Sen. Levin nails Goldman Sachs on a "shitty deal".

Selling "the shitty deal" was a top priority. They knew they had a "product" (somewhere in my back-issues I think I've opined upon looking at these weird mutant investments as "products" when they aren't anything tangible, understandable, or even with any understood value--I'm agin' it) that was basically worthless, but then sold it. Enthusiastically.

I fully appreciate how Levin repeats the term "shitty deal" here. It is a vulgarism, but what they did seems pretty vulgar--they "swindled". They openly misrepresented a "product". If you want a handy term for CDO--try: "pig in a poke". That term needs to be repeated to demonstrate the degree to which the responsible people at Goldman Sachs knew what they had--but were prepared to make money on it anyway--even with the knowledge that their clients would be left holding a "shitty" bag eventually.

It's not a word we commonly hear a Senator say--but it was very merited.