Not Funny: Then Bush, Now Obama

[Kathianne]

Control & Power:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123879833094588163.html


Obama Wants to Control the Banks
There's a reason he refuses to accept repayment of TARP money.
By STUART VARNEY

I must be naive. I really thought the administration would welcome the return of bank bailout money. Some $340 million in TARP cash flowed back this week from four small banks in Louisiana, New York, Indiana and California. This isn't much when we routinely talk in trillions, but clearly that money has not been wasted or otherwise sunk down Wall Street's black hole. So why no cheering as the cash comes back?

My answer: The government wants to control the banks, just as it now controls GM and Chrysler, and will surely control the health industry in the not-too-distant future. Keeping them TARP-stuffed is the key to control. And for this intensely political president, mere influence is not enough. The White House wants to tell 'em what to do. Control. Direct. Command....

...Under the Bush team a prominent and profitable bank, under threat of a damaging public audit, was forced to accept less than $1 billion of TARP money. The government insisted on buying a new class of preferred stock which gave it a tiny, minority position. The money flowed to the bank. Arguably, back then, the Bush administration was acting for purely economic reasons. It wanted to recapitalize the banks to halt a financial panic.

Fast forward to today, and that same bank is begging to give the money back. The chairman offers to write a check, now, with interest. He's been sitting on the cash for months and has felt the dead hand of government threatening to run his business and dictate pay scales. He sees the writing on the wall and he wants out. But the Obama team says no, since unlike the smaller banks that gave their TARP money back, this bank is far more prominent. The bank has also been threatened with "adverse" consequences if its chairman persists. That's politics talking, not economics....

[Kathianne]

Interesting times indeed. Thinking about the above, how many banks are NOT lending because they are waiting to return TARP $$$? I thought this was all about 'unfreezing' credit?

If the gov't can control and direct the banks, then complete the take over of GM, what's to prevent them from not underpricing GM products, effectively putting Ford and the foreign makers in US, out of business? Throwing tariffs on imports? Force the 'green cars' upon the people? What were those famous USSR cars the world was clamoring to buy in the 70's? :rolleyes:

Will be interesting to see which industries they look at next. :coffee:

Hint I saw on another board:


http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2009/04/should-obama-control-internet


...gives the president the ability to "declare a cybersecurity emergency" and shut down or limit Internet traffic in any "critical" information network "in the interest of national security." The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president.

The bill does not only add to the power of the president. It also grants the Secretary of Commerce "access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access." This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws....


http://cdt.org/security/CYBERSEC4.pdf if you want to see the bill.

[Kathianne]

It is well established that Stuart Varney often advances falsehoods and distortions.

Do not derail.

[bullypulpit]

Control & Power:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123879833094588163.html

It is sensible policy to audit the books of those banks which have accepted TARP funds. Find out which are solvent or insolvent...Put the insolvent ones into receivership, dispose of their assets and reopen them under responsible management. That's what the FDIC is for.

Shift the remaining TARP funds to the FDIC to do the job and get it over with.

And given Varney's association with FOX Noise, his credibility is questionable.

[Kathianne]

It is sensible policy to audit the books of those banks which have accepted TARP funds. Find out which are solvent or insolvent...Put the insolvent ones into receivership, dispose of their assets and reopen them under responsible management. That's what the FDIC is for.

Shift the remaining TARP funds to the FDIC to do the job and get it over with.
Bully, you obviously did not read the article. The bank was threatened with audit by Bush team if didn't accept TARP funds. Seeing the cap on salaries, etc., the bank that DIDN'T WANT TO TAKE THE FUNDS, now wishes to return said with interest. However, they are being intimidated by Obama team, thus the title.

[Jagger]

Fast forward to today, and that same bank is begging to give the money back.
What is the name of the bank?


The chairman offers to write a check, now, with interest. What is the chairman's name?


He's been sitting on the cash for months and has felt the dead hand of government threatening to run his business and dictate pay scales. Show us some evidence that the government is threatening to run his business and dictate pay scales.


