Signup for our free newsletter:

Goldman Sachs Corruption and the Quest to Influence the Election

Written By Jeff Siegel

Posted November 1, 2016

When the suits at Goldman Sachs are busted doing something sketchy, it doesn’t take long for it to hit the news streams.  Nor does it take long for the talking heads on all those finance shows to report this news with expressions and tones of disgust and awe. 

But what’s so surprising about Goldman Sachs, or any other major investment bank, doing something sketchy?  This isn’t news.  This is standard operating procedure.

You think the Goldman Sachs empire was built on honor and a high moral code?  Not a chance.  This is an empire that was built by really smart people who know how to work a system designed to reward back-scratching and pleasurable reach-arounds in the bathrooms of the Hart Senate Building.

Understand, I don’t say this to criticize Goldman Sachs.  After all, while the investment bank that everyone loves to hate has certainly never given the impression that it was some kind of altruistic non-profit looking to advance the cause of social responsibility, it has also used its power for good, enabling a lot of entrepreneurs to build wealth and success.

But make no mistake: As long as the lines of communication to the White House are open and friendly, Goldman will continue to run shit.  And that’s why CEO Lloyd Blankfein has been very vocal about his support of Hillary Clinton.

Hillary’s my BFF!

I will not use these pages to support any presidential candidate. 

The entire system has been rigged for decades, and no diatribe on my part will change that.

However, to suggest that Goldman Sachs isn’t working Clinton for its yearly hall pass would be naive.

Check out this quote from Blankfein regarding his support for Clinton …

“In terms of her intelligence — I think her positioning, not only in terms of her ideology, but what I regard as a pragmatism that I saw demonstrated when she was our senator and in earlier stages of her political career when she could cross the aisle and engage other people to get things done, I admire that. It stands out a little today — that kind of willingness to engage and compromise, but let’s just stop at engage — that willingness to engage is a scarcer commodity these days.”

Indeed, Goldman Sachs does need support from both sides of the aisle, so certainly he wants his puppet to be controlled by a puppeteer using both red and blue strings.  This is not a criticism, by the way.  It’s simply an observation of the truth.

The question, however, is this …

By supporting Clinton, does this make Goldman Sachs unethical?

Probably not.

Just as Hillary Clinton was paid handsomely to speak at Goldman Sachs events, Blankfein is getting paid to support Clinton.  Not with money, however, but with access.  And that, quite frankly, is a hell of a lot more valuable.

The debate over ethics in situations like these are inherently flawed for the simple reason that the “pay to play” game is as American as apple pie, baseball and hurling insults at migrant workers who do the hard and honorable jobs that no American is willing to do.

Folks are always talking about how we need to take special interests out of the equation.  But you know as well as I do that this is something that will never, ever happen.

When given the choice, the majority of Americans would certainly vote to see the lobbyists get kicked to the curb.  But choice is not what “the people” get.  Instead, they get the illusion of choice.

So when you head to the polls next week to vote, keep this in mind …

Whether its the jack ass or the elephant, no presidential candidate gives two shits about your ability to create and protect wealth and prosperity.  They care about the Goldman Sachs of the world, not you. So it’s up to you to carve your own path in the absence of any individual who promises you the world, but delivers nothing but buyer’s remorse.