We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/

Ms McLean, why don’t you follow the money? Who cost the taxpayer the most cash? Who made the largest losses? Who is still costing the taxpayer the most? When we are talking about misrepresentations about underlying mortgages, who was specifically paid a fee to investigate the underlyings?( Hint it was Frannie ). So much wrong with her article, almost every single line is untrue.

Mr Salmon why do you link to these clueless wankers?

Posted by Danny_Black | Report as abusive

Beautifully ironic. Assange has risen to fame by broadcasting details of private and classified documents, exposing evidence of possible crimes. Now the tables have been turned on him, with the most private documents of his life (and evidence of a possible crime) published for all to see.

Whatever his lawyers think of this, I’m sure Assange has no objection to “trial in the public press”. That is his preferred form of trial.

Posted by TFF | Report as abusive

Rorty is the man!

I sorely wish Mike Konczal hadn’t named his blog after Rorty. No doubt he did it to honor him, but “Rortybomb” comes off sounding like one of those tribute rock bands dedicated to playing Van Halen or Boston or Jethro Tull.

Kids, don’t name your blog “Rawlsbomb.”

And don’t mistake Mike Konczal’s ideas for Richard Rorty’s.

Posted by dedalus | Report as abusive