Which brings me to the Pay for Performance Act, just passed by the House. This is an outstanding example of class warfare. I'm an Englishman. We invented class warfare, and I know it when I see it. This legislation allows the administration to dictate pay for anyone working in any company that takes a dime of TARP money. This is a whip with which to thrash the unpopular bankers, a tool to advance the Obama administration's goal of controlling the financial system.

Stuart Varney is obviously another of one the Flying Butt Monkeys that populate the ranks of the Right Wing Socialists who want taxpayers to foot the bill for unreasonable and excessive salaries for employees of failed financial firms.

[Kathianne]

What is the name of the bank?

Read the article. Accept or don't. As I said, don't derail.

[Jagger]

they are being intimidated by Obama team, thus the title.
Varney is probably lying. I'll believe his allegations when you produce some evidence.

[Jagger]

Read the article. Accept or don't. As I said, don't derail. Huh?

[bullypulpit]

Bully, you obviously did not read the article. The bank was threatened with audit by Bush team if didn't accept TARP funds. Seeing the cap on salaries, etc., the bank that DIDN'T WANT TO TAKE THE FUNDS, now wishes to return said with interest. However, they are being intimidated by Obama team, thus the title.

That WAS the Bush administration, and why should they worry about an audit if their bools were clean?

[Kathianne]

That WAS the Bush administration, and why should they worry about an audit if their bools were clean?

Using the FDIC to threaten audits on banks that don't want to partake is akin to the IRS auditing you because you disagree with the administration.

It takes time, loss of productivity, stress on employees, etc. I can't believe you'd condone such. I thought you wanted transparency and accountability.

[Jagger]

Our Government Engaged In EXTORTION With Our Banks!

By Judge Andrew Napolitano
FOX News Senior Judicial Analyst

The Federal government committed extortion and they’re not being held accountable. What’s next? Listen to this: I recently met with the Chair and CEO of one of the country’s top 10 bank holding companies. His bank is worth in excess of $250 billion, has no bad debt, no credit default swaps, no liquidity problems, and no subprime loans. He told me that he and others were forced by Treasury and FDIC threats to take TARP funds, even though he did not want or need them.
http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/04/02/napolitano_fdic/


No evidence whatsoever to support the allegations.

[red states rule]

Obama is clear - he wants the Feds to run the nations banks. Banks want to repay but are not allowed to per Pres Obama


Obama Wants to Control the Banks
There's a reason he refuses to accept repayment of TARP money


By STUART VARNEY
I must be naive. I really thought the administration would welcome the return of bank bailout money. Some $340 million in TARP cash flowed back this week from four small banks in Louisiana, New York, Indiana and California. This isn't much when we routinely talk in trillions, but clearly that money has not been wasted or otherwise sunk down Wall Street's black hole. So why no cheering as the cash comes back?

My answer: The government wants to control the banks, just as it now controls GM and Chrysler, and will surely control the health industry in the not-too-distant future. Keeping them TARP-stuffed is the key to control. And for this intensely political president, mere influence is not enough. The White House wants to tell 'em what to do. Control. Direct. Command.

It is not for nothing that rage has been turned on those wicked financiers. The banks are at the core of the administration's thrust: By managing the money, government can steer the whole economy even more firmly down the left fork in the road.

If the banks are forced to keep TARP cash -- which was often forced on them in the first place -- the Obama team can work its will on the financial system to unprecedented degree. That's what's happening right now.

Here's a true story first reported by my Fox News colleague Andrew Napolitano (with the names and some details obscured to prevent retaliation). Under the Bush team a prominent and profitable bank, under threat of a damaging public audit, was forced to accept less than $1 billion of TARP money. The government insisted on buying a new class of preferred stock which gave it a tiny, minority position. The money flowed to the bank. Arguably, back then, the Bush administration was acting for purely economic reasons. It wanted to recapitalize the banks to halt a financial panic.

Fast forward to today, and that same bank is begging to give the money back. The chairman offers to write a check, now, with interest. He's been sitting on the cash for months and has felt the dead hand of government threatening to run his business and dictate pay scales. He sees the writing on the wall and he wants out. But the Obama team says no, since unlike the smaller banks that gave their TARP money back, this bank is far more prominent. The bank has also been threatened with "adverse" consequences if its chairman persists. That's politics talking, not economics.

