folks’ decision to finance “libertarian” movements in America…

(Forgive me for not including links; ProPublica has apparently decided that undocumented comments are more…reliable.  I further hope that the quoted parties are happy with what attribution I can give.)

To quote Greenpeace (Google “greenpeace Koch Industries Environmental Record”):

The Koch companies have a notorious environmental record.

Some of the more egregious examples include:

  In 2009, the US Justice Department and EPA announced in 2009 that Koch Industries’ Invista subsidiary would pay a $1.7 million penalty and spend $500 million to fix environmental violations at facilities in seven states, in an agreement with the US EPA and Department of Justice.
     
  In May 2001, Koch Industries paid $25 million to settle with the US Government over a long-standing suit brought by Bill Koch - one of the brothers bought out in 1983 - for the company’s long-standing practice of illegally removing oil from federal and Indian lands.
     
  In late 2000, the company was charged with covering up the illegal releases of 91 tons of the known carcinogen benzene from its refinery in Corpus Christi. Initially facing a 97-count indictment and potential fines of $350 million, Koch cut a deal with then-Attorney General John Ashcroft to drop all major charges in exchange for a guilty plea for falsifying documents, and a $20 million settlement.
     
  In 2000, the EPA fined Koch Industries $30 million for its role in 300 oil spills that resulted in more than three million gallons of crude oil leaking into ponds, lakes, streams and coastal waters.
     
  In 1999 a Koch subsidiary pleaded guilty to charges that it had negligently allowed aviation fuel to leak into waters near the Mississippi River from its refinery in Rosemount, Minnesota, and that it had illegally dumped a million gallons of high-ammonia wastewater onto the ground and into the Mississippi.
     
  Koch’s negligence toward environmental safety has led to tragic losses of life. In 1996, a rusty Koch pipeline leaked flammable butane near a Texas residential neighborhood. Warned by the smell of gas, two teenagers drove their truck toward the nearest payphone to call for help, but they never made it.  Sparks from their truck ignited the gas cloud and the two burned alive. The National Transportation Safety Board determined that “the probable cause of this accident was the failure of Koch to adequately protect its pipeline from corrosion” and the ineffectiveness of Koch’s program to educate local residents about how to respond during a pipeline leak.

End quote.

The list of members of ALEC is…interesting…and includes the Kochs.  But the reader would not only have to Google that list, but Google the named individuals and corporations and, in the case of individuals who are politicians, Google their stances on, say, giving Wall Street’s investment banks any and all things that they want.  (In case the reader happened to think an argument that used dropping Goldman Sachs’ name as the primary reason to destroy the Fed had any merit.)

One could Google “Politico” and their story “Exclusive: The Koch brothers’ secret bank” to get a head start.

Bloomberg (Google “bloomberg expose koch 2011”) ran an extensive piece on Koch behaviour such as trading with Iran detailing bribery of foreign officials, trading with Iran, stealing oil from native American lands (“reservations”, if you must), and so on.

In summary, I am unable to find any any evidence to support the implication that the Koch brothers act altruistically or with the well-being of the American people and these United States of America as their moral guide; to the contrary, the public evidence states that what they do is to enrich themselves and if Americans are hurt - or killed - because of that, too bad.

On the other hand, I am also unable to find any evidence that Soros or Buffett have acted so directly against the health and well-being of the American people - especially not as a pattern of behavior.

(By the way:  I’m sure glad other websites don’t make it so difficult for me to link to ProPublica stories and so properly attribute what I quote of ProPublica’s work.  There’s a certain irony, in that…)

carolyn

Oct. 13, 2013, 6:08 p.m.

ibsteve2u: Thanks! A warning to those who want to get rid of the FED. My own take is that all government agencies set up to prevent abuses of any kind are subject to mission creep (buy-offs) to the point that they often come to represent the interests of those who are supposed to be under scrutiny. Or, some agencies are set up to give the impression of serving public interests while in practice they’re actually accomplishing the polar opposite. (Bush’s “Clear Skies initiative” comes to mind.) I’m of the thought that the Federal reserve has long been a hybrid of these two designs.

R.T. Greenwood: “explain to me what the Koch Bros gain by supporting the Tea Party?”

