Say one thing for Goldman: the firm has chutzpah. Just last July, there it was acting all contrite and paying $550 million to settle an S.E.C. suit that charged it with misleading investors in marketing some complex securities tied to sub-prime mortgages. Goldman failed to disclose that one of its biggest clients, John Paulson, the hedge fund manager, had helped to select the sub-prime loans underpinning the securities, and that he stood to gain handsomely if the securities fell in value, which they quickly did. Six months later and Goldman again appears to be trying to twist the securities laws for the benefit of itself and one of its clients—Facebook.

Posted on January 3, 2011 at 5:05pm.

Say one thing for Goldman: the firm has chutzpah. Just last July, there it was acting all contrite and paying $550 million to settle an S.E.C. suit that charged it with misleading investors in marketing some complex securities tied to sub-prime mortgages. Goldman failed to disclose that one of its biggest clients, John Paulson, the hedge fund manager, had helped to select the sub-prime loans underpinning the securities, and that he stood to gain handsomely if the securities fell in value, which they quickly did. Six months later and Goldman again appears to be trying to twist the securities laws for the benefit of itself and one of its clients—Facebook.

—John Cassidy wonders if the SEC is really going to let Goldman get away with letting rich people get an early jump on investing in Facebook.