IKB considers suing Goldman Sachs for fraud

Not only should the banks who have been defrauded sue Goldman Sachs, but so should each person who has lost money as a direct and proximate result of Goldman's fraud. In the U.S. it should be a federal class action. In Europe I don't know the appropriate legal mechanism. I also believe that Goldman Sachs should be charged with criminal as well as civil fraud, and that its principals should go to prison along with its co-conspirators, such as Paulson.

Goldman Sachs was also a key player in the Greek credit default fiasco and was in bed with the hedge fund managers who then speculated against the euro when Greece was on the cusp of defaulting on its debt. This kind of predatory conduct has to be stopped. If the U.S. won't do it, Europe must.

Realx, its a civil case, cool your jets. Its going nowhere. Blame Goldman Sachs for Greece. Ungloublisch. Blame Goldman Sachs for the volcano. Blame Goldman Sachs for everything bad in your life Prufrock2010. Your just angry you could never work at Goldman Sachs. There are plenty of European banking failures that Europe has never admittted to any wrong doing. Expect the same here. Just a fine for your worries, thats all. ta ta

peschvogel, you're at it again. I told you about Greece (in fact every newspaper in the world told you about GS and Greece), and you still defend this gangster organization.

I never wanted to work for Goldman Sachs. I spent much of my career suing companies like Goldman Sachs. I litigate. You bloviate.

Right, Goldman Sachs originated the poor budgets and trade imbalances of Greece, Spain, Portugal, etc....Stimmt

I am sure you lost many cases...Especially to Goldman Sachs....You would never qualify to work there because of your education. No offense.

You are so clever Prufrock, you got it.

Ungloublisch-Unglaublich (sounds familiar )

This case has "no" teeth. The testimony of a former Paulson & Co official could undercut the Securities and Exchange Commission's fraud case against Goldman Sachs, CNBC has learned.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/36685026

blah, blah, blah...

Right, peschvogel. That's why there are trials -- to determine the facts. Never in my wildest dreams could I envision the predetermined, not-under-oath, newspaper reported "testimony" of an official of the defendant corporation NOT being dispositive of a $1 billion fraud case.. Juries are the factfinders, peschvogel, not newspaper reporters.

Goldman Sach's primary affirmative defense is interesting. It goes like this: the other players were sophisticated investors, so if they got screwed it was because of their lack of due diligence. It doesn't pass the giggle test.

This will "never" go to trial. In your wildest dreams PruCock2010. The almighty capitalismus zionists rule again...However, the Euro is going down and German bunds are trading poorly...Schade...

Would you care to give me your informed legal opinion to support your claim under the U.S. Rules of Civil Procedure? I have them here to argue the point in case you're willing to accept that challenge.

The government's case against Goldman Sachs revolves in part around whether the investor that selected the toxic securities at the center of the case also could be the primary victim.ACA Capital Management was both the final clearinghouse of the portfolio of subprime mortgages and the company that took the biggest loss when the loans collapsed, according to the Securities and Exchange Commission's case against the Wall Street behemoth. The SEC claims that Goldman Sachs failed to disclose to ACA and another key investor that hedge fund manager John Paulson was betting against the mortgages at the same time Paulson was helping put the portfolio of collateralized debt obligations together. Sticky and complicated as the case already sounds, legal analysts say the task for the SEC could be even harder. The doubt centers on whether Goldman needed to tell investors who bought into the package of home loans that Paulson had helped select the securities and stood to benefit if they would drop in value. After all, ACA itself made the final decision on what securities would be included in the CDO, called Abacus 2007-ACI. Paulson aide Paolo Pellegrini told the SEC that he had informed ACA that the hedge fund was shorting the securities. So where's the fraud?

The case follows a linear path in which one investment company anticipated the collapse of the subprime mortgage market and was able to get Goldman to promote a financial instrument that would help make money should those lower-quality loans fail. Paulson approached Goldman about assembling Abacus and finding an investor that would take a long position.

Believing that investors would only buy in if a neutral third-party—which ultimately would be ACA Management—selected the loans, Goldman then convinced German bank IKB to invest in the portfolio. The bank's decision ultimately would result in a $150 million loss for IKB and a huge loss for ACA, which wrote insurance—called credit default swaps—on the mortgages.

The question, then, is whether Paulson's involvement was "material" to the decision an investor would make about buying into the CDO.