Think about it: If Rick Wagoner can be fired and compact cars can be mandated, why can't a bank with a vault full of TARP money be told where to lend? And since politics drives this administration, why can't special loans and terms be offered to favored constituents, favored industries, or even favored regions? Our prosperity has never been based on the political allocation of credit -- until now.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123879833094588163.html

[red states rule]

It is sensible policy to audit the books of those banks which have accepted TARP funds. Find out which are solvent or insolvent...Put the insolvent ones into receivership, dispose of their assets and reopen them under responsible management. That's what the FDIC is for.

Shift the remaining TARP funds to the FDIC to do the job and get it over with.

And given Varney's association with FOX Noise, his credibility is questionable.

Many many people tried to warn the public about Obama and the current crop of liberals now in charge.

You were warned and you didn't listen

So now BP you do what you do best - ignore the actions of your guy Obama and attack the messenger who is speaking out against your guy

[Jagger]

Stuat Varney hates America. He wants our financial system to collapse. He belongs in Gitmo.

[Jagger]

Obama wants the Feds to run the nations banks. So, why don't we see the government actually running the banks?

[Kathianne]

So, why don't we see the government actually running the banks?

They are starting. GM too.

[emmett]

Stuat Varney hates America. He wants our financial system to collapse. He belongs in Gitmo.

I doubt that is the case but I do believe that you believe it!

[Jagger]

They are starting. GM too.

Why don't you go ask Gary Crittenden who is running CitiGroup? If he says the government is running his banks, then I'll get worried.

[Kathianne]

Why don't you go ask Gary Crittenden who is running CitiGroup? If he says the government is running his banks, then I'll get worried.

For those that wonder Gary Crittenden:

http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssFinancialServicesAndRealEstateNews/idUSSNAPSHOT20090320

About those toxic assets:

http://www.businessinsider.com/insolvent-banks-and-imaginary-fire-sales-2009-4


Geithner Wrong, Crap Assets Correctly Priced, Say Harvard And Princeton Profs
John Carney|Apr. 6, 2009, 9:04 AM|35
Print
Tags: Wall Street, Treasury, Bailout, TARP, Tim Geithner, Financial Crisis, Banks, Financial Services, Debt, U.S. Government
The government's official view that toxic assets are incorrectly priced due to illiquidity "fire sales" is wrong, a new study by Harvard and Princeton finance professors suggests.

You can read the whole paper by Harvard's Joshua Coval and Erik Stafford and Princeton's Jakub Jurek below. The striking conclusion is that the low prices of toxic assets actually reflect the fundamentals, rather than being driven by an illiquidity discount...

[Psychoblues]

Stuart Varney clearly has an agenda and clearly is not to be trusted on any issue that should be considered consequential other than his somehow driving motivations to satisfy a small and shrinking sliver of the population that share his idiocies and clear hatred of the United States Of America. He offers not one whit of evidence to back up his assertions and not one whit of sources from which he has drawn his conclusions.

This piece was offered on the opinion page of the Wall Street Journal Online. There was a time when the Wall Street Journal would have refused to publish garbage like this. Something has obviously happened that has seriously effected their editorial staff as they now regularly puiblish this type trash. Clearly this is just another attempt by idiots to pass off their bullshit and disguise it as news!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Kathianne]

Stuart Varney clearly has an agenda and clearly is not to be trusted on any issue that should be considered consequential other than his somehow driving motivations to satisfy a small and shrinking sliver of the population that share his idiocies and clear hatred of the United States Of America. He offers not one whit of evidence to back up his assertions and not one whit of sources from which he has drawn his conclusions.

This piece was offered on the opinion page of the Wall Street Journal Online. There was a time when the Wall Street Journal would have refused to publish garbage like this. Something has obviously happened that has seriously effected their editorial staff as they now regularly puiblish this type trash. Clearly this is just another attempt by idiots to pass off their bullshit and disguise it as news!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:beer::cheers2::beer:


Psychoblues

Why?

[Psychoblues]

Agenda driven people sometimes baffle me, kat.


Why?

