[wantsBU2wint]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/17/us/politics/17obama.html

The president said that he has instructed Timothy F. Geithner to “pursue every single legal avenue” to block bonuses to the insurer’s top executives.

 

[3D.]

Tim, the ex-president of the NY federal reserve... hahhahahahha

that's like asking a pervert to gaurd the curtains in a ladys dressing room

it is moronic to think that Obama and geihtner were not aware of these projected bonuses, and even more moronic to think that they will try and stop them from being granted.

turn on your tv and you will get your "yes" man, don't worry it works everytime...

 

[$tinkle]

only problem w/ blocking the bonuses:

While the Senate was constructing the $787 billion stimulus last month, Dodd added an executive-compensation restriction to the bill. The provision, now called "the Dodd Amendment" by the Obama Administration provides an "exception for contractually obligated bonuses agreed on before Feb. 11, 2009"--which exempts the very AIG bonuses Dodd and others are now seeking to tax.

Dodd's original amendment did not include that exemption, and the Connecticut Senator denied inserting the provision.

"I can't point a finger at someone who was responsible for putting those dates in," Dodd told FOX. "I can tell you this much, when my language left the senate, it did not include it. When it came back, it did."

"Because of negotiations with the Treasury Department and the bill Conferees, several modifications were made," Dodd Spokesperson Kate Szostak in a response to FOX Business.

gee, i wonder why dodd was so vocal & ardent about ensuring they got theirs...

 

[Defenestrated]

Epic fail, Dodd is probably :facepalm: right now.

 

[stevew]

Epic fail, Dodd is probably :facepalm: right now.

No....he has received a lot of money from AIG...this was his kickback to them.

 

[Defenestrated]

He wont name names because the name would be Dodd

 

[stevew]

if the senators/congressmen had done their lite reading....none of this would be a surprise.

it was in what they passed.

 

[$tinkle]

Will Obama, McCain, Dodd Return Contributions From AIG Employees?

 

[4xBoy]

Will Obama, McCain, Dodd Return Contributions From AIG Employees?

Greed knows no bounds.

 

[dan-o]

Welcome to the harsh reality of being in the spotlight Dems.
I don't expect anyone in DC to be spotless but BO and Co better live up to the standards they claim to uphold.

 

[kidwoo]

Will Obama, McCain, Dodd Return Contributions From AIG Employees?

Their generosity included more than $23,000 to Obama's campaign.

Both Obama and Republican presidential candidate John McCain raked in much larger sums from AIG earlier in the year. Obama collected a total of $130,000 from AIG in 2008, while McCain accepted a total of $59,499.

Oh my.

With all that money how could this administration not be completely beholden to these guys? They practically floated the campaign.

big fvcking deal

If anything it just shows even more that AIG are a bunch of tools.

 

[dan-o]

The amounts of the donations aren't noteworthy. The denial and subsequent backpeddling regarding OK'ing the bonuses is the issue as Dodd is full of $hit. Without public outrage re: the bonuses the Admin would've let them fly uncontested, apparently.

 

[kidwoo]

The denial and subsequent backpeddling regarding OK'ing the bonuses is the issue as Dodd is full of $hit.

Absolutely. But the notion that AIG has this huge favor to hold over the administration's heads due to some massive contribution is stupid. You and I could have probably donated that much.

But yeah. Fvck dodd

 

[$tinkle]

Oh my.

With all that money how could this administration not be completely beholden to these guys? They practically floated the campaign.

big fvcking deal

If anything it just shows even more that AIG are a bunch of tools.

if the amount is trivial, why go after AIG? isn't like they're talking out of both sides of their mouth, and everything they've done is legally binding.

it is congress who's trying to either abrogate, re-negotiate, or nullify the contract they already underwrote

 

[$tinkle]

Absolutely. But the notion that AIG has this huge favor to hold over the administration's heads due to some massive contribution is stupid. You and I could have probably donated that much.

But yeah. Fvck dodd

i think if i were involved w/ a contract @ work & they met my salary w/ beak wetting, there would be more than a few legal hangups. this is more than just "f*** dodd"; this is fodder for the republicans to say "i told you so" all day long.

and that doesn't make for good future legislation either. they now can claim moral high ground w/ nearly absolute impunity b/c of one guy

 

[kidwoo]

if the amount is trivial, why go after AIG? isn't like they're talking out of both sides of their mouth, and everything they've done is legally binding.

it is congress who's trying to either abrogate, re-negotiate, or nullify the contract they already underwrote

Uh.....I was talking about the campaign contributions you brought up, not the big thing about the other stuff and junk and things.

The lack of (proper) oversight on all these big ass handouts from both administrations has been pretty pathetic. AIG is just the topic du jour.