Neither ACA nor IKB say in the SEC complaint that knowledge of Paulson's involvement in the case would have changed their minds about the investment, an omission that legal analysts say could be a key weakness in the government's case.

The notion of "caveat emptor," or let the buyer beware, is frequently mentioned as the moral of the Goldman story.

"It looks like Paulson and the short guys were correct and it looks like IKB to some extent was being overly risky and speculative," Singer says. "I want to see what due diligence anybody did on the buy side of this deal to justify buying subprime at the end of 2007.

"At the end of the day, if Paulson or somebody had done something improper and had been named, that would have changed the whole dynamic," Singer adds. "Isn't it odd that he wasn't named?"

peschvogel, when you quote 8 paragraphs of someone else's writing verbatim, as you have done above, it is customary to reference the source of your quotation. Otherwise it is called plagiarism.

That aside, the SEC has a slightly different take on this case than the source you have quoted without attribution. The SEC doesn't file these cases unless it is confident it will win. I hear that Countrywide is next.

Interesting that the case is filed right after the President targets the big banks for reform. While the merits of the case can be left for legal dissection merely bringing the case forward in such a public manner should be viewed in a larger context. By re-igniting the public's ire for the practices of Wall Street, the administration wishes to tilt public opinion in its favor when it makes the case for banking reform. This makes it more difficult for the opposition to marshal a coherent defense and galvanize the public support.

By pushing for fiscal accountability the administration is co-opting the opposition's platform, by filing against GS, the administration is cutting into the reputation of the biggest Wall Street player and causing the market itself to punish the firm for its questionable practices. GS now has to shore up its reputation and prepare for a lengthly legal battle, thus removing it from what would otherwise be complete and vigorous participation in the coming banking reform efforts. GS could still choose to participate of course but its contributions will be viewed skeptically.

This is gamesmanship for a political fight and a pretty strong opening salvo for the coming challenge of trying to reform American Banking regulations.

@cobalisk - Barack Obama, cleaver man isn't he!

Too funny watching all the Teutonics "attack" the zionist, capitalismus banks when nothing, i repeat nothing will happen. The witch hunt will stop. This is a) a civil case

b) J. Paulson was "not" on the equity side of this deal c) There is no teeth in this case.

"The SEC doesn't file these cases unless it is confident it will win. I hear that Countrywide is next. "

PruCock2010, once again you write before you think. The SEC does indeed file cases and loose all the time. Just use your friend "google".

@amadik: Please add "something" or give it a rest. You didnt add anything besides your overbearing comment. Where is your value added? I dont see anything but attacks from you but no substance. At least i commented. You just want to "give orders. Typisch...

RICO or racketeering charges possibly could be brought against Goldman Sachs

IKB could possibly use Civil RICO statute in the US to burn Goldman Sachs to the ground !!!!!!!

The US SEC will never do anything to harm or damage GS, too politically well connected,

Too many SEC lawyers and US government lawyers looking for a job at GS, and those that are not, would be afraid of losing their jobs and careers if they challenged GS.

I'm not a lawyer but, the CIVIL RICO (racketeering law) can be used by private entities or citizens to bring a variety of US federal felony offenses against defendants, although the defendants can't be sent to jail, it provides for devastating treble damages,against the defendants, if successful.

CIVIL RICO (as opposed to federal Criminal RICO, which can only be brought by the US Dept. of Justice)

Anybody that was successful in winning a RICO case against GS would create a firestorm of Racketeering lawsuits against GS.

Not even GS would have enough to pay off all the plaintiffs.

Hypothetically everybody that ever lost money in a securities offering underwritten by GS would theoretically have standing to sue GS.

One of the key issues in RICO is what's called pattern & history as opposed to an isolated incident, which GS has been engaging in with impunity for many years.

I know from personal experience.

www.marylandcorruption.com

CIVIL RICO...Schade...Too funny...GS is not the Gambino crime family....

Look, Goldman Sachs is "the" most reputable firm in the world. It has the most strictist compliance guidelines. This "civil" case witch hunt if you will, is just a reason for the US govt to go after the best to make a case for financial reeform. GS Mgmt & lawyers have been at the Whote House 5 times in the last week.

