Goldman Sachs pushed AIG over the edge and you and I got stuck with the bill:

Behind-the-scenes disputes over huge sums are common in banking, but the standoff between A.I.G. and Goldman would become one of the most momentous in Wall Street history. Well before the federal government bailed out A.I.G. in September 2008, Goldman’s demands for billions of dollars from the insurer helped put it in a precarious financial position by bleeding much-needed cash. That ultimately provoked the government to step in.

With taxpayer assistance to A.I.G. currently totaling $180 billion, regulatory and Congressional scrutiny of Goldman’s role in the insurer’s downfall is increasing. The Securities and Exchange Commission is examining the payment demands that a number of firms — most prominently Goldman — made during 2007 and 2008 as the mortgage market imploded.

Goldman played hardball with AIG and was rewarded handsomely.

Several former Goldman partners said it was not surprising that Goldman sought such tough terms, given the firm’s longstanding focus on risk management.

By July 2007, when Goldman demanded its first payment from A.I.G. — $1.8 billion — the investment bank had already taken trading positions that would pay out if the mortgage market weakened, according to seven former Goldman employees.

Still, Goldman’s initial call surprised A.I.G. officials, according to three A.I.G. employees with direct knowledge of the situation. The insurer put up $450 million on Aug. 10, 2007, to appease Goldman, but A.I.G. remained resistant in the following months and, according to internal messages, was convinced that Goldman was also pushing other trading partners to ask A.I.G. for payments.

On Nov. 1, 2007, for example, an e-mail message from Mr. Cassano, the head of A.I.G. Financial Products, to Elias Habayeb, an A.I.G. accounting executive, said that a payment demand from Société Générale had been “spurred by GS calling them.”

Mr. Habayeb, who testified before Congress last month that the payment demands were a major contributor to A.I.G.’s downfall, declined to be interviewed and referred questions to A.I.G. The insurer also declined to comment for this article. Mr. van Praag, the Goldman spokesman, said Goldman did not push other firms to demand payments from A.I.G.

Later that month, Mr. Cassano noted in another e-mail message that Goldman’s demands for payment were becoming problematic. “The overhang of the margin call from the perceived righteous Goldman Sachs has impacted everyone’s judgment,” he wrote to five employees in his division.

By the end of November 2007, Goldman was holding $2 billion in cash from A.I.G. when the insurer notified Goldman that it was disputing the firm’s calculations and seeking a return of $1.56 billion. Goldman refused, the documents show.

In many of these deals, Goldman was trading for other parties and taking a fee. As the mortgage market declined, Goldman paid some of these parties while waiting for A.I.G. to meet its demands, the Goldman spokesman said. But one reason those parties were owed money on the deals was that Goldman had marked down the securities.

In the end, Goldman got what it wanted, thanks to the American taxpayer:

A.I.G. shares fell 6 percent the day the report was published. Three weeks later, the United States government agreed to pour billions of dollars in taxpayer money into the insurer to keep it from collapsing.

The government would soon settle the yearlong dispute between Goldman and A.I.G., with Goldman receiving full value for its bets. The federal bailout locked in the paper losses of those deals for A.I.G. The prices on many of those securities have since rebounded.

The Wall Street banksters are playing dangerous, high stakes games with our nation's economic well being. We need more reforms so that Wall Street won't ever again demand another bailout.

What do companies that post record losses and teeter on the brink of bankruptcy only to be bailed out by the American taxpayer do? That's right - they dole out $100 million in bonuses to the fat cat executives that scuttled a multi-billion dollar fortune.

Bonus payments totaling $100 million to AIG employees from the same unit that prompted a massive taxpayer bailout are "outrageous" but allowed under the law, the Obama administration's pay czar said Wednesday.

Kenneth Feinberg said the retention bonuses were contractual obligations agreed upon years ago, before American International Group Inc. received a $180 billion federal rescue at the height of the financial crisis in late 2008.

"These are the old grandfathered payments," Feinberg said. "I do not for a minute ignore the outrage out there, which I share. But the fact of the matter is we've got to abide by the law."

It's time to pass a new set of laws to take on the excesses of Wall Street. Our small businesses and our middle class is at stake.

Novel idea:

The three of us, as experienced investigators and prosecutors of financial fraud, cannot answer these questions now. But we know where the answers are. They are in the trove of e-mail messages still backed up on A.I.G. servers, as well as in the key internal accounting documents and financial models generated by A.I.G. during the past decade. Before releasing its regulatory clutches, the government should insist that the company immediately make these materials public. By putting the evidence online, the government could establish a new form of “open source” investigation.

Once the documents are available for everyone to inspect, a thousand journalistic flowers can bloom, as reporters, victims and angry citizens have a chance to piece together the story. In past cases of financial fraud — from the complex swaps that Bankers Trust sold to Procter & Gamble in the early 1990s to the I.P.O. kickback schemes of the late 1990s to the fall of Enron — e-mail messages and internal documents became the central exhibits in our collective understanding of what happened, and why.

So far, prosecutors and regulators have been unable to build such evidence into anything resembling a persuasive case against any financial institution. Most recently, a jury acquitted Bear Stearns employees of fraud related to the collapse of the subprime mortgage market, in part because available e-mail messages suggested the employees had done nothing wrong.

Perhaps A.I.G.’s employees would also be judged not guilty. But we would like to see the record to find out. As fraud investigators, we would like to examine the trading patterns of A.I.G.’s financial products division, and its communications with Goldman Sachs and other bank counterparties who benefited from the bailout. We would like to understand whether the leaders of A.I.G. understood that they were approaching a financial Armageddon, and whether they alerted their counterparties, regulators and shareholders to the impending calamity.

Sunshine is the best disinfectant. We, the people, own these companies, and, as the owners, we have a right to know what they've been up to... especially since their actions contributed to the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression! We're the ones that are suffering the most from this economic catastrophe. We deserve to know what caused this crisis. Sunshine will lead us to the truth.

Take action.

Uh, oh. Looks like more bad news for AIG. Federal prosecutors are looking into seating a Grand Jury. Here is the big news in The Wall Street Journal.

Federal prosecutors, capping an 18-month investigation, are
preparing to impanel a grand jury in Brooklyn, N.Y., to consider an
indictment of a former senior American International Group Inc. executive, according to people familiar with the matter.

The Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission
have been investigating whether Joseph Cassano, whose AIG Financial
Products unit nearly brought down the insurer a year ago, committed
securities fraud in allegedly misleading investors by overstating the
value of mortgage-related contracts and failing to disclose material
facts about them to AIG's outside auditor, the people said.

There has been only one other major criminal case to come in the wake of the financial meltdown. A trial starts later this month for two Bear Stearns fund managers accused of lieing to investors. Shouldn't there be more of these?