HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » AIG Is Thinking About Sui...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 11:33 PM

AIG Is Thinking About Suing the Government for Bailing It Out

Last edited Tue Jan 8, 2013, 02:37 AM - Edit history (1)

Source: Atlantic Wire

It's been almost five years since AIG's stock dropped 60 percent in a day leaving the company doomed to failure, when Uncle Sam swooped in with $182 billion to rescue it. But AIG must have a short memory, because on Monday night news emerged that the insurance company is actually thinking about suing the U.S. government over the bailout that saved it. The board will discuss the idea with shareholders at a meeting on Wednesday.

It's not so much that AIG's mad the government bailed them out. (They wouldn't be around to be mad if it hadn't.) They just wish they'd done it a little bit differently. "The lawsuit does not argue that government help was not needed," The New York Times reports. "It contends that the onerous nature of the rescue -- the taking of what became a 92 percent stake in the company, the deal's high interest rates and the funneling of billions to the insurer's Wall Street clients -- deprived shareholders of tens of billions of dollars and violated the Fifth Amendment, which prohibits the taking of private property for 'public use, without just compensation.'" Does that kind of bad attitude count as "looking the gift horse in the mouth" or "biting the hand that feeds you?" Or both?

On Edit: Far more detail from the New York Times http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/01/07/rescued-by-a-bailout-a-i-g-may-sue-its-savior/?hp

Read more: http://www.theatlanticwire.com/business/2013/01/aig-thinking-about-suing-government-bailing-it-out/60698/

54 replies, 6859 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 54 replies Author Time Post
Reply AIG Is Thinking About Suing the Government for Bailing It Out (Original post)
Justin_Beach Jan 2013 OP
bluerum Jan 2013 #1
pkdu Jan 2013 #2
Morganfleeman Jan 2013 #18
Hosnon Jan 2013 #27
elleng Jan 2013 #3
think Jan 2013 #4
still_one Jan 2013 #5
Flatulo Jan 2013 #6
RKP5637 Jan 2013 #7
Angry Dragon Jan 2013 #9
Angry Dragon Jan 2013 #8
dotymed Jan 2013 #23
awake Jan 2013 #29
Larry Ogg Jan 2013 #52
Veilex Jan 2013 #10
The Second Stone Jan 2013 #12
jsr Jan 2013 #11
grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #20
cali Jan 2013 #22
davidpdx Jan 2013 #13
SoapBox Jan 2013 #14
dotymed Jan 2013 #24
SoapBox Jan 2013 #35
Justin_Beach Jan 2013 #15
longship Jan 2013 #16
BainsBane Jan 2013 #17
grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #19
Festivito Jan 2013 #21
Justin_Beach Jan 2013 #25
forestpath Jan 2013 #26
John2 Jan 2013 #28
hughee99 Jan 2013 #30
Turbineguy Jan 2013 #31
Kelvin Mace Jan 2013 #32
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Jan 2013 #42
wordpix Jan 2013 #33
valerief Jan 2013 #34
nykym Jan 2013 #36
EC Jan 2013 #37
gateley Jan 2013 #38
allan01 Jan 2013 #39
raccoon Jan 2013 #40
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Jan 2013 #41
HangOnKids Jan 2013 #46
dbackjon Jan 2013 #43
IDemo Jan 2013 #44
Hassin Bin Sober Jan 2013 #45
Tx4obama Jan 2013 #47
underpants Jan 2013 #48
and-justice-for-all Jan 2013 #49
Kablooie Jan 2013 #50
Oakenshield Jan 2013 #51
Tuesday Afternoon Jan 2013 #53
Beacool Jan 2013 #54

Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 11:36 PM

1. Slimey weasel bastards

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 11:36 PM

2. Their recent Ad blitz saying "Thankyou" from employees to "America" ...sinks that ship nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pkdu (Reply #2)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 03:41 AM

18. Not really

Some ad doesn't relieve them of any rights under the law. Notwithstanding, even if one agrees that a case could be made on 5th Amendment grounds (a tenuous case at best), it would be a disaster from a PR standpoint, so I suspect this will go nowhere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Morganfleeman (Reply #18)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 09:48 AM

27. Agreed. This hits a nerve and it is very easy to understand.

"Hey, you know that massive company that nearly brought down the entire economy and begged the tax payer for money to bail out their malfeasance? Yeah, they're suing us now saying they got a bad deal."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 11:43 PM

3. HA!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 12:03 AM

4. Please tell AIG they forgot to add the sarcasm tags

No Really....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 12:03 AM

5. fuck greenberg and the horse he road on. as far as their claim, bullshit. It was a time of crisis,

in no small part to their actions

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 12:14 AM

6. Those fuckers. Talk about chutzpah!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 12:15 AM

7. Fuck AIG. I would have let them crash and burn than propping up a system that is

going to fail, eventually, anyway. That's the way real capitalism works, if you can't hack it, you're gone. So, now we will mush along with these financial monopolies 'till the next crisis.