So, cool your jets. This is not going anywhere. No criminal charges. If anything, what this case will reveal is that IKB should be bought down because of the risk taking they were allowed to do on behalf of the German Government, the German people and the German taxpayer. This will have remifications in Germany for financial reform to begin there once the IKB list and tapes reveal how much recklessness they did to defraud the German Govt & taxpayers.

CIVIL RICO...You surely dont jest...Too funny...I need one of those belly laughs everyday. Thank you...

What is interesting to talk about now is Greece and the looming sovereign debt crisis in Europe. Ireland, Portugal, Spain will be next for the German taxpayer. Greece's budget has been revived today as its worsening. And then their will be Katla. This will put Europe and Germany back into the 18th Century....Es tut mir sehr lied...

@xyz60:

Peschvogel (aka wmm208) is not a lawyer. I am.

Theoretically you are correct in that private plaintiffs CAN bring a civil RICO action against Goldman Sachs, as all the requisite elements seem to be present. A civil RICO action requires a "pattern of racketeering," i.e., two or more predicate criminal acts committed in the past 10 years. Wire fraud and securities fraud would qualify under the RICO statutes. The greater obstacle in a potential RICO case is to establish an ongoing criminal "enterprise" that is distinct from the defendant itself. The Abacus program that was specifically created to defraud investors could arguably be identified as said "enterprise." Paulson could certainly be named as part of the RICO enterprise whether or not he's a named defendant.

I have prosecuted several civil RICO cases with 100 percent success, each of them settling as soon as the defendants' motions to dismiss were denied.

If one wanted to really spice things up a bit, a RICO class action would be a very interesting approach, and one that I believe is viable.

People like peschvogel think that RICO is reserved for the mafia. In fact, RICO cases are brought in U.S. federal courts every day. You can confirm this by doing a simple PACER search on the U.S. Court's website.

Goldman Sachs is more powerful and dangerous than the Gambino crime family will ever be.

GS is a US domestic financial terrorist

So it's ok with you to have GS underwriting stock offering IPO's that pay money directly to known members of organized crime?

You might also want to do a Google search for Grell RICO

And also a number of interesting articles about GS at Rolling Stone

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/;kw=[3351,53763];jsessionid=F8F1AA79D23610FE335EAD29AF596B12

Great, thanks for the RICO mafia process. on what grounds and evidence will you base this? Remember, the US is not like Germany. Here, you are innocent until proven guilty. Do you have a rabbitt in a hat or do you know someone that will whistleblow for this case? Because your RICKO process or any other process dont hold an ounce of water unless you have "evidence".

Now, IKB has mounted numerous evidence through sending millions of taxpayers money illegally when lehman crashed and now faces even larger fraud against its own people by defrauding German taxpyers through risky structured invstments. The government workers at IKB should learn how to "wire" properly and "underwrite" and perform accurate "due diligence". Something not learned in the wonderful German educational system i am sure...Schade..

peschvogel, your ignorance is astounding. Where did you get your law degree?

Civil cases in America do not determine guilt or innocence. They determine liability. Evidence is available through the discovery statutes, unlike in Germany, where discovery is not available except by court order. You don't need a whistleblower to prove your case. You simply need evidence, most of which is obtained via discovery. A "preponderance" of the evidence is the standard of proof in civil cases relating to most causes of action. To prove fraud requires a slightly higher standard, which is called "clear and convincing" evidence. This is still well below the evidentiary standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt" which governs criminal cases.

xyz60 has offered you a good tip. Grell's website offers RICO IN A NUTSHELL. Grell knows his stuff. You should check it out, but I sincerely doubt that you would understand it. Meanwhile, you will continue bloviating on a subject about which you know absolutely nothing.

Yes, but here in the US you need a small piece of something called "EVIDENCE" to claim a lawsuit. In Germany, you are guilty until proven innocent, even without evidence, you will go to jail. Thats why courts in Germany are kangaroo courts.

Look, the US financial system is one of the worlds most "regulated" industries. This is all just political posturing regarding the big, bad, witch hunt GS case.

Nobody on this page has STILL proven to me or pointed a document to me or to anyone reading this ridiculous witch hunt of a case which will go NOWHERE, a single piece of "evidence".

"You simply need evidence" - PruCock2010

Where is the evidence? I see none? No fraud? no criminal charges? Nada, nein, neanche nassuno, nyet. Its all political posturing. Going nowhere. Get off your anti-zionist platform. Not happening. Not in this lifestime. Whatever mafia process or courts you wish to choose.

