It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama Received a $101,332 Bonus from AIG

page: 4
26
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by jd140
 


Nope, but Gleen Greenwald's expose seems completely reliable, credible and well founded. I advise you to check it out, if you haven't already.

I'm guessing you believe that Treasury officials asked for the provisions to be removed, or at least more lax, don't you? Than why would they ask for that if there weren't any in the first place (if we assume Dodd is lying)?

Unless you're suggesting someone else wrote the more strict provisions? Got any theories?




posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhatTheory

Originally posted by converge
Didn't you forget an 's' in President?


No, I didn't.
What other President signed this current bill which allowed for the bonuses?


The bailout didn't start on January 20th 2009.

If you don't think President Bush and his Administration share the blame for this as well, then you don't have your history straight.


[edit on 18-3-2009 by converge]



posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 11:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by converge
The bailout didn't start on January 20th 2009.

If you don't think President Bush and his Administration share the blame for this as well, then you don't have your history straight.


Good grief! You cannot come to grips with the fact that this is squarely on the shoulders of the current Congress and Administration.

Obama is the one who promised 'change' and an 'open government' right? They had plenty of time since he became President to alter the bill. However, they chose NOT to even read the bill and ram it through before anyone else could read it.

So NO, I don't think Bush is to blame for this current bailout bill which allowed for the bonuses. Did Bush sign this bill? Answer: No. Enough said.


When are you going to stop blaming Bush and start putting the blame where it is due which is the current Congress and President.

Stop the revisionist history please.



posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by converge
 



You would guess wrong, just because someone doesn't believe your sources doesn't mean you can assume whatever you like.

I don't have any theories. I'm not going to trust a reporter 100% just because he might be reliable. No one knows who is responsible and I think we are just seeing the tip of the ice berg. I doubt a reporter who started researching this a few days ago knows anymore then you and I.

But hey, if Dodd and this guy is all you need, then good for you.



posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 11:27 PM
link   
reply to post by WhatTheory
 



They will stop blaming Bush when another Republican is President. Then it will all be his fault.



posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 11:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
Sorry if I missed someone else posting this.

The other troubling thing about the AIG bailout is that AIG runs the (democrat-controlled) congress's pension fund.

So you see? The democrat-controlled congress HAD to bail out AIG.



Oh now that's a gem, thanks for the info.

[edit on 113131p://bWednesday2009 by Stormdancer777]



posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 11:44 PM
link   
Oh this is so sad! This is about the most outrageous thing I have ever heard in my life!

101,000 lousy dollars as your portion to cover them as President of the United States with the theft of hundreds of billions of dollars.

We now know why the powers that be love him so.

Barack buddy get yourself a good agent. I bet that your Cheif of Staff fanagled a much bigger cut than that for himself!

That's just pitiful! I know they helped get you elected and all but cash is king!

You should have demanded at least 2%.

He is just way to inexperienced for his own good. Poor Barak



posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 11:49 PM
link   
Not poor Barrack, poor people who voted for him. I feel sorry they put all their trust in a guy who cant even keep a simple political scam hidden from the public. Its like watching a movie on HBo with a lowsy ass actor portraying the President. kick him to the curb.



posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 11:51 PM
link   
And Another thing!!!
Why does he always insist on locking these criminals up, but when he gets caught up, he cant be held accountable. If he had any honor left in his body at all, he would show it by resigning.Or at least giving himself a nice jail sentence =) But he wont. No class.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 12:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Common Good
Not poor Barrack, poor people who voted for him. I feel sorry they put all their trust in a guy who cant even keep a simple political scam hidden from the public. Its like watching a movie on HBo with a lowsy ass actor portraying the President. kick him to the curb.


That must be why they pay him so little? It is a very bad show I agree.

You know what. I think it's time for American's to start suing the government for breach of contract. They aren't even putting on a good show of it anymore. Money back refund until the Constitutional form of Government promised in the contract is delivered with no future payments until it is.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Merriman Weir
This shouldn't be a party or partisan issue. As sickening at it is, this kind of thing is endemic in politics generally. No party is actually clean in this, in whatever country it is and whatever political/economic system those countries run.

The sad reality is that very, very few people enter politics for wholly altruistic reasons, no matter where they stand on a political compass. You can always tell where a politician's heart really lies with how their nest gets feathered: the 'consultancy' work they do after office, the firms they become directors of and so on.


That's exactly what I said.

People just make it a partisan issue because people are looking for any vehicle humanly possible to criticize this democratic president that conservatives absolutely demise right now. It wasn't him who decided where the bailout money went and it wasn't him who passed the bailout legislation through the house and the senate. Both parties passed it...

Like it or not, neither side has all the answers and niether side seems to really be doing what I think they should be doing right now.. Figuring out permanent solutions to our economic problems instead of justifying shelling out billions of taxpayer dollars to the same companies responsible for getting us where we are today.

Noone is going to fix our economy overnight, including Obama. I understand the frustration, I really do.. I just see this kind of anti-obama nonsense as baseless and pointless. It only seems to act as an indicator of the desperation and self-destruction of the Republican party caused by the bush administration. And some people might not admit it, but Republicans haven't exactly gotten over losing the election. That is part of where this anger comes from.

