Goldman Sachs is a Wall Street investment bank so massively large and ever-present that at one point the media nicknamed them “the giant vampire squid” for literally having its tentacles reaching into transactions everywhere, from lenders to buyers, on mergers, acquisitions, credit, currencies, derivatives in every business sector imaginable, from the cup of coffee you buy in the morning to the punishing mortgage that you pay at the end of the month.
But one thing Goldman Sachs has not been is accountable – having largely skated straight through a number of controversies without any serious liability, from defrauding clients during the 2007-2008 financial crisis to more recent troubles such as the Malaysian sovereign wealth fund fraud or the purchase of Venezuelan sovereign debt in 2017.
This impunity has prompted one whistleblower employee at Goldman Sachs to come forward recently to contact WSW with evidence and testimony of what he describes as a specific methodology allegedly used by the bank to pay bribes to key figures, including American citizens.
In the course of his duties this past week, the whistleblower came across an account which had been opened, received a single large deposit in the exact amount of $250,000.00, which was followed by a withdraw via a cash instrument (cashier’s check or hard currency), and then the account was immediately closed on June 29, 2021, and scheduled for archive. The account was further flagged by security citing reasons of “identity theft,” which blocks access in the system for review.
When the whistleblower saw that the account had been registered under the name “Marc Goldstein,” he sought to further investigate the anomaly given that this individual could be a known individual, a Senior Vice President at competing firm Morgan Stanley, according to his
But instead what he discovered is that the account was in fact registered to completely separate individual with by the same name, “Marc J. Goldstein” with a correct corresponding social security number on the account ending in XXX-XX-8701.
Who is Marc J. Goldstein?
According to independent verification, the holder of this ghost account is believed to be Marc J Goldstein, the proprietor of MJG Arbitration & Mediation (dba Marc J Goldstein Litigation) located in New York City. According to his website, Goldstein describes himself as “an independent arbitrator and mediator of complex international and domestic business disputes.”
Seeking independent verification of the whistleblower’s claims, WSW obtained a credit report for Marc J Goldstein, which listed a below-average credit score of 648, citing “serious delinquency” and a “number of accounts with delinquency.” The only major asset listed is his home, against which he has taken out two mortgages.
According to the whistleblower, whose employment status at Goldman Sachs was independently verified by WSW, the bank allegedly seeks to buy out individuals in financial distress like Mr. Goldstein and force them to act in their interests.
“This is their methodology – they find a point of weakness in whatever transaction or dispute they are in, open a ghost account for the single purpose of a deposit and a cash withdrawal, and then archive the account under a false ‘identity theft’ flag which means that the bank absorbs the bribe as a cost,” the whistleblower alleged in a recent interview with WSW. “This is far from the only time a single use account like this has been open and shut presumably to conceal something untoward – but it is the first time I’ve seen it in such plain sight.”
Seeking further confirmation of the whistleblower’s testimony, WSW confidentially reached out to a separate financial services expert with access to Federal Reserve, ACH, and SWIFT databases. This second source was able to confirm the existence of Mr. Goldstein’s account at Goldman Sachs, and further received verbal confirmation of the account in a phone call with Goldman Sachs customer service.
The whistleblower indicated it was not clear to him/her what the purpose of the alleged payment to Mr. Goldstein was related to, however that the unusual nature of the transaction, the exact amount, and sudden closure of the account should warrant a close examination from regulatory authorities.
If any sources are able to further corroborate or inform on this story, please get in touch via our contact page.