Now, Germany is facing massive fraud case by Greece, Spain, Italy, portugal and ireland for running trade surpluses very well knowing that German exports via price wages at low interest rates are screwing over pensioners, citizens, taxpayers, companies and governments of fellow Euronations because they could not devalue their currency in crisis. Expect this case to represent the true fraudelnt evidence against Germany as countries named above are defaulting on their debt with no bailout. As per the Maastericht Treaty, fellow Euro nations like the above CANNOT leave the Eurozone. Now, this will be heard in den Haage.There is substaintail criminal evidence that Germany is criminally to blame for running huge surpluses and exporting deflation. Schade...

Keep it up, peschvogel. You prove your ignorance with every word you write and misspell. Did you even bother to read what I wrote?

Your hatred for Germany and Germans is truly remarkable. Why do you post here other than to annoy people?

By the way, as for proving the case, that's what trials are for. Duh.

Still no "evidence", just false malicious claims based on poppycock. Now, on the case for the game which is rigged on Germany's exports, those are facts. Fellow Euro nations have also taken notice and they will file charges soon. Dont get into US law and financial products which you have no idea about. You dont know what a CDS is nor have you ever structured, originated nor liquidated one so dont comment or "try" to make points on deals you have no idea about. That deal had a higher yield and because mkts went down, we are all looking to scapegoats. For every hedger there is a speculator. This is a case for mkt regulation. Not a "wiatch hunt" against GS. Bankers will still rule in the US and US banks will still be the best in the world. Endit!

Peschvogel, maybe there are really reasons why you hate Germany.You cannot interact here with a sensible discussion , but spew your hatred toward germany . This kinds of personality also appeared in TT.I'm hoping you can get peace of mind.

mrsams: No hatred towards germans or anyone here. Just trying to make a point. No evidence against GS so malicious and ludacris claims can be made of IKB and German exports for causing the current sovereign debt crisis. And besides, when you are on top like Goldman Sachs, everyone wants to tak etheir swings at you. But GS is better than this. Again, nobody can provide any substantial evidence? The "guilty" before inncoent vs the inncoent before proven guilty seems to be the mantra here. Why all the witch hunt? Where is the evidence? Nobody can point, prove or say what evidence there is against GS but they want to cry foul. Its like you provide a contradictory statement. Nobody has any "grounds" here. Just all bad words. You know what they say about yelling into a forest?

Yelling into a forest is like trying to reason with peschvogel. Futile.

Again, no "substance" for the claims against GS. Just spam by PruCock2010. No dded value. Where is the "evidence"? There is none? Nobody is an expert on CDO, CDS but want to "comment" on how the evil speculators ruined the world? ruined the Greece's government to make poor budget mistakes years ago? Too make poor government mistakes on behalf of Portugal, Spain, Ireland, Italy also? The evil zionist speculators are making the Euro go kaput because its structurally flawed and thats the capitalists fault? The katla volcano is also a tool of mass destruction on European society because it will blow soon however, if Goldman Sachs never created volcanic swaps, Europe would be safe from the ash and toic cloud coming its way soon? boo hoo...waaa waaa. Its particularly amuzing to see how desperate people will become when seeing their own future sized up to ash but wishes to make futile attempts like "evil speculators" or "zionists" like the might Goldman Sachs....Unglaublich...

I'll let the SEC prosecute the case against Goldman Sachs. Maybe you can join the defense team.

You will be waiting for a long time with no "solution". Best wishes against Skadden Arps..

This case revolves around a very simple idea.

The type of "security" being created and sold involves collecting a bunch of individual loans and then packaging them together. There are people on both sides, so you essentially have people betting it will fail and people betting it will succeed. It's a given that somebody has to lose, since it obviously can't do both.

In this particular case, the issue at the core is simple. The company betting it would fail, Paulson & Co, was involved in picking the loans that were included. Obviously they could stack the deck. The problem, and the foundation of the case, is that the other investors, the people who were betting it would succeed, were never told that Paulson was betting against them AND had a hand in picking the loans.

It is true that the investors could have more carefully examined the package, but they took the word of Goldman about that, and that's where the fraud element comes from. Goldman told them it was good, and never told them the other side had a hand in picking the loans. Essentially they lied, or at the very least, selectively told the true, hiding some information that might well have colored the opinions of the investors.

