Comments on: Democrats Threaten AIG Bill Of Attainder

By: proreason

proreason — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 20:08:12 +0000

Point 1 – exactly correct
Point 2 – exactly correct
Point 3 – exactly correct
Point 4 – exactly correct
Point 5 – exactly correct

They are liars, hypocrits, conmen, criminals, sneaks, weaklings, greedy bastards and cowards.

Other than that, I like em just fine.

By: Right of the People

Right of the People — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 19:22:05 +0000

Yarddog, What they’re really mad about is they can’t figure out a way to get their grimy little paws on any of this cash.

I’m with you, let’s take this sucker back. Buy all the ammo you can and get ready for a wild ride.

10-7

By: canary

canary — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 06:51:30 +0000

The government can not sue AIG, unless they violated a contract, which to my understanding, there was no stipulation that said AIG couldn’t give bonus’s. No stipulation that certain individuals would have to be fired (which I don’t think the govt could put in the stipulations). Now if the government could harrass these people, and go on a witch hunt. If they found some fraud, then the government would not be able to sue, but would have to use the DOJ charge with criminal act. So, I think all this b.s. Frank and them are saying, may just be a smokescreen, to make the public believe they are doing something. It would be illegal to tax the bonuses, but I think the government thinks people are stupid, after all they elected Obama.
And prehaps it will be old news soon, and all for show, since the government is fixing to give them more bailout money. And the govt could do some behind closed doors pressure and threats (find a some t’s not crossed ) , even though the old b.s. is to create jobs. heh heh.
But, to threaten to own the country is communism. This might be a test to see if they can slowly take over the country, which frankly I think that’s what the new regine is doing. They want the public angry, and test the public’s ignorance, and gain sympathy for Obama, and take the spot light off themselves.
Would Grassly ever get away with telling Frank, or Obama to apologize or commit suicide. Did he tell Tim Geithner of Maxine Waters to do this? This is how Hitler got so much power.
I mean with muslim nuts committing suicide, why does he mention Japan. Japan surely appreciates this statement.
OH!!!! I get it. The government wants to rid the term “terrorist” so that know one considers the terror they can put in people and businesses. I mean people jumped off buildings after Walstreet, and Grassly get’s away. He should resign. It’s extremely politically incorrect, and a barbaric terrorist statement he made.

These politicans know that they might have a problem getting a job with the economy the way it is.
The government wants fear in this country. They want to make people submissive and lay down.

By: BillK

BillK — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 06:06:08 +0000

By: BillK

BillK — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 05:59:13 +0000

Now Dodd is claiming that “someone” – not him – put the bonus exception into the Dodd Amendment:

http://sweetness-light.com/arc.....ent-139036

By: sheehanjihad

sheehanjihad — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 05:25:21 +0000

I firmly believe that the Democrats are faking this indignation, to appease the growing ranks of angry voters. They knew about it long ago, and didnt figure it would make any difference. So they blather on about the “outrage” of it all, when they are the ones who caused this entire financial collapse to happen. They want votes, they want to keep their seats. They could give a damn about bonus’s…..but they have to pretend to for photo ops and sound bites.

By: BillK

BillK — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 03:09:32 +0000

It’s getting more fun all the time.

From the AP:

Livid Democrats demand AIG return bailout bonuses

By Laurie Kellman

WASHINGTON – Talking tougher by the hour, livid Democrats confronted beleaguered insurance giant AIG with an ultimatum Tuesday: Give back $165 million in post-bailout bonuses or watch Congress tax it away with emergency legislation. Republicans declared the Democrats were hardly blameless, accusing them of standing by while the bonus deal was cemented and suggesting that Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner could and should have done more. While the White House expressed confidence in Geithner, it was clearly placing the responsibility for how the matter was handled on his shoulders.

Geithner sent a letter late Tuesday to congressional leaders informing them that he was working with the Justice Department to determine whether any of the AIG payments could be recovered. He cited a provision in the recent economic stimulus law that gave him authority to review compensation to the highest-paid employees of companies that already have received federal assistance.

Fresh details, meanwhile, pushed outrage over AIG ever higher: New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo reported that 73 company employees received bonus checks of $1 million or more last Friday. This at a company that was failing so spectacularly that the government felt the need to prop it up with a $170 billion bailout.

