• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Zer0 Is Remaking The Law

Mike

Well-known member
Indiana is fighting Obama over Chrysler and will not back down!!
Indiana | 5/22/09 | RICHARD MOURDOCK


A LETTER FROM INDIANA STATE TREASURER RICHARD MOURDOCK

When I opted to seek the office of Treasurer of State, I never intended to be a part of a national news story. But neither did I expect that I would ever see the United States government act in a way that would take money away from retired Hoosiers. But it has done so.

The Obama administration has arbitrarily abandoned more than 100 years of law. Long-established legal precedent dictates that secured creditors are the first to have their interests protected in a bankruptcy. But not this time. This time the administration said the law was less important than the urgency of the situation and they threw away the rights of those they called "greedy speculators" and "unpatriotic".

As The Wall Street Journal recently noted, retired Hoosier policemen and retired teachers are neither greedy speculators nor unpatriotic. They are hard working people who saved and expected their funds to be protected by those with the responsibility to do so. That is the essence of my job.

Indiana is the only party to intervene in the massive Chrysler bankruptcy. We are attempting to re-establish the rule of law that protects investors from arbitrary acts of government officials in depriving citizens of their property. It is a point of utmost importance.

Some believe Indiana should not have intervened in the bankruptcy. They feel the state is threatening the future of Chrysler. When we bought the millions of dollars of Chrysler bonds on behalf of retirees, we didn't do so hoping Chrysler would fail. We bought them so they might succeed. But the action of the federal government is wrong and cannot be ignored.

I take my oath of office and fiduciary responsibilities very, very seriously. Indiana's State Troopers, millions of Hoosier taxpayers and over 100,000 retired teachers have legal rights that are to be protected. As difficult as my actions have been I would have failed in my duties if I had not acted to intervene.

Sincerely,

Richard Mourdock Indiana State Treasurer
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Mike said:
Indiana is fighting Obama over Chrysler and will not back down!!
Indiana | 5/22/09 | RICHARD MOURDOCK


A LETTER FROM INDIANA STATE TREASURER RICHARD MOURDOCK

When I opted to seek the office of Treasurer of State, I never intended to be a part of a national news story. But neither did I expect that I would ever see the United States government act in a way that would take money away from retired Hoosiers. But it has done so.

The Obama administration has arbitrarily abandoned more than 100 years of law. Long-established legal precedent dictates that secured creditors are the first to have their interests protected in a bankruptcy. But not this time. This time the administration said the law was less important than the urgency of the situation and they threw away the rights of those they called "greedy speculators" and "unpatriotic".

As The Wall Street Journal recently noted, retired Hoosier policemen and retired teachers are neither greedy speculators nor unpatriotic. They are hard working people who saved and expected their funds to be protected by those with the responsibility to do so. That is the essence of my job.

Indiana is the only party to intervene in the massive Chrysler bankruptcy. We are attempting to re-establish the rule of law that protects investors from arbitrary acts of government officials in depriving citizens of their property. It is a point of utmost importance.

Some believe Indiana should not have intervened in the bankruptcy. They feel the state is threatening the future of Chrysler. When we bought the millions of dollars of Chrysler bonds on behalf of retirees, we didn't do so hoping Chrysler would fail. We bought them so they might succeed. But the action of the federal government is wrong and cannot be ignored.

I take my oath of office and fiduciary responsibilities very, very seriously. Indiana's State Troopers, millions of Hoosier taxpayers and over 100,000 retired teachers have legal rights that are to be protected. As difficult as my actions have been I would have failed in my duties if I had not acted to intervene.

Sincerely,

Richard Mourdock Indiana State Treasurer

OT, didn't you mention a short while ago that Obama respected the rule of law?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
Mike said:
Indiana is fighting Obama over Chrysler and will not back down!!
Indiana | 5/22/09 | RICHARD MOURDOCK


A LETTER FROM INDIANA STATE TREASURER RICHARD MOURDOCK

When I opted to seek the office of Treasurer of State, I never intended to be a part of a national news story. But neither did I expect that I would ever see the United States government act in a way that would take money away from retired Hoosiers. But it has done so.

