Even if they ultimately lose their last-minute court battle, the Indiana pension funds defending their rights as secured first-lien creditors of Chrysler have done a valuable deed.
We have learned, among many other things, how at least one government lawyer characterized the funds' lawyer, Thomas Lauria.
A $10,000 Democratic Party donor, Lauria, despite clear evidence of intimidation of his originally larger pool of clients by Barack Obama himself (in his April 30 speech announcing the company's bankruptcy filing) and his car guys, has nonetheless bravely pursued the important contract law and fiduciary duty issues involved in the shortchanging of his clients for several weeks.
Wait until you see the word the government lawyer used to describe Lauria.
As a result of Lauria's legal efforts, we have also learned of e-mails showing that the government drove the Chrysler-Fiat deal over Chrysler management concerns, and did so despite more than likely knowing very little about shotgun marriage partner Fiat.
All of this and more is in a report published last night in the Wall Street Journal by Neil King Jr. and Jeffrey McCracken.
Here are key paragraphs revealing containing items I expect most of the rest of the establishment media to ignore (bolds after title are mine):
U.S. Pushed Fiat Deal on Chrysler
The Obama administration rushed an alliance between Chrysler LLC and Fiat SpA despite Chrysler's worries about Fiat's financial health and its willingness to share technology, according to internal company emails.
The emails show Fiat ignoring requests for documents and trying to change contract terms late in the talks. A Chrysler adviser at one point said the deal risked looking as if the U.S. auto maker and the Treasury Department, which helped broker the pact, were "in bed with a shady partner." In another note, an official referred to the Treasury Department as "God."
..... On Friday, a federal appeals court upheld Chrysler's Fiat deal, dismissing a challenge by dissident Chrysler debt holders. But the court also issued a stay until 4 p.m. Monday -- leaving a small window for Thomas Lauria, the lawyer pursuing the case, to appeal to the Supreme Court. One judge on the three-judge panel suggested the Supreme Court should have "a swing at this ball."
Mr. Lauria's persistence led one government lawyer in the Chrysler case to dub him a "terrorist" in an email to a Chrysler adviser.
..... The emails, which run from mid-March until early May, were put into the court record following a request by Mr. Lauria, the lawyer fighting the bankruptcy on behalf of various Indiana pension and investment funds that hold Chrysler bank debt. They argue that the case has trampled on established bankruptcy law.
..... Chrysler's advisers told the company their Italian counterparts were refusing to provide sufficient financial information to evaluate the deal. A team sent to Fiat headquarters in Turin, Italy, reported back on March 14 that "no financial due diligence ... has or can be performed."
An internal memo 13 days later from Chrysler's advisory team also said Fiat's "off-balance-sheet investments" in joint ventures around the world posed an economic risk and a political risk," including the appearance that "Treasury/Chrysler" was "in bed with a shady partner."
Eight days before President Barack Obama announced his support for the alliance in an April 30 speech, Chrysler officials were still bristling over what they considered Fiat's unwillingness to provide even basic information about its finances.
..... Fiat is putting in no cash.
..... Despite the push to do a deal with Fiat, Chrysler advisers continued into April urging the Treasury to think again about a potential merger with GM. Earlier talks between the two auto giants had broken down in November, and the Obama administration put little stock in the idea.
How did "Treasury/Chrysler" get from "lacking basic information" about Fiat's finances to completing sufficient due diligence to support making the deal with a very complex company in eight days? Additionally, Fiat's "off-balance-sheet investments" seem to have a whiff of Enron-like potential.
The two WSJ reporters also reveal how the government, despite the urgings of Chrysler management, refused to explore the viability of combining it with deeply troubled but at least financially transparent General Motors.
The funds are appealing to the Supreme Court. Bloomberg reports that "A creditor bid for Supreme Court intervention would likely go first to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who handles emergency matters from the New York-based federal appeals court that ruled yesterday. She could act on her own or refer the request to the full nine-member court." Justice Ginsurg's gatekeeper function would appear to indicate that the Indiana pension funds will see not see justice served.
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.
—Tom Blumer is president of a training and development company in Mason, Ohio, and is a contributing editor to NewsBusters




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Shotgun Weddings frequently end in Shotgun Divorces
June 6, 2009 - 11:42 ET by MAS1916Intervening in a free-market enterprise by the government is disastrous enough. When the Team Obama folks get into the business, it guarantees disaster!
The unbelievable arrogance of Obama's minions to believe they can run Chrysler better than shareholder-elected management will be revealed shortly. The deal will be a guaranteed loser as Fiat will understand that a government partner in the American auto market will ensure failure of the product line. And Obama doesn't control Fiat.