If the SEC can prove that case, Goldman is in serious trouble. Even if they don't, Goldman's reputation will take a beating, and already is.

However, all of this aside, the real problem is that Wall Street is so busy trying to come up with new ways to make money that they no longer care if the products are ethical or even reasonable. They make money either way, though the commissions they charge for putting the things together in the first place or by selectively investing in the ones they know are good. It's more or less insider trading.

I doubt Goldman had much to do with the volcano, or with the earthquake in Chile, or even the one in Haiti. They do have their fingers in a lot of pies, but probably not the ones cooked up by Mother Nature.

If you want a sense of what this is doing, the Republicans who were strongly against ANY new regulation of Wall Street suddenly started jumping ship, and some have now said the new proposals don't go far enough! That's a sign of how serious this whole mess is.

wa

The SEC complaint against Goldman Sachs can be read here:

www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2010/comp-pr2010-59.pdf

For those interested in the ongoing schemes of Goldman Sachs you can checkout this website.

http://www.goldmansachs666.com/

Goldman Sachs had sued this website owner for his use of the Goldman Sachs name in his domain name, and apparently Goldman Sachs lost, because he is still using it.

A blurb from the above website that captures the essence of Goldman Sachs

Laws just or unjust may govern mens actions. Tyrannies may restrain or regulate their words. The machinery of propaganda may pack their minds with falsehood and deny them truth for many generations of time. But the soul of man thus held in trance or frozen in a long night can be awakened by a spark coming from God knows where and in a moment the whole structure of lies and oppression is on trial for its life.: Sir Winston Churchill

Gentleman, i admire your endurance as you struggle to have a rational discussion with our freespelling comrade!

I've given up on that struggle. I'd have better luck with the homeless crackhead babbling to himself in front of the Bahnhof.

So, you like to talk to drug users at the train station... How nice. Do you score as well? I bet you have hours of discussions on topics so near and dear to the both of you. Like the homeless man, it seems like Greece needs money...Time to pay up Germany...Schade... : )

See what i mean? A veritable psunami of idiocy.

psunami - wunder-schön. A dose of Schadenfreude, eh PruCock2010. It never ceases to amaze me. Now, you must go. Go into your pension account, your parents pension account, and please handover, or should i say bendover to Greece and pay up. Spain, Portugal, Ireland and Italy are also next in-line. The Greek way....ha ha ha ha...

Quod erat demonstrandum. QED.

peschvogel you are laughing, but it does not express of happiness.You are just desperate and like to provoke.I wish you more peace in your life.Your hatred is just so extreme that I think you need professional help.

So cute. More peace offerings coming from you is like recieving help from the wicked. We dont want your olive branch. We dont need your analyzing. I have never been more happier in my life and seeing your non-thought provoking synopsis, makes me gag. Please continue to be the inwardly looking person that you are. Dont ever look outward, be spontaneous or act friendly. It just wont work...You know what they say about yelling into a forest?

In your "state of mind" (the way you behave here)I also think everything wont work.Just hoping somebody around can take care of you.

More info on Goldman Sachs, PBS interview with Black.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04232010/transcript4.html

Also a website called 13 Bankers.

Toll, someone like you who has "stress haben" and "burnout" is telling "me" how to work? You dont know what hard work is sugar. You would never know. But you will soon find out. After your sozial welfare state is done because their is no more money and you will have to work hard because you are "incentivized" then you will understand what working is like. Its all changing this year. Better get your boots strapped on tightly. Work...Dont tell me about something you know nothing about...Its all the malaise and denial you have that you think you understand "work"....Job satistfaction levels in my country are 60%. In yours they are 13%. Work. phew. umph.

@ xyz60:

Thanks for the link to the Moyers interview. It contains the video plus a transcript, which is both useful and informative. Peschvogel ought to check it out, but he won't because he's too busy babbling and flaming and spewing hatred.

Prufrock2010

Moyer also did an interview maybe 3 or 4 nights ago with the authors of 13 Bankers, they also provided some excellent insight in Goldman Sachs. You might want to check out this interview also. One of the authors was a guy by the name of Kwak, sharp as a tack.