-ChriS



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 12:49 AM
link   
reply to post by BlasteR
 


I dont know, but this post just got deleted. And it was good!!!
Oh well.
Im not re-typing it. Its gone with the wind.
breifly...



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 05:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by WhatTheory
Good grief! You cannot come to grips with the fact that this is squarely on the shoulders of the current Congress and Administration.


No, what I cannot come to grips with is people ignoring the facts and history because you just want to blame Obama.




So NO, I don't think Bush is to blame for this current bailout bill which allowed for the bonuses. Did Bush sign this bill? Answer: No. Enough said.


Bush was in favor of the bailout. He could've said no when this all started, but he didn't. He even pitched the idea to the American people and went along Paulson and Bernanke to, among other things, start injecting money in AIG and let Lehman Brothers go under.

I don't if you remember but Edward Liddy, now CEO of AIG since September 2008, was yesterday (or the day after) on Capitol Hill defending himself because he said the bonuses were on contract before he went there, so he couldn't do anything. So they all knew there were these huge bonuses to be payed out.

Not only that, but the Bush Administration and some republicans who are now pretending to be outraged, lobbied against executives compensation caps at the time (September 2008)


Former Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson said that while he was upset with the levels of salary afforded to top executives, any cap on such would dissuade companies from participating in the TARP.

"If we design it so it's punitive and so institutions aren't going to participate, this won't work the way we need it to work," he told Fox News Sunday on September 21.

Senator Richard Shelby, the top Republican on the Senate Banking Committee, told CBS news that: "It should be up to the board of directors of a private corporation to set the compensation of an executive; it shouldn't be Congress's role."

Senator Mel Martinez told CNBC that: "While it is very appealing to think about executive compensation as being a part of this, one of the drawbacks to that is perhaps that we would have fewer entities participate in what is essentially a voluntary act."

And House Minority Whip Eric Cantor, "outraged" over AIG's issuance of $165 million in bonuses, said he was not in favor of "the federal government be[ing] able to set salaries across the board," when the issue of executive compensation arose in September 2008.




When are you going to stop blaming Bush and start putting the blame where it is due which is the current Congress and President.


If all you really want is to put blame where it is due then you have to accept that Bush and his Administration have some blame for this as well.




Stop the revisionist history please.


That's quite ironic coming from you Bush apologists.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 05:59 AM
link   
Bush= should go to jail
Obama=should be his bunk mate
Dodd= should be their @#@#%
McCain=Should join them(and I voted for the guy).
All those people on that list= should go to jail.
End Of Story.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 06:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by WhatTheory


Well this does explain a lot. No wonder Obama wanted to save AIG while letting other big institutions fail. Apparently this entire AIG bailout is nothing but payback for the campaign contributions.

I'm sure the main stream media will not cover this angle because it would portray Obama and top Dem's in a bad light.

www.examiner.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


think you should try and see how many money Blackwater has given GwB,Cheney and the rest of that crmininal group.

Best regards.

Loke.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 09:06 AM
link   
PEOPLE...
leaving one's political affiliation aside....ALL elected officials receive campaign contributions from the corporate sector....
Favorites just get more.....
whether Republican or Democrat..
There is a conspiracy theory and a trail of ass-kissing involved in the election of every single one...from your city mayor on up!!!
The smell of burnt toast is ever-present.
We just like to lambast and blame!!!!!
Yeah...hoping to make oneself feel better by a calling out!!
How sad and egoistic is this?????

If you are so upset and outraged...then..demand that your employer not take taxes out of your check, stop filing taxes by April 15th, stop shopping at Wal-mart, stop voting and stop feeding the machine!!!!
Go Under The Radar and LIVE!!!!!!!!!!

I am not an anarchist nor a presbyterian......
Just trying to live with purpose and clarity!!!!



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 11:54 AM
link   
Has the Obama administration actually given any money to AIG?

When is the last time money was given to AIG? What is the timeline? The GW admin created this bailout, so blaming it on Obama makes no sense at all. It is quite obvious that big media is working hard to stick Obama with the responsibility for our current economic downturn, which began long before Obama took office, and will take at the very least several months, if not a couple of years, for things to turn around.

This is just another non-story.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Loke.
think you should try and see how many money Blackwater has given GwB,Cheney and the rest of that crmininal group.

Best regards.

Loke.


So that makes it ok now? Two wrongs make a right? Of course not, so your point is moot. Besides, it's a totally different scenario. Blackwater did not get a bailout because they were going out of business.



posted on Mar, 20 2009 @ 08:42 AM
link   
reply to post by RFBurns
 


That makes it okay, then, does it? I think these thieves on both sides should be tried and jailed!



posted on Mar, 20 2009 @ 08:52 AM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


Yes, they have. There was a $30 billion payment to AIG on March 2nd. The bonuses that have become central to this controversy came from those funds.

And don't forget: Obama was the one pimping that $787 billion bailout last month, too. Not GWB. Obama. Bush has blame in this mess, certainly, but Obama is up to his eyeballs in it now as well.


[edit on 20-3-2009 by vor78]



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join