Perhaps even you could fill in a few blanks?!?!?!?!??!?!?!??!?

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Kathianne]

Agenda driven people sometimes baffle me, kat.


...
:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

whatever

[Psychoblues]

You asked "why". I gave you the best I could. The last time I asked you "why", you clocked me out!!!!!!!!!!!



whatever

Is that again your objective?!?!?!?!?!??!?!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Kathianne]

You asked "why". I gave you the best I could. The last time I asked you "why", you clocked me out!!!!!!!!!!!




Is that again your objective?!?!?!?!?!??!?!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

You are adding nothing. Indeed you are spamming, wish to stop? Now would be a good time. Not going where you wish.

[Psychoblues]

I am not "spamming", kat.



You are adding nothing. Indeed you are spamming, wish to stop? Now would be a good time. Not going where you wish.

Spamming is not my thing, don't you know?!?!??!?!?!?!??!?!?!?

Your author offered up his ridiculous opinion. You marginally shared your opinion and I offered up my own observations. That, cowgirl, is not spamming.

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

Agenda driven people sometimes baffle me, kat.



Perhaps even you could fill in a few blanks?!?!?!?!??!?!?!??!?

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

You mean people like Obama, Reid, and Pelosi?

In reality, only the truth baffles you PB

[Psychoblues]

Are your meds fuckin' with your feeble mind again, rsr?!?!?!?!?!??!?!



You mean people like Obama, Reid, and Pelosi?

In reality, only the truth baffles you PB

This thread is not about Obama, Reid, Pelosi or even me as you imply. This thread is probably too complicated for your drug addled mind to comprehend. You would have squealed like a stuck pig if anyone had responded to you like you just responded to me especially considering that I wasn't even talking to you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! How about your befuddlement with that truth, rsr?!?!?!??!?!!

The GOP,,,the party of fear and loathing,,,sad,,,,

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

Are your meds fuckin' with your feeble mind again, rsr?!?!?!?!?!??!?!




This thread is not about Obama, Reid, Pelosi or even me as you imply. This thread is probably too complicated for your drug addled mind to comprehend. You would have squealed like a stuck pig if anyone had responded to you like you just responded to me especially considering that I wasn't even talking to you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! How about your befuddlement with that truth, rsr?!?!?!??!?!!

The GOP,,,the party of fear and loathing,,,sad,,,,

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

Still a class act PB and I am not surprised by your normal reaction when asked direct questions

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3311/3423260674_b9081491b9_m.jpg

[Psychoblues]

Why do you insist on acting like such a shithead, rsr!?!?!?!??!?!?!?



Still a class act PB and I am not surprised by your normal reaction when asked direct questions

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3311/3423260674_b9081491b9_m.jpg

Or is it that you're not acting?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!???!!

The GOP,,,the party of fear and loathing,,,sad,,,,

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

Why do you insist on acting like such a shithead, rsr!?!?!?!??!?!?!?




Or is it that you're not acting?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!???!!

The GOP,,,the party of fear and loathing,,,sad,,,,

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

The nerve of me asking you a question on a debate board. Oh the inhumanity!

[Psychoblues]

I'll take that to mean that you're not acting.



The nerve of me asking you a question on a debate board. Oh the inhumanity!

You are every ounce the shithead that you demonstrate yourself to be!!!!!!!!!!!

The GOP,,,the party of fear and loathing,,,sad,,,,

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

I'll take that to mean that you're not acting.




You are every ounce the shithead that you demonstrate yourself to be!!!!!!!!!!!

The GOP,,,the party of fear and loathing,,,sad,,,,

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

and I see your debate skills have not improved much over the last month

You are a credit to the Dem party PB

[Psychoblues]

I've known for a very long time that you are ignorant and oblivious to debate or any other skills, shithead.


and I see your debate skills have not improved much over the last month

You are a credit to the Dem party PB

Do you care to comment on the subject at hand or are you going to insist on retaining your right to be a shithead and ignore the subject matter and further display your fear and loathing?!??!?!?!??!?!?!?!

The GOP,,,the party of fear and loathing,,,sad,,,,

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

I've known for a very long time that you are ignorant and oblivious to debate or any other skills, shithead.