I heard the President's speeches. I know what is going on in Wash DC. I know that ridiculous UW standards were comprimised for low interest rate sub prime mortgages. I knwo what happened. I know whats most likely going to happen. However, you cant accuse GS of fraud. if that is the case, look at the CDO market of Deustche Bank and all the failures they made. I suppose they are next? And what about the banking irregulaties in Europe and what Basel 3 will do to banks there which are under capitalized and over leveraged (which are most). The big banks wont get broken up. they are too big and too intertwined with our global economy these days. You can force and trip up bans to fail based on regulation. GS was just an excuse for this. Its a "civil", may i remind you again, a "civil" charge where Paulson & Co was "not" the sponsor and the US housing mkt was tanking "already", so whomever bought this (IKB) was taking huge risks. Again, nothing will happen tp GS. This is just a "manifesto" for financial reform. GS is too connected to the US Givt as well as world Governments. Thanks for the link. Remem,ber, the SEC needs new revenue streams as the US Govt is cutting back. What better way to do this then to fine, fine, fine. This is also being used by the Germans as a "zionist" bank or (vermon aka glass nacht) that "purposly" tried to ruin Germany when the opposite is true,. GS is Germany's biggest advisor, GS has more wasps that work there than juden and GS did not defraud anyone for anything. Germany is just trying to drum up old hatred. This case is going no where except a fine, a GS trader named Fabbrice who will be fired and attention will turn back to the Euro's decline....

Goldman Sachs has already been accused of fraud, peschvogel. Read the complaint. More defendants to be named. More complaints to be filed. Schade...

IKB Deutsche Industriebank took a $150 million bath on Goldman?'s famed Abacus deal and is named as the key victim of the alleged GS/Paulson scheme in the SEC?'s lawsuit. But the German bank touted itself as an expert in CDOs with a top notch staff that examines investments with a fine-tooth comb.

?"CDO pools are examined with a drill down to underlying assets and stress testing of the underlying asset pools,?" IKB bragged in marketing materials obtained by The Daily Beast.

But it appears like the German bank, IKB never ?"drilled down?" enough to realize the underlying mortgages in Abacus were doomed to failure.

Another point is that IKB was owned by Lone Star "after" they bought their CDo with their "knowledgable" State owned -- CDO team.

SEC's Top Cop Oversaw Deutsche CDOs

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704388304575202562283283500.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsTop

The Busted Homes Behind a Big Bet

http://finance.yahoo.com/loans/article/109380/the-busted-homes-behind-a-big-bet?mod=loans-home

Yes, good point. Deustche Bank issued more CDO's during this time period and incurred more losses for their clients. Expect DB to get a lawsuit from the SEC.

The SEC has no jurisdiction over Deutsche Bank in Germany, peschvogel.

No, but they do have a subsidiary in New York that you could easily sue....You forgot to read the fine print....

I never forget to read the fine print. If the fraud was committed in Germany, and the victims of the fraud resided in Germany, Germany is the proper jurisdiction and venue for the action. I refer you to the U.S. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

I also urge you (yet again) to stop bloviating on topics of which you have absolutely no knowledge. I also realize that this is a futile admonition in your case.

Fraud by Deustche Bank was probably committed in Frankfurt so when the SEC raises the issue, Frankfurt will be the stage.

Wow, it seems that you have quite a bit of anger in you. However, thats what lawyers who are underpaid in Germany have...Stress haben...You should take a holiday? I mean with the nerve i touched upon, i guess you need some time away. Oh, but wait, you cant. You need to pay for Greece and the rest of the defaulting countries...Kein pause...

Quoth peschvogel:

"Fraud by Deustche Bank was probably committed in Frankfurt so when the SEC raises the issue, Frankfurt will be the stage."

What part of the SEC has no jurisdiction in Germany don't you understand?

Here comes the next witchhunt: The Atlantic, citing two Deutsche Bank traders, reports that the German bank is guilty of an identical transgression that Goldman (and to a much lesser extent, John Paulson) is in hot water for currently: i.e., DB arranged a deal for IKB designed by JP. Look for DB?'s stock to drop as expectations for a Wells Notice hit fever pitch. The reason one has not come yet is because, as we reported this weekend, Robert Khuzami has recused himself from investigating Deutsche due to his long tenure there as a lawyer (presumably supervising CDO issuance). The reason one most likely is in the making, is that, as we also reported, Greg Lippmann, or the head Deutsche CDO trader mysteriously departed last week. Look for much more weakness in fins over the next few days.

Dont underestimate that the SEC can easily sue DB "Inc." in New York...