Ahhh, Goldman Sachs, the fourth branch of the government. Goldman Pays Greenmail to Make Snoops Go Away: Jonathan Weil Share | Email | Print | A A A Commentary by Jonathan Weil http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=apXH8S_cHhTw&refer=home May 14 (Bloomberg) -- Thanks to the commonwealth of Massachusetts, crusading attorneys general throughout the land now have a road map for extracting multimillion-dollar checks from Wall Street banks such as Goldman Sachs Group Inc.: Donât accuse them of anything at all. The big news from Goldman and Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley this week was a $60 million settlement, under which the investment bank resolved her officeâs investigation into its packaging of mortgage securities backed by subprime home loans. Per the usual custom in such accords, Goldman didnât admit any wrongdoing. The odd part is that Coakleyâs office didnât accuse Goldman of any wrongdoing, either. It filed no lawsuit. And it made no allegations that Goldman had violated any statutes or rules. Why did Goldman pay if Coakleyâs investigators couldnât identify any infractions to allege? Thatâs a mystery. The only statement I could squeeze out of Goldman was a one-liner from a P.R. man, Michael DuVally. âGoldman Sachs is pleased to have resolved this matter,â he said. Iâll bet it is. The closest thing to an accusation Coakley could muster during a May 11 press conference was that Goldman âhad played a roleâ in predatory lending in the state. Then again, so did a lot of other companies. By that standard, even local newspapers that printed the lendersâ ads might be in trouble. Goldman paid anyway, the same way a company might pay greenmail to a corporate raider who demands a premium price for his shares in exchange for going away. If getting Goldman to fork over a $60 million settlement is this easy, it seems every state attorney general in the country should try it. Making Amends According to Coakley, who has been investigating abusive lending in the mortgage industry since 2007, Goldman offered to make amends before her office had completed its probe or concluded whether the bank might have any liability. âThey agreed it was in their best interests to mitigate whatever damage had been done,â she told me in an interview. âTheyâre the ones who asked âWhat would satisfy you?â We laid out what we were looking for in terms of damages.â The outcome will draw no complaints from the 714 lucky Massachusetts borrowers who took out subprime loans Goldman now holds. Under the pact, Goldman will provide about $50 million of relief for residents in the state, including principal reductions of as much as 35 percent for first-lien mortgages. Coakley said many of the mortgages -- which were originated by other lenders, not Goldman -- âwere unfairâ and âdesigned to fail at the inception.â Goldman also is paying $10 million to the state, almost all of which is earmarked for its general fund, although this wasnât labeled as a fine. Investorsâ Stake The borrowers arenât the only ones who had a stake in the investigationâs outcome. So did investors who bought subprime mortgage securities from Goldman. According to the settlement agreement, the probeâs scope included whether Goldmanâs disclosures to investors in such securities were adequate. The state also was investigating whether Goldman failed âto take sufficient steps to avoid placing problem loans in securitization poolsâ or âto correct inaccurate information in securitization trustee reports.â Coakleyâs office left those questions unanswered. When I first read through the settlement agreement, which contained no findings of fact, I couldnât help but wonder if this might be one of those instances where a prospective plaintiff agrees to take a payoff in exchange for keeping silent about any damaging information it knows. You Have to Wonder Coakley said it was a fair question. She assured me, though, that this wasnât the case. âThere was no smoking gun here,â Coakley said. She said Goldmanâs $60 million offer was everything her office could have hoped for, especially given its limited budget and jurisdiction over the bankâs activities. Even if the state had filed claims against Goldman, âwe would not be able to achieve a better result,â Coakley said. That may be true. Itâs also conceivable that Goldman had no legal liability, and decided to pay the equivalent of a parking ticket just so it could get the investigation over with and stop racking up bills for outside lawyers. Yet thereâs the inescapable feeling that we have no idea what really happened here. Those 714 borrowers may be getting compensation. What much of the public is looking for, though, are answers about how some of the nationâs most powerful Wall Street banks helped drive us into our present economic mess. We didnât get any this time. Perhaps thatâs one reason Goldman is so pleased with this investigationâs resolution. (Jonathan Weil is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.) To contact the writer of this column: Jonathan Weil in New York at jweil6@bloomberg.net Last Updated: May 14, 2009 00:01 EDT