Lloyd Blankfein Justifies Unethical Behavior
![]() |
| Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein, apparently having a bad day. Picture Source |
What’s in a name? That which we call a crappy deal, by any other name would smell as foul.
How do I not put Lloyd Blankfein, the amusing CEO of Goldman Sachs, in the soup this month? He’s spent so much time in the White House over the last couple of years, he might as well just get a room there.
Don’t you love those Senate firing lines? Public interrogations like this are not only entertaining, but they’re healthy. Like many others, I’ve developed a real rancid taste for these bankers that use ostensible complexity as a cloak for greedy and dishonest behavior. Here’s what Blankfein submitted as testimony prior to his cross-examination:
“While we strongly disagree with the SEC’s compliant, I also recognize how such a complicated transaction may look to people.”
What I like about the Senate questioning (at least parts of it), is that it demonstrates how thin this smoke screen of complexity really is. It’s not complicated, it’s actually pretty easy to understand. I can explain it on one sentence. They crafted and sold a crappy deal to investors, then they bet heavy on the fact that the deal was crap. That’s not hard to understand.
Was it legal? Maybe. Was it ethical? Depends on your answer key, right?—not.
This is my biggest problem with these bankers. They’re actually trying to rationalize that there’s no ethical problem here. Who’s answer key are you using, Lloyd?
The reason why ethics and compliance are commonly used in the same context is because they’re so closely related. In large part, compliance is an attempt to keep people ethical but it’s not perfect. Unethical compliance is possible due to the devious ingenuity of some people, but trust me, it’s unsustainable, and eventually these people pay.
I don’t know whether or not Mr. Blankfein survives his boiling ordeal, but either way I don’t like the taste of this soup.




John Weathington is President and CEO of