The Obama administration has arbitrarily abandoned more than 100 years of law. Long-established legal precedent dictates that secured creditors are the first to have their interests protected in a bankruptcy. But not this time. This time the administration said the law was less important than the urgency of the situation and they threw away the rights of those they called "greedy speculators" and "unpatriotic".

As The Wall Street Journal recently noted, retired Hoosier policemen and retired teachers are neither greedy speculators nor unpatriotic. They are hard working people who saved and expected their funds to be protected by those with the responsibility to do so. That is the essence of my job.

Indiana is the only party to intervene in the massive Chrysler bankruptcy. We are attempting to re-establish the rule of law that protects investors from arbitrary acts of government officials in depriving citizens of their property. It is a point of utmost importance.

Some believe Indiana should not have intervened in the bankruptcy. They feel the state is threatening the future of Chrysler. When we bought the millions of dollars of Chrysler bonds on behalf of retirees, we didn't do so hoping Chrysler would fail. We bought them so they might succeed. But the action of the federal government is wrong and cannot be ignored.

I take my oath of office and fiduciary responsibilities very, very seriously. Indiana's State Troopers, millions of Hoosier taxpayers and over 100,000 retired teachers have legal rights that are to be protected. As difficult as my actions have been I would have failed in my duties if I had not acted to intervene.

Sincerely,

Richard Mourdock Indiana State Treasurer

OT, didn't you mention a short while ago that Obama respected the rule of law?

Thats why its all going to the Bankruptcy Court- which has much more latitude than any other court- to make the decision on whether to accept the agreement- or modify it further....
The final decision is the Courts.....As Geithner pointed out to Congress the other day-- and the plan is still evolving with the courts balancing whats best for all interests- while still trying to keep an entity alive in hopes that it can recover...
And some won't like it- but their alternative was to get a penny back on the dollar (if they were lucky) when Chrysler locked their doors...
And Geithner said the government was trying to cover the taxpayers interests as #1...

What I thought was interesting is that its now the Repubs that are calling for "Nationalizing" some of these companies- when just a few months ago they were the ones screaming because they were afraid it might happen....

(Remember all you guys "Socialism" rants) :???:

Senator Corker even told Geithner if he came back now with a "Nationalism" bill for AIG- he doubted whether their would be one or two votes opposing it....
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Why are you ignoring Obama's reshuffling of the legal pecking order of assets? Why are you ignoring Obama's threatening of creditors who won't like his deal?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
Why are you ignoring Obama's reshuffling of the legal pecking order of assets? Why are you ignoring Obama's threatening of creditors who won't like his deal?

I'm not...These creditors alternative was to lock the doors- sell the assets- and get not even a penny on their dollar invested...No more Chrysler...

In Bankruptcy cases the courts have great latitude to work toward what they believe will be the survivability of the entity....

But its still up to the courts....

I know the thing that is bending your tallywhacker out of shape is the employees/ and retirement funds being given a share...And personally I hope the courts recognize the interests of the employees...After watching the Enron fiascal- and the 30-40-50 year employees that had dedicated themselves to the company lose everything-shares and retirements- while the CEO's raped the company- I've always felt the mediators/courts should pay more attention to the employees...

The alternative of not keeping viable pension funds is that the cost/burden could fall back on the government/taxpayer and The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. (PBGC) which Congress is now looking at- considering the possibility of having to possibly bail out in years to come because of all the now failing companies....
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
OT, "I'm not...These creditors alternative was to lock the doors- sell the assets- and get not even a penny on their dollar invested...No more Chrysler... "

YES YOU ARE. You didn't address either of the two issues I brought up; Intimidation and ignoring the established law.
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
Because, Sandy, Barry, like AT, is a law unto himself. And like AT, Barry won't get a second term, either. One term is enough for them to fornicate things up.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
OT, "I'm not...These creditors alternative was to lock the doors- sell the assets- and get not even a penny on their dollar invested...No more Chrysler... "

YES YOU ARE. You didn't address either of the two issues I brought up; Intimidation and ignoring the established law.