The Tea Party movement is primarily interested in dismantling any and all public services possible, using “fiscal responsibility” as their rationale. Being able to operate business in a country with little to no tax responsibilities along with the loss of governmental safety nets and the stripping of worker’s rights would create a dream scenario for the Koch brothers. ... But you appear to be fairly sharp so I’m pretty sure you already know that….

ibsteve2u

Oct. 13, 2013, 6 p.m.

lolll…I do so love it when a suspicion on my part that casting a lure tied just so into a particular pool will yield a bite.

I would concur with you that the Koch brothers would like to destroy our government…especially our government’s ability to protect the American people and our nation and economy against them.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Koch_Industries

http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/campaigns/global-warming-and-energy/polluterwatch/koch-industries/koch-industries-environmental/

Curious, both the interval between our government attaining the power to prevent misbehavior by large corporations and their owners and the timing of some folks’ decision to finance “libertarian” movements in America…

R. T. Greenwood

Oct. 13, 2013, 5:43 p.m.

And do you really think the Koch Bros have more power than Warren Buffett? Buffett has been selling off his Moody’s stock as Obama delays taking action against Moody’s for the ratings scandal during the housing bubble. Also, Buffett gains from no Keystone pipeline because his railroad makes money from transporting oil.

The Koch Bros have virtually no political influence to speak of since they are supporting decidedly minority movement in this country.  Really, explain to me what the Koch Bros gain by supporting the Tea Party?

R. T. Greenwood

Oct. 13, 2013, 5:34 p.m.

What exactly is the Koch Bros connection to the Federal Reserve? As a speculator of currency, don;t you think Soros is more closely tied to Fed policy?  Goldman Sachs is greed personified.  Soros is a speculator and has been convicted as an inside trader in pursuit of that goal.  The Kochs employ 50,000 and produce a myriad of products for consumer consumption.  They contribute to political candidates but liberals far outweigh people in Congress who believe in limited got, free markets, and fiscal responsibility.

ibsteve2u

Oct. 13, 2013, 5:10 p.m.

By the way:  The Fed acts as a great dampener on our nation’s financial markets (and so economy).

One thing you should know is you can make the most money if you know in advance when the market (stocks or commodities) is getting ready to make a sudden move and which direction that move will be…

And those moves can be entirely artificial…like, anyone who managed to attend a secret energy task force meeting (or was connected to an attendee) and somehow became aware of a pending invasion of a Middle Eastern nation could align financial resources accordingly so as to benefit from the consequential and entirely predictable upward move in the price of oil…

Likewise, kicking the Fed off-line would enable the interested who had control of sufficient liquidity (through their control of major corporations [which, while not being “people”, surely do have a lot of leverageable cash, physical assets, and credit], hedge funds, personal wealth, existing corporate shareholdings, etc.) to make a huge amount of additional wealth if they can kick the market and/or America’s economy into oscillation…

And without the Fed there to prevent or dampen that oscillation…lollll…the honest wealthy and the 401K holder would quickly find themselves eating from a common soup pot.

All that wealth, just for getting rid of the Fed…no wonder there are some wealthy who admire the idea so much that they buy politicians and political movements in order to pursue the idea.

(Note that they’d be happy to get rid of the SEC, too.)

ibsteve2u

Oct. 13, 2013, 4:46 p.m.

Chicken and egg thing…did the Fed start out evil, or are they becoming evil because of the influence of the Goldman Sachs, Koch Industries, and General Electrics of the world?

The same people, I might add, who finance and control the Republicans in their entirety, the neoliberals among the Democrats, even the Tea Party/“libertarians…(although much of the latter’s base think they’re “grass roots” ‘cuz all they’re allowed to see is the fertilizer they’re being fed).

Is a lot of evidence that federal agencies become a reflection of the morality and ethics of the political party that controls them; for instance, the great mortgage-backed securities pyramid scam happened on the watch of the “law-and-order” Republicans…

Ain’t that strange?

R. T. Greenwood

Oct. 13, 2013, 4:19 p.m.

Come on folks. Get your senators and reps to put the clamps on the Federal Reserve.  They are evil and they are creating even more evil in the form of Goldman Sachs and others.

Fang Yin

Oct. 12, 2013, 10:35 p.m.

I find it incredible that someone who is a 41-year old lawyer with an Ivy League background, and has worked extensively at banks to sound shocked by the deeply entrenched business practices in the financial industry.

Segarra speaks as if she lacks a historical understanding of the Fed: how it comes into being, its true nature and agenda. Therefore she’d embark on this new career path of being a Fed examiner, of which the ostensible job description is to help establish an industry-wide conflict-of-interest policy, and to prevent a sequel to the 2008 financial crisis.

