"Speculators" (i.e., Chryler INVESTORS) file suit to stop obama from (accuses, suspect)

[Blue Grass Fever]

Originally Posted by sanrene

White House Accused Of Chrysler Threats

Confirmation that obama and his band of merry thugs did indeed try to threaten and strongarm invested creditors into a bad deal.





Is anyone really surprise? The thuggery of Chicago-style politics.

Politics is a rough and tough game. You, of all people, should know this.

It's only "thuggery" when the "other" side partakes in his/her position?

Anyway, those investments are passive.........

[Blue Grass Fever]

Originally Posted by Toyman at Jewel Lake

Does anyone know what happens to common stockholders in this situation? Do they still maintain their shares after bankruptcy? If not, why should the UAW get prefferential treatment over those that have invested in Crysler? 55% ownership after NO investment seems like a heck of a payback from the O administration.

There's no publicly traded stocks in regard to Chrysler. If that's what you mean by common stockholder...

[OC Investor2]

Originally Posted by Blue Grass Fever

Who cares about the bondholders on whether or not they get paid back!


Their investments are passive....

The fact the investment is passive has nothing to do w/ it. Many Bondholders hold secured debt - i.e. when a co. sells the bonds they agree if they don't pay the bondholders back the bondholders are entitled to seize the assets (plants, trademarks, whatever) that back the debt. The company (borrower) gets to pay a lower interest rate in return for offering the lender the higher degree of security. If a company goes BK, those lenders have first right to the remaining assets. Not the employees and not the stockholders.

[OC Investor2]

Originally Posted by Blue Grass Fever

Politics is a rough and tough game. You, of all people, should know this.

It's only "thuggery" when the "other" side partakes in his/her position?

Anyway, those investments are passive.........

It isn't politics it is the law. Who gets what in a BK is determined by established BK law. Obama is trying to subvert those laws to the benefit of his campaign contributors i.e. the UAW. That's thuggery no matter what side you are on.

The Corleone family would be proud....

[Finn_Jarber]

Originally Posted by sanrene

giving the UAW the sweetheart deal of the century. Totally unconstitutional what his administration is trying to do.

Hot Air » Blog Archive » Senior creditors: Chrysler deal violates 5th Amendment
http://hotair.cachefly.net/images/20...hamendment.pdf


The arrogance is breathtaking.

Look in your portfolios - maybe YOU are one of the investors.

How does Chrysler situation violate the 5th amendment?

5th Amendment
============
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation

[OC Investor2]

Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber

How does Chrysler situation violate the 5th amendment?

5th Amendment
============
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation

Gov't attempting to force private individuals thru intimidation to relinquesh legal claims to assets to advance its preferred re-org plan for chrysler.

[ViewFromThePeak]

Originally Posted by OC Investor2

Gov't attempting to force private individuals thru intimidation to relinquesh legal claims to assets to advance its preferred re-org plan for chrysler.

I guess Obama in his infinite wisdom of the Constitution can interpret "just compensation" to mean "you won't go to jail" provided you comply.

[OC Investor2]

Originally Posted by ViewFromThePeak

I guess Obama in his infinite wisdom of the Constitution can interpret "just compensation" to mean "you won't go to jail" provided you comply.

and THAT'S change You can believe in!!!!!

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by Toyman at Jewel Lake

Does anyone know what happens to common stockholders in this situation? Do they still maintain their shares after bankruptcy? If not, why should the UAW get prefferential treatment over those that have invested in Crysler? 55% ownership after NO investment seems like a heck of a payback from the O administration.

It depends on the judge and the plans. Often times once a company files bankruptcy they receive a .Q status on the market, they become penny stock until a judge decides how much each stock share is worth. Those investors will often be issued new stock with the old stock being worthless.

This however is not the situation with Chrysler because Chysler is privately owned by Cereberus Capital Management (80.1) and Daimler A.G. who owns (19.9%)

[sanrene]

It's only "thuggery" when the "other" side partakes in his/her position?

It's more than thuggery - it is unconstitutional what they are doing.

Wouldn't you agree - or do you not care?