There is a long history of Presidents and Administrations getting directly involved with mediation (intimidation if you want to call it that) and reorganization going back thru Teddy's day, FDR, Nixon- the first Chrysler bailout-Penn Central Railroad, the Steel Industry, etc - especially when taxpayer dollars were involved.....

The story is that FDR declared a bank holiday-- took all the bankers in a room- locked the door- and wouldn't let them out until they came up with some plan for keeping the country solvent and stop the foreclosures and runs on the bank....
I sometimes think thats what should have occurred here with all the Bankers/Wallstreet fatcats--but the room should have been a jail cell.... :wink:

And its up to the Courts to determine if it follows established law...If it doesn't they won't approve it.....But like I said- there are Godzillion pages and precedent in Bankruptcy/Reorganization law- and the Courts have lots of leeway...
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Damnit OT, Obama THREATENED people! Why do you support that crap. Here you have the government overstepping it's bounds, ignoring law, and then THREATENING entities that stand up for their rights!

Read this;
Business Insider reports that more than one Chrysler senior creditor has corroborated Thomas Lauria’s allegation that the Obama administration threatened them with public attacks if they didn’t surrender their contractual rights. One of their sources says that the Obama team comprises some of the worst “ends justify the means” people he’s ever encountered (via HA reader Geoff A):

Creditors to Chrysler describe negotiations with the company and the Obama administration as “a farce,” saying the administration was bent on forcing their hands using hardball tactics and threats.

Conversations with administration officials left them expecting that they would be politically targeted, two participants in the negotiations said.


HOW THE HELL CAN YOU LOOK THE OTHER WAY AND/OR DEFEND THAT?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
Damnit OT, Obama THREATENED people! Why do you support that crap. Here you have the government overstepping it's bounds, ignoring law, and then THREATENING entities that stand up for their rights!

Read this;
Business Insider reports that more than one Chrysler senior creditor has corroborated Thomas Lauria’s allegation that the Obama administration threatened them with public attacks if they didn’t surrender their contractual rights. One of their sources says that the Obama team comprises some of the worst “ends justify the means” people he’s ever encountered (via HA reader Geoff A):

Creditors to Chrysler describe negotiations with the company and the Obama administration as “a farce,” saying the administration was bent on forcing their hands using hardball tactics and threats.

Conversations with administration officials left them expecting that they would be politically targeted, two participants in the negotiations said.


HOW THE HELL CAN YOU LOOK THE OTHER WAY AND/OR DEFEND THAT?

Well after seeing where the years of "Hands Off- Asleep at the Wheel" policy got our economy- its kind of refreshing to see an Administration interested enough to take off the gloves and fight to keep some industry alive in this country....

Arbitration/mediation- especially when you're coming from a weak (penny on the dollar) position- never has been for the faint of heart...

And if telling these folks that if they hold up the deal trying to get funds that ain't there anymore- and cause it to end up with no mediated deal- an auctioned off entity- and no more Chrysler--- that you will make it public who wrecked the deal and doomed the Corporation is intimidation--- so be it....
 

MsSage

Well-known member
Sandy dont bother. OT is only out for his ounce of flesh. Untill he sees someone pay no matter who or at what cost he refuses to see the truth.

I only hope he gets his payment SOON and it is before the country has been thrown in another Civil War.
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
So if all the sale barns were in financial trouble, but you ran your calves through anyway, you would be happy to accept pennies on the dollar for them.........if Barry told you to?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
loomixguy said:
So if all the sale barns were in financial trouble, but you ran your calves through anyway, you would be happy to accept pennies on the dollar for them.........