Do you care to comment on the subject at hand or are you going to insist on retaining your right to be a shithead and ignore the subject matter and display your fear and loathing?!??!?!?!??!?!?!?!

The GOP,,,the party of fear and loathing,,,sad,,,,

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues


I have - you are the one ignoring them. Obama can do whatever he wants and his supporters like you are cool with it

Even when Obama does the same things Bush did - things you libs were opposed to - you yawn and express your support of the chosen one

And instead of trying to defend Obama, you attack anyone who dares to point out the double standards

[Jagger]

You are adding nothing.
Cease your repetitive spamming.

[Psychoblues]

Sweet!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Not!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The GOP,,,the party of fear and loathing,,,sad,,,,

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Kathianne]

Regarding the OP, seems the reason for refusal of return of funds is becoming more clear with Chrysler. Looks like more is coming out. Audio and links at site:

http://islandturtle.blogspot.com/2009/05/white-house-uses-strong-arm-tactics-to.html


SATURDAY, MAY 2, 2009

White House uses strong arm tactics to extort concessions from lenders
Yesterday (May 1) on Detroit’s Frank Beckman’s morning talk show (WJR), bankruptcy attorney Tom Lauria made the incendiary accusation that the members of the White House had threatened to use the “the full force of the White House Press Corps to destroy” his client’s reputation if it didn’t acquiesce to highly unfavorable terms of the government’s proposed Chrysler restructuring plan. Because of the strongarm tactics, Lauria’s client dropped its opposition.

Here is the tape of Beckman’s interview of Lauria. The relevant portions begin at the 1:30 mark. Listen to it.


Lauria: Let me tell you it’s no fun standing on this side of the fence opposing the President of the United States. In fact, let me just say, people have asked me who I represent. That’s a moving target. I can tell you for sure that I represent one less investor today than I represented yesterday. One of my clients was directly threatened by the White House and in essence compelled to withdraw its opposition to the deal under the threat that the full force of the White House Press Corps would destroy its reputation if it continued to fight. That’s how hard it is to stand on this side of the fence.

Beckman: Was that Perella Weinberg?

Lauria: That was Perella Weinberg.

There is a pattern here. Financial institutions holding billions of Chrysler’s secured debt are being held hostage by the TARP loans they are not permitted to pay back. They are being forced to accept just pennies on the dollar for loans they made in good faith less than two years ago. Just like mob loan sharks, the administration wants them under its thumb so they can extort more and more concessions.

This is an abuse of power that goes beyond Nixon.
POSTED BY CORKY BOYD AT 9:15 AM


http://uk.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKTRE54017D20090501?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0


Chrysler lender group plans objection to sale
Fri May 1, 2009 5:03am BST
By Emily Chasan

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A group of about 20 lenders that balked at the terms of a government-brokered deal to cut Chrysler LLC's $6.9 billion debt, are now planning to object to the company's planned bankruptcy sale, their attorney said on Thursday.

Chrysler LLC filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in New York on Thursday, saying that it would sell its core assets including its Chrysler, Jeep and Dodge brands into a new company that would be owned by the U.S. government, Fiat SpA and the company's workers.

The plan, however, depends on U.S. Bankruptcy Court approval of the sale, and this group of lenders feels the current plan to sell those assets within 30 to 60 days may infringe on their legal rights.

"We're just standing on the law," said Tom Lauria, a bankruptcy attorney at White & Case, representing a group of about 20 Chrysler first lien senior secured lenders....

...He said the group understands the need for Chrysler to sell itself and for the industry to restructure, but owes a fiduciary duty to its investors and objects to the way Chrysler is trying to divvy up the proceeds of the bankruptcy sale without putting it to a creditor vote.

"This is not an objection to rescuing Chrysler, Lauria said.

Rather, Lauria said, Chrysler's proposed plan "inverts" the classic priority scheme written into the bankruptcy code, where senior secured creditors are paid in full first, followed by junior lenders, administrative claims, unsecured lenders and equity holders.

"The sale is an attempt to end-run the procedural protections that are provided to stakeholders by Chapter 11," he said.

