You should have read more than just the headline. They give the reasoning in the article. Even the biased New York Times couldn't make it shady...so they post a headline that catches people like you...and here you are using a big nothing as an example of wrongdoing.

The guy had a contractual right to shares in the future. Goldman accelerated his options so he could sell the shares as it is a requirement to be completely divested to take the treasury position. You really think that is shady??! Really?

This post was edited on 3/15/17 at 11:25 am

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Yak

DuPage County

Member since May 2014

4672 posts

Posted on 3/15/17 at 12:19 pm to BBONDS25

This isn't even the biggest reason why I think Goldman Sachs is up to their usual shenanigans. But yes, yes I do think it's shady. I absolutely think expediting the process to hurry the hell up and get yet another Goldman employee in the White House ASAP in order to screw us more is shady as frick.

You know why? Because they ARE shady as frick. The government used our money to bail these assholes out, just to let them use that money to give themselves bonuses. You think Cohn benefited from this? Being the number 2 executive of Goldman Sachs, I'd say no doubt.

But anyways, to answer your question, yes, I think they are shady. frick those assholes. Let's not even talk about the insider trading, subprime mortgages, etc.

These people are against us, and for themselves. You can justify the selection all you want, but you'll never change my opinion on any of these people.

This post was edited on 3/15/17 at 12:30 pm

0 ...

Report Post

Political Talk - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board