now, it s telling this entire miniature controversy, we could even call it a nontroversy, fixated on slogans, not trump s actual governance. the thing that impacts people s lives isn t whether it s cute to say swamp or whether it s best expressed as dts. it s whether the people who made this swamp still get to run it. and trump actually did have a point when he campaigned on the idea that bankers run washington. people from top banks held big jobs in the bush administration and the obama administration. trump ran on changing that and so far, the only way he s changing it is by super sizing it. trump has put, this is a fact, more goldman executives and billionaires in his administration already than were in the last ones. now, whether you think that s good or bad, it s literally the opposite of what he ran on. now, up next, new fallout over the inaugural festivities and trump s conflicts of interest.
understand, it s not just goldman sachs that was engaging in this casino like behavior. it was all across wall street. people need to understand they were making stuff up to bet on it, essentially that s what they were doing it. the synthetic cdos made out cloth just to bet. a common practice, this trading in derivatives that we ve been hearing about and most people don t exactly understand. as i understand it, that s kind of the point. goldman is the only one that had fraud charges filed. will that make it harder to get answers? well, they may refuse to answer the questions. but this is about getting at the policy problem here. whether it was technically legal or illegal is not as important as whether or not it was wrong.
you don t understand, it s too complicated. give me a break. it was not so complicated that the s.e.c. shouldn t have gone in there and cleaned this stuff up, raise the flag of warning. none of that happened because wall street was in such a rush for greedy profits, they are completing against each other. they cared more about the story in the wall street journal than they cared about whether or not the regulator woz would pounce on them. are you less concerned about whether or not the s.e.c. is able to prove a fraud case against goldman, which some say will be difficult, insider trader is difficult to prove, but to prove malicious intent will be even harder. do you care so much about the legality? i care about fixing this mess. i cannot blech the republicans are not letting us debate the
doing what an investment bank is supposed to do? no apologies, that s what they do. or was the game rigged? and was the game rigged no matter how the economy went you have an opportunity this afternoon after his testimony to talk with we ll see how he we ll see how he plays. i m sure he s going to be hammered on the hill today. christine romans will be with us all morning. ali velshi is here to give us a little look around at what it s like inside that room. good morning, ali. reporter: this is the room where the senate permanent subcommittee will be talking to goldman executives. they ll be sitting here, seven of them. if you wanted to characterize today, it is the day goldman has to drop its sheen. they have had a very controlled p.r. machine. that probably ends today.
oxygen of finance growing so people wouldn t be obsolete. that s the line inside goldman sachs that tells you how this guy thinks. we have to look at his testimony from this morning, which he acknowledges that the s.e.c. lawsuit was a bad day, worst day in his life, saying clients are number one, we have to have their trust. do they still have the trust of the clients now that the s.e.c. is going after them? and now carl leahe levin has sa that s the tip of the iceberg. goldman starts to get tough about fighting back their reputation, when mainstream was upset about goldman weren t as upset as when the clients were asking questions. we have to find out here, what the s.e.c. is trying to find out and we want to know, was goldman