34

I don't know why all this fight against admitting the corruption of the SEC. Yesterday I watched even the guy who pointed out Madoff's fraud try to limit his argument against that agency to being inept. He says that they are not intelligent enough to be corrupt. Why such a week and desperate looking defence?

First, corruption is far from being reserved to especially intelligent people. Second, even assuming so, the one here does not require more that turning the head away from seeing the facts. 

What kind of scheme did Madoff defraud people with? Was it something like fabricating sale numbers of a product so one would think that it requires more from the SEC to go and check?

No he was fabricating stock trades and positions. That is the core and the most basic of what the SEC should watch for. A scam of that kind at that magnitude and for that long was passed and despite how the guy here says that it takes five minutes to suspect or discover a scam by looking at the numbers. Moreover the guy himself also mentioned four or more times writing to that entity about the issue.

If that was not enough, and to blur the line between passive and active support even more, that entity supposedly investigated the scam once or twice and did not find anything wrong. Even if you had a big doubt , if you hear that it was investigated and nothing bad turned out you probably say I must be wrong then and invest your money there if you were already contemplating that. Imagine if you where to still suggest there could be a scam there what level of paranoia could have been ascribed to you. It is like the cops investigating whether a car was registered and fail to find that it was not despite having no tag number or, to take the analogy away from direct visual discovery, one that was entirely made up.