BTW, fuck all of these endless wars too. No wonder this country is always cash strapped. War is a racket, wall street is a racket, and the medical empire in this country is a racket.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RKP5637 (Reply #7)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 12:27 AM

9. charge them under the RICO Act

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 12:25 AM

8. I guess that is one way to make sure there is never another bank bailout ..........

break them up ......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #8)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 07:52 AM

23. Until Glass-Steagall was repealed under Clinton

these monopolies were illegal. Anyone who has ever played monopoly can see why.
It is an apt description of what has happened to America. A few (very few) players own all of the good property and money. Instead of allowing the game to end, "our" govt. just printed up more money and gave it to the banksters. Of course this prolongs the agony of we, the losers, and allows the (hunger) game to continue.
FDR was changing the game before he died. Reagan came along and re-started the wealthy wins rule... all of the Presidents since then (corporate owned) have ensured that the game will continue. Only death will get you out of your obligation to the banksters...

This "smiley" has become very relevant for me.........

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dotymed (Reply #23)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 10:35 AM

29. Clinton should have never let Glass-Steagall be repealed

As bad as Bush and his gang of crooks were it was Bill Clinton who gave them the keys to rob the bank with when he repealed Glass-Steagall. Until we fix the mistakes that Clinton made in the 90s we are F*cked, not just Glass-Steagall but DOMA as well (we have fixed don't ask don't tell). For all of the good things that Bill did there are still some acts that we are still paying for today and in my mind the death of Glass-Steagall is one of the worst act any Demarcate ever did to this country (not counting Vietnam)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awake (Reply #29)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 05:07 AM

52. Repealing Glass-Steagall meant easy money for the construction boom...

And the construction boom is what kept the unemployment numbers down. Low unemployment numbers ensured that the sheep wouldn't notice that all the factories were being shut down, thanks to the free trade acts, and that much of the good paying manufacturing jobs were being outsourced to starving peasants in third world countries willing to work for slave wages.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 12:48 AM

10. Ummm... theres a problem with that...

AIG willfully accepted the stipulations to the deal. AIG was not compelled to take the deal... they CHOSE to take it (having the option of staying alive as a business or not is still a choice). The fifth amendment states: "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation"... the key word here is "Taken". AIG agreed to GIVE the 92% stake in the company in exchange for the funds... the government did not TAKE it. Moreover, the GIVEN 92% was held in trust for AIG... not for the public good. Any public good was indidental.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Veilex (Reply #10)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 01:19 AM

12. I agree, they accepted the deal

I'd say charge them criminally. After all, they seem to be criminally stupid and ungrateful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 12:50 AM

11. People Are Thinking the Government Should Have Put AIG Executives on a Leaky Boat to China

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jsr (Reply #11)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 03:52 AM

20. Did you know AIG started in China?

AIG history dates back to 1919, when Cornelius Vander Starr established an insurance agency in Shanghai, China. Starr was the first Westerner in Shanghai to sell insurance to the Chinese, which he continued to do until AIG left China in early 1939óas Mao Zedong led the advance of the Communist People's Liberation Army on Shanghai. Starr then moved the company headquarters to its current home in New York City. The company went on to expand, often through subsidiaries, into other markets, including other parts of Asia, Latin America, Europe, and the Middle East. - wiki

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #20)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 05:40 AM

22. Did you know that AIG owns Stowe Mountain Resort?

It's been the personal playground for AIG bigwigs for decades and in order to avoid having to sell it off as a non-essential business, the fucks created a new subsidiary, Chartis, to buy it. Stowe originally belonged to Cornelius. When he died in the seventies, his estate sold it to AIG.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 01:21 AM

13. My solution would be to go into the boardroom

and slap them all up the side of head so hard it knows them back to 2008.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 01:31 AM

14. Time for an Occupy AIG?

...fuck 'um, I say!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SoapBox (Reply #14)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 08:00 AM

24. WE really must grow "occupy" or a similar

"people first" entity, in order to even stand a chance against the fascists....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dotymed (Reply #24)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 12:39 PM

35. Ditto, ditto!

I laugh every time the PukeBaggers and their 1% ilk, call US, the Fascists.



"The 14 Characteristics of Fascism"

http://www.ratical.com/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 01:44 AM

15. If the government hadn't intervened ...

those shares would have been worth absolutely nothing, so it seems to me that the government didn't "deprive" shareholders of anything - quite the contrary, they bailed out the shareholders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 02:02 AM

16. Ask Joseph Cassano.



He's the AIG guy who single-handedly crashed the world's economy.

Read about it:
The Big Short, Michael Lewis' exposure of what happened in 2008.

Too Big to Fail, Andrew Ross Sorkin's book on the big bail-out. Also made into a great HBO movie:


BTW, good cast. James Woods plays Lehman Bros. CEO Dick Fuld. Bernacke is played by Paul Giamatti! Both book and flick are great.

Wish they would make a flick of "The Big Short". It really tells the story like no other than Michael Lewis can.

