Cramer recently broke down the situation in the following post. “It is time. It is time for Lehman (LEH) to put up its defense. Not the talking one. But the one it used in 1998 when everyone thought it was a goner. It needs to go in and start buying its stock. Think about it. If Lehman is right and self-styled nemesis David Einhorn from Greenlight Capital is wrong about the firm needing capital, this has to be one of the greatest buying opportunities Richard Fuld, the CEO, has ever had. Not since 1998, when he bid me $31 for a million shares in order to take advantage of the endless raids that his firm had because of alleged problems in London, has Richard Fuld had such a great chance to make a statement. But here's the flip side. Without such a vow and show of not just confidence but opportunity, the market is going to determine that Greenlight is right and the spiral will be endless. We know what happens when a company needs capital. You get a Washington Mutual (WM), a Nat City (NCC), an AIG (AIG) or worse, a Bear (BSC). We all know this. We also know that these companies are surprisingly easy to break in a world where money is fungible. Still, there is worth here. Lots of worth. I know that the earnings power has been impaired, but I do not believe the capitalization is impaired. I don't know if that is the case unless I see a buyback. It is what makes Goldman Sachs (GS) different. Why now? Because the stock is clearly down artificially if Einhorn's wrong. A panic valuation. The silence of the non-buys is speaking every bit as loudly as Einhorn against this great institution.”

Cramer also recently broke down AIG in the post below. “If you think the disclosure is bad for these financial insurers here, it is every bit as poor over there in the U.K., where we just learned that housing prices dropped the most ever on record. Most of the major monoline insurers, and of course AIG (AIG), have exposure to Britain in ways that we are all too familiar with over here. The only difference is that I believe the trajectory was considered far more certain over there than here. AIG in particular bragged about this business in December, to show their diversification away from the U.S. Kind of like how Bear (BSC) bragged that by putting a lot of different mortgages together from Florida and California and the rest of the country and varying their ratings you have created a wondrous, diversified instrument called a CDO. Yesterday, Erin Burnett, my partner in "Stop Trading" on CNBC, asked me about all of those assets that AIG has, like the great Chinese business, the leasing business and the like. They are all great businesses. But Citigroup (C) had great businesses, and they weren't enough to offset the losses. AIG's looking a lot like Citigroup -- lots of assets generating a solid return that is easily wiped out by the magnification of losses through leverage. Or, in English, AIG is better than an Ambac (ABK) or an MBIA (MBI) for certain, but that doesn't mean you have to own the darned thing.”

From a recent Mad Money show: "This is a company I've been behind for a long time. This is a great supermarket stock with a lot of great brands."

From a recent Mad Money show: "These are big speculative Chinese stocks. Maybe I've been too conservative here, but if you want to speculate with non-retirement money, go ahead."

From a recent Mad Money show: "This is a fuel cell and battery company. I can't get behind that one, sorry."

From a recent Mad Money show: "It's had a big run. I don't think its sustainable at this level. I want you to take profits on that one. I fear people giving back gains."

From a recent Mad Money show: "Statoil has a checkered past in finding new oil. It is not my favorite oil. I can't get behind it."

From a recent Mad Money show: "I've been puzzled with why this one is going down. Proctor has raw cost problems, but it has superior technology. I think Proctor is right to buy here."