 

[kidwoo]

i think if i were involved w/ a contract @ work & they met my salary w/ beak wetting, there would be more than a few legal hangups. this is more than just "f*** dodd"; this is fodder for the republicans to say "i told you so" all day long.

and that doesn't make for good future legislation either. they now can claim moral high ground w/ nearly absolute impunity b/c of one guy

At least it's more legit of a case than a blowjob.

 

[3D.]

i want to own some really sweeeet toxic assets...

Forget AIG Bonuses--The Next Bailout is Here
By Ruth Conniff, March 18, 2009

Democrats from Andrew Cuomo to Barney Frank to Barack Obama are demanding that the 418 AIG employees who received bonuses give them back. Sure, it's outrageous that the very people who drove AIG off the cliff, along with a whole lot of other financial firms, walked away with million-dollar bonuses paid with taxpayer bailout money. But as the Wall Street Journal opinion page points out, "Taxpayers have already put up $173 billion, or more than a thousand times the amount of those bonuses, to fund the government's AIG 'rescue.'"

And there is more to come.

The Obama Administration is putting the finishing touches on another big bank bailout. Called the Public Private Investor Partnership (PPIP), it is the brainchild of the Treasury Secretary from Wall Street, Tim Geithner. Under the plan, the government will give our money to hedge fund managers to buy "toxic" assets for more than they are worth. The banks that created these toxic turkeys will use the money from the sales to recapitalize themselves. Everyone comes out ahead except, of course, the taxpayers, who are essentially funneling money to hedge funds to buy bad assets for more than they are worth. The other bonus for the banks in this plan, as Yves Smith points out, is that they get to avoid giving the toxic assets any real market value. Less transparency and more transfers of wealth from taxpayers to hedge fund managers.

So much for the "free market."

Yves Smith writes: "This is what readers ought to be upset about. The AIG bonuses are rounding error, and a done deal. This (the PPIP) is billions to avoid price discovery . . . "

$750 billion, to be precise--plus what remains of the $700 billion bank bailout Congress already approved.

Smith reports that the bailout will likely have two parts: a subsidy to the hedge funds that buy the bad assets, and another one for the banks that sell them, to make up for the low prices investors are willing to pay. It's socialism for bankers and hedge fund managers.

Meanwhile, as AIG CEO Edward Liddy testified on Capitol Hill Wednesday, members of Congress were up in arms about the bonuses he says he was "contractually obligated" to pay executives. Liddy once claimed he had to pay the money in order to retain the talented financial products executives who helped run the company into the ground. The fact that 52 of them left AIG, cash in hand, dampened that argument. On the Hill today, Liddy called on AIG employees to "do the right thing" and return "at least half" of the money if they got a bonus of more than $100,000. I guess a $50,000 bonus is what passes for punishment on Wall Street for putting your company into bankruptcy--or what would have been bankruptcy had the government not bailed out t AIG.

And speaking of bankruptcy, Liddy told Congress that had AIG gone bankrupt and been put into receivership, the contracts that awarded those bonuses would have been void. Bankruptcy would have saved the taxpayers not only $165 million in bonuses, but also the latest $30 billion in AIG bailout. Liddy pointed this out to the Fed a month ago, according to Brad Sherman, Democrat of California, in the Washington Post.

Begging Barney Frank not to subpoena the names of the executives who got bonuses, Liddy read aloud a death threat from an outraged citizen who would like to strangle AIG execs with piano wire.

The Obama Administration and Congressional Democrats are responding to outpouring of anger.

But the truth is, the bonuses to greedy execs are just a sideshow. It's the government's willingness to give away hundreds of billions of dollars in yet another massive bailout that people should be shouting about.

http://www.progressive.org/mag/rc031809.html


just think, when all this wall street bull**** has collapsed, we'll get to see them do it all again with carbon credit cap and trade

 

[DaveW]

You know as time goes on and more details of the big banks behavior comes to light the more certain I am that they should be left to sink or swim without government assistance.

Story's like This one make be think that they as greedy and self serving at everyone else's expense as ever and are laughing at us.


Time to exercise the Tyler Durdan option maybe?

 

[IH8Rice]

correct me if im wrong, but isnt unconstitutional to put excessive taxes on the people who are getting the bonuses? i thought i heard some geeks talking about that on Fox i believe ( i know its not the best place for news)

 

[$tinkle]

i was reading something about "bill of attainder", but not sure if it could stick, b/c no law was broken

 

[Secret Squirrel]

correct me if im wrong, but isnt unconstitutional to put excessive taxes on the people who are getting the bonuses? i thought i heard some geeks talking about that on Fox i believe ( i know its not the best place for news)

It's called the "Arrogant blowhard that accepts a bonus for f*cking the company and a bunch of other bullsh*t that you pulled to have your cake and eat it too. F*ckers." tax. And I think it should be perfectly constitutional.