Doesn't happen- those funds are guaranteed by GIPSA....And from what I'm hearing- happily a new GIPSA that is going to be much more producer oriented than the last crew.... :)
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Sandhusker said:
Damnit OT, Obama THREATENED people! Why do you support that crap. Here you have the government overstepping it's bounds, ignoring law, and then THREATENING entities that stand up for their rights!

Read this;
Business Insider reports that more than one Chrysler senior creditor has corroborated Thomas Lauria’s allegation that the Obama administration threatened them with public attacks if they didn’t surrender their contractual rights. One of their sources says that the Obama team comprises some of the worst “ends justify the means” people he’s ever encountered (via HA reader Geoff A):

Creditors to Chrysler describe negotiations with the company and the Obama administration as “a farce,” saying the administration was bent on forcing their hands using hardball tactics and threats.

Conversations with administration officials left them expecting that they would be politically targeted, two participants in the negotiations said.


HOW THE HELL CAN YOU LOOK THE OTHER WAY AND/OR DEFEND THAT?

Well after seeing where the years of "Hands Off- Asleep at the Wheel" policy got our economy- its kind of refreshing to see an Administration interested enough to take off the gloves and fight to keep some industry alive in this country....

Arbitration/mediation- especially when you're coming from a weak (penny on the dollar) position- never has been for the faint of heart...

And if telling these folks that if they hold up the deal trying to get funds that ain't there anymore- and cause it to end up with no mediated deal- an auctioned off entity- and no more Chrysler--- that you will make it public who wrecked the deal and doomed the Corporation is intimidation--- so be it....

You don't get it, OT. I don't understand how you can not see what is going on here. Forget about Chrysler for a second. What you have here is a case of the government strongarming citizens who are doing nothing more than doing what is their right and fudiciary responsibility to do! THE GOVERNMENT IS THREATENING IT'S CITIZENS!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is Soviet Union crap, and you're saying it is OK? Good Gawd, OT, have you completely lost it? I don't care what the reason is, or what level/party/who the government official is, this can not be allowed to even be thought of! How in the heck can you consider yourself a Constitutionalist when you can some up with some way to excuse this type of behavior?
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
What is there to stop Barry from throwing GIPSA under the bus like he did Chrysler's SECURED CREDITORS???

Your excrement is weak at best. Wonder how loud you'd holler if it happened to you, eh??
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
Oldtimer said:
Sandhusker said:
Damnit OT, Obama THREATENED people! Why do you support that crap. Here you have the government overstepping it's bounds, ignoring law, and then THREATENING entities that stand up for their rights!

Read this;
Business Insider reports that more than one Chrysler senior creditor has corroborated Thomas Lauria’s allegation that the Obama administration threatened them with public attacks if they didn’t surrender their contractual rights. One of their sources says that the Obama team comprises some of the worst “ends justify the means” people he’s ever encountered (via HA reader Geoff A):

Creditors to Chrysler describe negotiations with the company and the Obama administration as “a farce,” saying the administration was bent on forcing their hands using hardball tactics and threats.

Conversations with administration officials left them expecting that they would be politically targeted, two participants in the negotiations said.


HOW THE HELL CAN YOU LOOK THE OTHER WAY AND/OR DEFEND THAT?

Well after seeing where the years of "Hands Off- Asleep at the Wheel" policy got our economy- its kind of refreshing to see an Administration interested enough to take off the gloves and fight to keep some industry alive in this country....

Arbitration/mediation- especially when you're coming from a weak (penny on the dollar) position- never has been for the faint of heart...

And if telling these folks that if they hold up the deal trying to get funds that ain't there anymore- and cause it to end up with no mediated deal- an auctioned off entity- and no more Chrysler--- that you will make it public who wrecked the deal and doomed the Corporation is intimidation--- so be it....