Where does that leave GM? Without some guarantee of ongoing taxpayer support, neither Chrysler or GM can survive. Obama will need the UAW to keep functioning until 2012, so He will keep feeding the beast until then. But what in the world will the product lines look like? ( for a humorous look at the 2012 GM product line, you can hit: http://firstconservative.com/blog/political-humor/political-humor-general-motors-in-2012 )
At least Obama won't be able to hide the amount of taxpayer funding He will throw away.
At least .....
June 6, 2009 - 12:05 ET by Tom Blumer..... Obama won't be able to hide the amount of taxpayer funding He will throw away.
I wouldn't bet on that.
This is the day that Obama officially became a dictator.
June 6, 2009 - 19:02 ET by TailgunnerI spent three years stationed in Italy. Any money you put in any industry there has an even chance of winding up in the pockets of organized crime.
Nobody wants this but Obama and his underbosses.
What more do we need to know? He's a ******* dictator.
NOLO PUGNARE ME OCCIDERE
What Obama giveth with one hand he taketh away with both hands.
The investors are boned.
June 6, 2009 - 12:11 ET by supercon"A creditor bid for Supreme Court intervention would likely go first to
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who handles emergency matters from the New
York-based federal appeals court that ruled yesterday.
Gee.... how do you think she will rule...? She has already made her decision before she has even heard the argument. Can you just picture her sitting at the kitchen table reading the paper to Mr Whiskers her cat as she says "Hmmm...Fiat. Won't that be interesting? Just think of all those little cute cars they will build. I don't see a problem there." It is as inevitable as the morning sunrise.
The fix is in. Also I think it will come to light that Fiat has some sort of connection to either George Soros ,Bill Clinton or some wealthy Dem power broker who will cash in big time. Why else would Obama pick such an obscure car company to give Chrysler to ?
Hey Janet Napolitano...I'm proud to be a Right-winger.
This is a clean deal for Fiat.
June 6, 2009 - 12:26 ET by sevenFrom fiats view, the acquisition is viewed as a "test drive". Fiat is accessing only assets and not liabilities. Obama is still providing an expense account. If it fails, Obama is still supporting the UAW. This purchase is like a bubble.
Fiat also will learn quickly they are not running the deal. Usually angel investors actually micromanage their investments. Obama is the angel. In the paper it is made to appear Fiat is. Just some perspective, dodge Rahm is closed. No one including a bankruptcy judge can force suppilers to ramp up and build sub assemblies. They may be willing to but may be unwilling to extend a dollar of credit. If they have no tarp, Obama has no claws in them to force production. Suppliers may go cod on terms because they can reead that contacts with Obama/chrysler are void and payment is at the whim of the Feds.
Yes and no.
June 6, 2009 - 13:05 ET by superconI agree that extending credit or entering into an agreement with Chrysler may be risky but some of those suppliers have no choice. Chrysler may have been their biggest contract and without them they are out of business.
What I think will be the more uncertain aspect is how the company will be run with so many task masters. A camel is a horse designed by a committee.
Hey Janet Napolitano...I'm proud to be a Right-winger.
This is fascism 101. On
June 8, 2009 - 09:08 ET by pcantidoteThis is fascism 101. On what possible grounds could a court uphold what this administration is trying to do here?
Enforce Term Limits if They Won't: Vote Against ALL Incumbents in 2010.
New Funding Options
June 8, 2009 - 23:43 ET by Nicolas INormal
0
People
need a new funding option, as the normal options for short term expenses and
emergency bills, credit lenders at banks and the credit card companies, are
experiencing a major shortage of funds to lend. Ivory back scratchers, gold toilets, mistresses, and trips to
golf in Tahiti when you're supposed to figuring out how to pay back the bailout
money are things that must be preserved, and so the rest of us need a new
funding option. Many a budget in
America has been hard hit, as millions have been laid off and credit is tighter
than it has ever been, and many are turning to payday loans as a new
funding option.
How did "Treasury/Chrysler"
November 19, 2009 - 20:47 ET by abshandraHow did "Treasury/Chrysler" get from "lacking basic information" about
Fiat's finances to completing sufficient due diligence to support
making the deal with a very complex company in eight days? - My answer they are magician, so it is easy for them to get it. They just a smart liar, so it is easy for them to do it. It is something usual to be used by people if they are on stuck position and want to find 'an emergency exit'. The government would be stupid if they don't know about it. (Shandra from Bankruptcy Records)