In the wake of Friday’s civil fraud complaint filed against Goldman Sachs, the blogosphere has had all weekend to reflect upon the implications of the news. Here’s some of the best commentary: “Wall Street has gotten a lot of mileage,” notes Ezra Klein, “out of the accusation that the political system simply doesn’t understand how Wall Street works. And that’s, well, correct. The problem is that Wall Street also doesn’t understand how Wall Street works.” [Ezra Klein] It’s not just that banks have gotten too big to fail. As the Goldman case is making clear, they’ve gotten too big to obey the law. [The Baseline Scenario] Reluctantly coming to Goldman’s defense, Jeff Matthews finds Exhibit A: Evidence that the bank’s alleged victims in this deal weren’t quite so innocent. Goldman, he writes, “did not, it would seem, drag them kicking and screaming. More like skipping and singing.” [Jeff Matthews Is Not Making This Up.] Even so, there’s a real threat to Goldman here: All the additional dirty laundry that could be aired during this case’s discovery process. [Matthew Yglesias] Finally, Barry Ritholtz comes up with a provocative baker’s dozen worth of questions that the SEC’s actions raise. Such as Question #11: “What does this mean for ‘Government Sachs’? Might GS see their privileged positions within Governments (US and others) curtailed?” Discuss. [The Big Picture] Follow MONEY on Twitter at http://twitter.com/money.