You don't get it, OT. I don't understand how you can not see what is going on here. Forget about Chrysler for a second. What you have here is a case of the government strongarming citizens who are doing nothing more than doing what is their right and fudiciary responsibility to do! THE GOVERNMENT IS THREATENING IT'S CITIZENS!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is Soviet Union crap, and you're saying it is OK? Good Gawd, OT, have you completely lost it? I don't care what the reason is, or what level/party/who the government official is, this can not be allowed to even be thought of! How in the heck can you consider yourself a Constitutionalist when you can some up with some way to excuse this type of behavior?

And if telling these folks that if they hold up the deal trying to get funds that ain't there anymore- and cause it to end up with no mediated deal- an auctioned off entity- and no more Chrysler--- that you will make it public who wrecked the deal and doomed the Corporation is intimidation--- so be it....Sounds like being honest- not Russia....

They were all offered a percentage on their dollar (about the same they will get if Chrysler is auctioned off)- and no equity in the new company (which they won't have if there is no company anyway).....

The proposed deal at least keeps the integrity of the pension system- and keeps the taxpayer from possibly having to pick it up thru the PBGC- keeps the employee health care system operating, rather than taxpayers picking up the cost thru medicare/medicaid- and keeps trained employees readily available for the new entity to start production with....

And remember they are now using US taxpayer money to operate with....If not- I would say hands off--but now with taxpayer money on the line (and more to be put in in the future if the deal goes thru) I believe the government not only has the right but the duty to negotiate the best deal they can to best guarantee the viability of the new entity- and to oversee how the taxpayers dollar is being spent...

Sandy- some of your own Repubs can see the extensiveness the Bush Bust has done to the country and now calling for "NATIONALIZATION" of some entities...

And as far as these investment firms that wrongly put their investors money into Chrysler stock-- they no longer have any credibilty to lose....The credibility/trust in bankers/financiers in this country is lower than a snakes belly anymore....

And the bottom line- its up to a Court to make the final decision....
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
loomixguy said:
What is there to stop Barry from throwing GIPSA under the bus like he did Chrysler's SECURED CREDITORS???

Your excrement is weak at best. Wonder how loud you'd holler if it happened to you, eh??

It is happening to him, he doesn't realize what IT is. I'm sure his Grandkids will thank him for his integrity after he is gone.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
OT, "And if telling these folks that if they hold up the deal....."

And that justifies the goverment breaking the law and then threatening the citizens that want law to be followed? Did you read the following?

"... the Obama administration threatened them with public attacks if they didn’t surrender their contractual rights. One of their sources says that the Obama team comprises some of the worst “ends justify the means” people he’s ever encountered.

THAT is acceptable government for you? THAT is following the rule of law? Come one, man!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
"... the Obama administration threatened them with public attacks if they didn’t surrender their contractual rights. One of their sources says that the Obama team comprises some of the worst “ends justify the means” people he’s ever encountered.

THAT is acceptable government for you? THAT is following the rule of law? Come one, man!

Thats exactly what I said-- they told them that if they didn't agree to the deal (which I looked up and it is actually 29 cents on the dollar the creditors were offered)- and the merger didn't go thru because of that- they would make it public who killed the deal- and why the US no longer has a Chrysler industry...
And since the major investor in Chrysler will be the US taxpayer- I believe that gives the government the right to dictate terms to protect the taxpayer investment...
And to a great extent its these GREED driven investment firms that didn't do any oversight thru the Chrysler/GM boards that caused the situation they are in....

Which could end up in thousands more out of work in the US and Canada (with GM)--unfunded insurance and pension plans which would then be on the backs of the taxpayers to fund- thousands more foreclosures- hundreds more subcontractor closures- etc. etc...

I'll agree thats playing hardball- but several economists have also predicted that a drug out bankruptcy/auction off of the auto dealers (Chrysler and GM) would put the country into a depression of the folds of the 1930's- and prolong economic recovery for years...

Heck- if you don't like it- dig up some of that WTF Nebraska Bank moldy money and go up there and offer Chrysler a cash $1 for $1 deal and you can be in the auto industry.... A second Henry Ford :wink:
 
Top