I am not exactly a conspiracy nut, so I don’t know what to make of this Wall Street drama. I have problems being inspired by her independent spirit, and at the same time do not wish to sound too cynical.

Dina J. Padilla

Oct. 12, 2013, 8:08 p.m.

When this can happen to to this woman, then it just affirms that our governmental system is just rigged, local, state & federal, where ever they learned to rig it. What use to happen in some neighborhoods in some cities is now business as usual. If the big thieves get away it with all, then how can anyone else be charged or punished for similar crimes and this leaves the most dangerous precedent that there is no such thing as justice in our country.
I still have the presence of mind though that good wins over evil at some point because it all never stays the same, that at some point the pendulum will starting swinging the other way and at real justice will prevail.

George

Oct. 12, 2013, 8:16 a.m.

This lady should grab as much attention and limelight that she can.Try to stay in the public eye as Sibel Edmonds did.US is now no better than any other 3rd world cesspool.I pray for her safety.

Archie1954

Oct. 11, 2013, 7:30 p.m.

Wow, the Fed is behind the 8 ball now. Her bosses are not and were not doing their jobs. I wonder if they were rewarded by Goldman for the fraud they perpetrated on this woman and the whole process. I hope it all comes out in court and these guys are fired and perhaps charged criminally, although it is difficult to believe the US Department of “Injustice” will do their duty in this matter .

ibsteve2u

Oct. 11, 2013, 6:26 p.m.

The polls…the ones you vote in.

Not really going to change anything until a) we make it illegal to use media under FCC jurisdiction to lie to the American people, b) we make Citizens United an abomination of the past with campaign finance reform legislation, and c) we make politicians who decide which of their constituents to represent based upon how much wealth that constituent possesses members of GenPop in Federal prisons.

That means working to bring the truth to the American people not just during the run-up to our elections but day in and day out…

A hard slog, given the corruption of so very many talking heads (and so the news rooms some of them control) and corporate-owned media sources, but one that must be undertaken.  To borrow the only useful thing Boehner (R-OH) has ever said, “This isn’t some damned game.”.

This is a war, and the stakes are the lives of the children of America.

Robert N. Frost

Oct. 11, 2013, 6:14 p.m.

So, with all this justifiable anger, where do we go?

One has almost given up waiting for a Carmen Segarra Movement. Like the NSA crisis, it will be folded by other spectacular moves, like “invading Syria,” and life (and massive corruption) goes on while we scream altruistic “Baa’ Baa’ “

You want a sample? See the convoluted report today in the New York Times Business Section. You would think that what Ms. Segarra uncovered is a minor scratch on the front door of Goldman Sachs.

We may have a corrupt government and financial institutions - but we do have the most efficient “engineers” of public opinion!

ibsteve2u

Oct. 11, 2013, 5:49 p.m.

To the statement

Deregulation could never have happened if corruption had not already been rampant in both “high finance” and large parts of the legal framework designed to protect the American people - and America herself - from the rise of corruption in “high finance” to a position of supremacy (ethically- and morally-speaking).

append

And, obviously, among the politicians who name themselves or act as Republicans and neoliberals.

It takes tools even to destroy.

ibsteve2u

Oct. 11, 2013, 5:32 p.m.

Ever watch The Shawshank Redemption (Tim Robbins, Morgan Freeman)?  The part, in particular, discussing how being imprisoned over long terms leads a prisoner to become “institutionalized” - to become unable to survive without the environment a prison provides?

One can become “institutionalized” in environments other than prisons…can come to believe that what is done in a particular environment is a…no, the way of life.  And behavior traits - like corruption - can be “institutionalized” into the way of life of entities…organizations of human beings.

People don’t look far enough back when they think about just when “high finance” in America became corrupt…when the players in “high finance” began to expect themselves to be corrupt, and began to expect all others to be corrupt, too, or they would spit them out like watermelon seeds.

Deregulation could never have happened if corruption had not already been rampant in both “high finance” and large parts of the legal framework designed to protect the American people - and America herself - from the rise of corruption in “high finance” to a position of supremacy (ethically- and morally-speaking).