The financial bailout program remains politically unpopular and has been a drag on Barack Obama’s new presidency, even though the plan began under his predecessor, George W. Bush. The White House is well aware of the nation’s bailout fatigue — anger that hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars have gone to prop up financial institutions that made poor decisions, while many others who have done no wrong pay the price.

White House officials, for the first time, on Tuesday night said Geithner told the White House about the bonus payments last Thursday, and senior aides informed the president later that day. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal details of the timeline involving AIG.

The administration wouldn’t be pleased to hear what Maria Panza-Villa, of Hillsboro, Ore., had to say. “Wasn’t Obama supposed to fix this?” asked the mother of two who said she has lost three jobs since November as one employer after another went under. …

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/aig_outrage

We’ve gone from simple class envy to mob rule.

Imagine what will happen for whomever else the publc suddenly decides is undeserving of what they feel is “too much” money.

By: bill

bill — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 01:39:20 +0000

Well this proves two things, they don’t read the Constitution, and they don’t read the bills they vote for.

Obammunism, what could possibly go wrong.

By: Odie44

Odie44 — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 23:44:00 +0000

Considering numerous blogs are bringing up the Bills of Attainder and well, the American judicial system process – it is a valid area of concern.

At the essence is whether or not taxing a bonus is “punitive” or “punishment” in itself, being they are specifically selecting a population of people they don’t like.

Interestingly enough – as SG posted – both Madison’s and Rehnquist’s opine is concerning the legislatives ability to punish, where clearly Rehniquist states “Such actions were regarded as odious by the framers of the Constitution because it was the traditional role of a court, judging an individual case, to impose punishment”

Constitution law trumps punitive/civil designation – i.e. the friggin existence of the Supreme Court, Judicial branch and seperation of powers and state.

Didn’t you hear – Roe v Wade was about “property rights” via a basterdization of Griswald v Conn… because “abortion” language is nowhere to be found in the Constitution.

By: canary

canary — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 23:27:45 +0000

Instead of resorting to 100% communism, just deduct from next 30 billion the oOllabama regine is giving AIG, like oOllahbama said, before he choked from anger and couldn’t speak, caught on camera. Sometimes stress can make you not able to speak. It feels like a egg in your throat. Maybe an unborn chick getting revenge, from Obama enjoying the slaughter of it’s muslim chicken ancestor in Chapter 2 of Dreams from my Father.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200…../obama_aig

By: pagar

pagar — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 22:51:31 +0000

“AIG does not insure congressional pensions”. That is correct, it takes voters who are willing to vote for these losers who are unable to make it in a civilian job to insure that these congresspersons draw pensions, However, AIG and those who funnel campaign contributions to incumbents share some part of the blame for America being embarrassed by those we currently call congresspersons. Help insure no congressional pensions, vote them out of office. Term limits are definately needed now more than ever.

By: archetype

archetype — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 22:50:34 +0000

I agree that congress is off the mark here but so are all of you and whoever wrote this article. None of you seem to be aware that there is a difference between punitive and civil laws. Bills of Attainder and ex post facto laws refer only to punitive (punishment as defined by Rehnquist) laws. The government can and often does enact retroactive laws (see recent laws re: sex offender registrations).

Congress is wrong to do this, but you’re going to have to do better than this.

By: TwilightZoned

TwilightZoned — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 22:19:54 +0000

Of course not. You should see the reaction I get when I mention it’s the salary that keeps on giving…into retirement, then to the spouse upon death…

By: Colonel1961

Colonel1961 — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 20:24:49 +0000

Thanks, Barney – I’m sure your business acumen is stellar. Now, shut the hell up until you admit your mistakes in this fiasco you pitiful little miscreant…

By: Colonel1961

Colonel1961 — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 20:09:13 +0000

Hope they don’t retroactively increase my taxes for the last five years…

By: U NO HOO

U NO HOO — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 19:56:30 +0000

“a janitor getting his weekly salary?”

Yeah, that is what I thought of, a janitor works all year and if he does a good job and doesn’t take too many days off he gets a Christmas bonus as an attaboy.

If he lets the toilet overflow no bonus, just a gottcha.

Seems to me the AIG bonus receivers, no matter how we feel about their bonus, are legally entitled, and politicos who are belly aching are just proving their analness.