"What's happening is the senior secured creditors are going to get 29 cents on the dollar and the unsecured creditors are going to get $10 billion (6.8 billion pounds)."

Lauria said his clients had viewed the quality of their collateral as secure and took correspondingly low interest rates on their loans to Chrysler because the loans were "seemingly secure." But now the lenders find themselves effectively subsidizing more junior creditors, in a way that would not typically occur under the bankruptcy code, Lauria said.

"No court has ever approved something like this before. It is without precedent," Lauria said....

[red states rule]

Chicago style polictics taken to the national level. Do as we say or we use our allies in the media to destroy you



Top Bankruptcy Attorney Thomas Lauria: White House Threatened To Use Press Corps To Destroy Firm's Reputation For Opposing Chrysler Bankruptcy Plan

Steve Rattner is the leader of the Obama administration's Auto Industry Task Force. Thomas Lauria is the Global Practice Head of the Financial Restructuring and Insolvency Group at White & Case.

ABC reporter Jake Tapper reports that "Lauria told ABC News that Rattner suggested to an official of the boutique investment bank Perella Weinberg Partners that officials of the Obama White House would embarrass the firm for opposing the Obama administration plan, which President Obama announced Thursday, and which requires creditors to accept roughly 29 cents on the dollar for an estimated $6.8 billion owed by Chrysler." Perella Weinberg Partners, which owned Chrysler debt through its Xerion Fund, "was one of Lauria's clients in this bankruptcy, but no longer is. Before the Thursday deadline, Joseph Perella and Peter Weinberg tried to join the larger creditors -- JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, and Goldman Sachs -- who are owed roughly 70% of Chrysler's debt and had already agreed to participate with the administration's plan. All four financial institutions are recipients of up to $100 billion in federal government bailout funds, though the Obama administration insists the matters were kept completely separate."

Perella Weinberg Partners, Lauria said, "was directly threatened by the White House and in essence compelled to withdraw its opposition to the deal under the threat that the full force of the White House press corps would destroy its reputation if it continued to fight. That’s how hard it is to stand on this side of the fence."

Lauria has said his clients "are mainly fiduciaries for pension plans, college endowments, retirement plans and credit unions who invested in low yield supposedly very secure first lien debt" with Chrysler.

http://www.stevelackner.com/2009/05/top-bankruptcy-attorney-thomas-lauria.html

[red states rule]

Here is part of the interview Mr Lauria gave when he talked about what happened behind closed doors


<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_GPNvjec-DA&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_GPNvjec-DA&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Kathianne]

Merged like threads.

[red states rule]

So far nothing from the liberal media on the White House strong arm tactics


The Non-TARP Lenders Aren’t Making Stories of WH Pressure Up; That Means Media Will Investigate, Right? Not So Far

By Tom Blumer
May 6, 2009 - 00:21 ET

As of early this evening, according to a report by Liz Moyer at Forbes, the latest news on the Chrysler bankruptcy filing is that:

•The recalcitrant non-TARP lenders who would not agree to the deal the government attempted to force on them are now attempting to challenge the deal the government and Chrysler have proposed in bankruptcy court.
•These lenders want to keep their identities hidden.
•In court documents, they have said that "intensifying pressure and name calling by the government threatened to harm them if their identities became public."
•Bankruptcy judge Arthur Gonzales "isn't buying it," and has given the lenders until 10 a.m. tomorrow morning to identify themselves or (though not specifically stated) they will apparently lose their standing in court.
Meanwhile, John Carney at The Business Insider today expanded on what the lenders' lawyer Tom Lauria first brought out on WJR Radio on Friday, when Lauria told talk-show host Frank Beckmann that "One of my clients was directly threatened by the White House."

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2009/05/06/non-tarp-lenders-aren-t-making-stories-wh-pressure-means-establishment-m

[Sitarro]

Major monetary supporter of Barry, George Soros, has made billions so far, he is really enjoying this mess...... coincidence?

[red states rule]

Major monetary supporter of Barry, George Soros, has made billions so far, he is really enjoying this mess...... coincidence?

and even openly disagreed with the Chosen One several times - and is still in one piece

I do not know if he has gotten any dead fish mailed to him however