Even Republicans and neoliberals - as arrogant as they are about assuming their desires for themselves and America take priority over the will, prosperity, and liberty of the American people - would never have dared to attempt to attempt to destroy the framework that protected the American people and America from a corrupt “high finance” if they had had any reason to suspect that entities like the Fed and SEC would rise in horror to protest the institutionalization of corruption in “high finance” and its regulatory bodies…

Richard Arnold

Oct. 11, 2013, 3:24 p.m.

A job for the NY State AG. No in the Fed establishment is going to touch this!

It should be the policy going forward that if your worked at GS, you cannot work for the Fed in any Management or Supervisory capacity. The conflict of interest is appalling.

Unfortunately, kudos to Ms. Segarra won’t fix her broken career. Let’s hope she prevails in her suit.

Mike C

Oct. 11, 2013, 3:04 p.m.

Might I add, sexiest bank examiner ever? Ok. That is all. Seriously though Carmen, call me…

Kris Alman

Oct. 11, 2013, 10:49 a.m.

Carmen Segarra for Chairman of the Federal Reserve!

Carmen

Oct. 11, 2013, 10:17 a.m.

Welcome to America! Home of the thief, land of the slave.

George

Oct. 11, 2013, 9:17 a.m.

The moneychangers hang together pretty well.

Ima Hader

Oct. 11, 2013, 9:02 a.m.

The Rothschild clan owns Goldman Sachs AND the ‘Federal Reserve’ private central bank. They’ve swindled the American people for the last 100+ years. This is nothing new. The only thing that’s new is the internet exposing these rat-faced basterds.
They own the judges, they own the Congress, and they own the puppet-Prez. And they own the media. So, uh, where do we start….?! Maybe we should just ask them to stop?
Or are more extreme measures in order? Read up on Eustace Mullins’ history of the banksters, or Andrew Jackson’s feud with Rothschild agent Nicholas Biddle. This has been a long term heist folks, and they play for keeps. It’s time to take back our destiny, as Americans.

DDearborn

Oct. 11, 2013, 8:50 a.m.

Hmmm

This issue begs the question: Why is a private bank being “regulated” by another private banking cartel (the FED) And why would anyone in the right mind believe that such “regulation” would in any way shape or form reflect or protect the public interest?

Real Name

Oct. 11, 2013, 8:13 a.m.

Baa baa

D. MacKenzie

Oct. 11, 2013, 6:08 a.m.

How dare she to question the motives of those doing Gods work! 

Does she not know that Goldman has above reproach and must be worshipped above all other financial deities?

Jack Meeoff

Oct. 11, 2013, 5:02 a.m.

Wall Street is nothing but a “SUPER Ponzi Scheme” with all the cover provided by the privately owned - Federal Reserve and the US Congress.

So, when you have Trillions of dollars to manipulate and extract your “piece of the action” from, it’s really easy to buy ALL the people off along the chain of command. Except, the do-gooders!

Here is a woman, a very intelligent woman who is trying to do her job, which is to protect the American Public from the likes of “proven illegal” financial practices of Goldman-“Money” Sachs. Her problem was, she actually believed that her job was to do challenge the business practices of financial companies like the Goldman’s of the financial world….wrong!

So, her run-in with her bought-off financial regulator bosses PROVES beyond a shadow of a doubt….no one on Wall Street goes to jail unless a “sacrificial lamb” is needed to make it look like the Fed Regulators are actually doing something in the Public’s financial interest.

So if you work in the financial sectors of the World beware - finding or challenging business practices of trillion dollar “Ponzi scheme” business modeled investment companies will give you…a very short career! No one likes do-gooders around when they are trying to steal everyone’s retirement money…I mean really!

Frank Martinez

Oct. 11, 2013, 2:55 a.m.

The rarest of all commodities- integrity.
Scarcity is supposed to translate to higher value.  This brave woman should be not only applauded but also protected. She has taken on Goliath- let all of us who recognize her courage make it a point to support her in any manner possible.
Is there a fund or website where we can tangibly demonstrate we have her back?
Bravisimo !

Jeff

Oct. 10, 2013, 9:41 p.m.

Scary!  Halloween must be coming.

Commenting is not available in this section entry.
This article is part of an ongoing investigation:
Fed Tapes

Fed Tapes: The Secret Recordings of Carmen Segarra

A confidential report and a fired examiner’s hidden recorder penetrate the cloistered world of Wall Street’s top regulator — and its history of deference to banks.

Get Updates

Stay on top of what we’re working on by subscribing to our email digest.

optional

Our Hottest Stories

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •