“In a letter to the inspector general, Treasury officials said that investment firms privately told the department that they would not get involved in the program if there was an attempt to wall it off.
“The Times asked all nine firms about their current trading practices in mortgage-backed securities and their plans for internal controls once trading begins using taxpayer money.
“The firms declined to answer all of the questions, including identifying who would lead their trading teams.”
How many former Congressional staffers and or members of any of Jamie Gorelick’s many ventures are currently traders (junior or otherwise) at these firms. Has Jamie Gorelick been retained as counsel for any of these firms? Is Jamie Gorelick’s law firm involved in any of the firms or is Gorelick’s office of National Government Relations (Lobbyist) involved in any government office that would have oversight on any of the matters the firms refused to discuss.
I really think that it would be unfair and unusual to subject WilmerHale to such scruteny, but I might just be a blast of fun.
Are there any Union Pensions associated with any of the firms in question? Or with any of the investments in the firms in question. With all the investigative journalists out of work there has to be a way to pay for such an investigation. Maybe Jamie Gorelick is associated with a firm that provides grant monies for such activity, or a philanthropic endeavor that would pay to not have any activity.
Of course the 80/20 rule applies to the newpaper industry here. Most of the revenue for most of the newspapers comes from advertising. Subscription base dollars are used up by costs associated with delivery and fixed costs of running the plant. I don’t know that they stretch much further.
But anyone who knows differently please feel free to correct my thinking here.