Both books are highly recommended.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to longship (Reply #16)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 02:31 AM

17. We should all sue AIG

Evil assholes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 03:51 AM

19. More Matt Taibbi BS!!!



Jail 'em.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 05:14 AM

21. Counter-sue for the rest. And their personal wealth.

They get to keep a house, a car and some of their retirement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Festivito (Reply #21)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 09:17 AM

25. Well ... maybe a car

I think it depends on the quality of public transit where they live. Cars are, for many people, becoming a luxury.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 09:40 AM

26. So how much will the government settle with them for?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 09:56 AM

28. I don't understand

 

the complaint if it was AIG that requested the Bailout and agreed to the Terms of the loan. So are they complaining the Government put a gun to their heads and forced them to sign the agreement?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 10:35 AM

30. Well then, they're businessmen, they should have negotiated a better deal.

The AIG investors should sue the management for putting the company in such a bad position that they couldn't "get a better deal" from the government, or in such a bad position that they needed the bailout at all. Or maybe their investors should just realize that the reason they were making big profits before the crash was because they were borrowing against the soundness of their own investment. The more money they made on the fees from the AIG mortgage insurance, the more their investment was in potential danger of collapse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 11:26 AM

31. Gee, and their TV commercials say

they were so happy with the bailout and were glad the taxpayers made a little profit.

Greenberg would have wiped out the shareholders anyway. He should sue the shareholders for buying AIG stock and being dumb enoungh to get screwed by him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 11:27 AM

32. Here's their plan

Sue.

The admin will cave since it never has the stomach to fight, and will settle for a few billion.

Everybody gets an AIG directorship/board seat after they leave office.

Everyone wins!!!

Oh, wait... We (the taxpayer) get screwed again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #32)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 04:09 PM

42. To the Obama cave with you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 11:34 AM

33. hey AIG, didn't you accept the terms of the bailout?

If you sign a contract with specific terms, you look ridiculous to turn around and say 5 yrs. later, "Hey, I didn't like the terms I agreed to."

This member of the public says not one more dime to AIG.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 11:56 AM

34. The big surprise is if they lose. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 01:21 PM

36. Sure sucks

Last edited Tue Jan 8, 2013, 01:57 PM - Edit history (1)

when you get punked by your own dishonest ways!!


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 01:29 PM

37. Isn't that rich...

complaining about the fees and interest rate being usery....my, my, I hope their complaints go as far as ours do about their fees and interest rates...they were at the same credit rating as deadbeats at the time of the bail-outs they should have been paying at least 13% just like their customers with bad credit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 02:04 PM

38. I think a line in the article sums it up nicely: shareholders would have suffered far worse

without the government help.

And, as a professor of economics (or something) said, it's a slap in the face to taxpayers.

Is there no end to the greed?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 02:39 PM

39. re:AIG Is Thinking About Suing the Government for Bailing It Out

next time aig screams we are going bankrupt, let it fail too big to fail? bah humbug

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 03:13 PM

40. I think somebody ought to be tarred and feathered for even considering such a thing. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 04:05 PM

41. That takes a shitload of Chutzpah

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Reply #41)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 07:04 PM

46. Murder Your Parents Then Cry Because You Are An Orphan n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 04:27 PM

43. Naitionalize, seize all assets, jail the fucktads

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 05:59 PM

44. Lawmakers Warn A.I.G. Not to Join Lawsuit Against U.S.

As the board of the American International Group weighs whether to join a shareholder lawsuit against the United States government, several lawmakers have a simple message for the bailed-out insurer.

Donít do it. Donít even think about it.

With A.I.G. having fully repaid its $182 billion bailout only weeks ago, the prospect of the company trying to claw back some of the $22 billion in profit that its rescue generated for shareholders doesnít sit right with several members of Congress.

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/01/08/lawmakers-warn-a-i-g-not-to-join-lawsuit-against-u-s/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 06:14 PM

45. Thieves fighting over their share of the "take" - happens every time.

They're just pissed Goldman Sachs got too big a cut of the take.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 07:39 PM

47. UPDATES below



Lawmakers Warn A.I.G. Not to Join Lawsuit Against U.S.
DU OP here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014360967

Elizabeth Warren gears up (Rips AIG a new one)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101652483



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 08:05 PM

48. They are doing this to prevent sharholder lawsuits..but it still looks like arrogant slimey BS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 09:47 PM

49. Will they include themselves for taking the bailout? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 02:21 AM

50. I'm generally against capital punishment but this made me think twice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 04:22 AM

51. I'm not sure who I should be angry with more...

AIG, or the government for bothering to bail out these vermin scumbags.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 07:34 AM

53. gawdamn the muthafuckers to hell. and I mean that all fire and brimstone hell, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justin_Beach (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 10:13 AM

54. I'll refrain from thumping my chest in anger until we find out

what was decided at the Board meeting. The former CEO of AIG, Hank Greenberg, is the one who is suing the government. Greenberg was ousted from the position that he had held since the mid 60s thanks to charges brought against the company at the time that Spitzer was NY's Attorney General. Greenberg owned a large amount of AIG stock and he felt that the bailout made him lose millions of dollars.

Greenberg is asking the AIG Board of Directors to join him in the lawsuit. The Board is meeting today and they will make a decision at that meeting. I venture to say that AIG won't want the negative publicity that this lawsuit would bring to them and will stay out of it. BTW, Treasury is also meeting to discuss this lawsuit.Ē

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread