CNBC Owned Trying To Defend Non-Prosecution Of Goldman Sachs

Editor's Note:  Hmm.  Could this explain the lack of will to prosecute?

Insight: Top Justice officials connected to mortgage banks

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and Lanny Breuer, head of the Justice Department's criminal division, were partners for years at a Washington law firm that represented a Who's Who of big banks and other companies at the center of alleged foreclosure fraud, a Reuters inquiry shows.

Alexander Higgins
Daily Bell

So let me get this straight. The Goldman Sachs Dept. of Justice failed to seriously investigate massive financial fraud at Goldman Sachs.

Sounds about right.

William Black decimates CNBC's money-honey.

"FBI agents were never even assigned to investigate the case. Was a Grand Jury even convened?" Wow. Watch this all the way to the end, as Maria tries to shut down Black and mistakenly calls the DOJ 'the defense department', not referring to the military but rather a department of justice filled with criminal defense attorneys instead of prosecutors. She went to the core of the issue at Eric Holder's DOJ aka Dept. of Criminal Defense Attorneys Masquerading as Prosecutors, and didn't even realize it. This mis-step into the Orwellian zone is both frightening and sickening.

OK for Government Witnesses to Lie to Grand Jury: Supreme Court

Activist Post
Joe Wright

The Supreme Court continues to erode every protection Americans have come to expect as their guarantee under the law of the land, known as the U.S. Constitution.

In addition to ruling 5-4 this week to allow prison strip searches for minor offenses, they now have ruled that government witnesses -- informants -- can lie to Grand Juries and, in so doing, will be immune from civil lawsuits by the wrongfully accused.

Justice Alito concurred with the strip search opinion above, and he is at the forefront of this current ruling, which I believe sets a horrible precedent that lying even to a Grand Jury carries no penalty whatsoever.

The ruling makes an argument that Grand Jury cases often involve violent criminal elements, which seek to go after witnesses, and that civil lawsuits would only seek to publish their identity, putting witnesses in harm's way. Furthermore, Alito argued that suits could deliberately be filed specifically to uncover a particular identity.

While this particular reasoning seems logical at first glance, the case upon which this ruling was established was not one where the above scenario would apply. In other words, the precedent-setting case is one that establishes the broadest possible framework. The case is Rehberg vs. Paul in which:

The civil suit had targeted an investigator for a Georgia district attorney who testified that accountant Charles Rehberg had harassed officials at Phoebe Putney Memorial Hospital. Rehberg claims the investigator lied, and he started the investigation as a favor to the hospital after Rehberg sent a series of faxes criticizing its management. The investigator had testified before three grand juries in a matter of months, resulting in three indictments that were each dismissed. (Source)