Posted on 05/19/2009 12:29:20 PM PDT by autumnraine
Edited on 05/19/2009 2:07:32 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
I am speechless. Are we Russia yet?
NEW YORK, May 19 (Reuters) - General Motors Corp's (GM.N) plan for a bankruptcy filing involves a quick sale of the company's healthy assets to a new company initially owned by the U.S. government, a source familiar with the situation said on Tuesday. The source, who would not be named because he was not cleared to speak with the media, did not specify a purchase price. The new company is expected to honor the claims of secured lenders, possibly in full, according to the source. The remaining assets of GM would stay in bankruptcy protection to satisfy other outstanding claims. GM has about $6 billion in secured debt, including a secured revolving credit and bank debt. The government's plans include giving stakes in the new company to GM's union and bondholders, although the ownership structure of the company is still being negotiated, said the source who is familiar with the company's plans. In addition, the government would extend a credit line to the new company and forgive the bulk of the $15.4 billion in emergency loans that the U.S. has already provided to GM, the source said.
The government has given GM until June 1 to restructure its operations to lower its debt burden and employee costs.
If those talks failed, the company has said it would follow rival Chrysler LLC into bankruptcy.............
Ford will be forced to take the money in order to consolidate the power; otherwise Obama’s plan will have a hole in it.
Too bad Obama’s hole doesn’t have a plan in it.
If they were smart, they'd destroy their US facilities and abandon the country. Better to have no plant at all than a government-run plant.
Except those produced BEFORE say 2008, right??? I’m still hoping one day to buy an _old_ Camaro, or a “newer” Monte Carlo SS... LOL Of course, I think hubby wants a Mustang (and as long as it’s an OLD one - don’t like the new ones), I’ll be OK with that, too! :)
[Can’t wait for the kids to move out — then again in this economy we might all be living together for quite some time... The return of the extended family! At least that’s ONE positive, eh?]
Who would buy it?
this is just disgusting.
I'm stealing that...
Did you mean:
Fnord. I’m getting a Fnord?
I wonder what the bondholders will get since they flipped off Obama’s first offer.
They (the 0 revolutionaries and go-alongs) will be as innovative and ruthless as they were in taking over GM & Chrysler and dictating to the banks.
He’s busy browsing crown catalogs.
Fraudulent conveyance
Investment Dictionary: Fraudulent Conveyance
The illegal transfer of property to another party in order to defer, hinder or defraud creditors.
Investopedia Says:
In order to be found guilty of fraudulent conveyance, it must be proven that the accused’s intention for transferring the property was to put it out of reach of a known creditor.
http://www.answers.com/topic/fraudulent-conveyance
ASSET PROTECTION - Fraudulent Conveyances
http://www.alperlaw.com/fraudulent_conveyances.html
Fraudulent conveyance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraudulent_conveyance
No we won't. Thats exactly the problem. The U. S. economy is so big it can absorb all this nonsense. The American people will not notice the impact for many years after Obama is gone. Its like slowing boiling a frog. The economy will come back in spite of Obama - just not as much as it would have. But its always hard to compare against what might have been. Get used to 6 years of this although the dems in Congress will start taking hits every 2 years as knowledgeable independents revolt. But it wont be enough to stop O from winning a second term. The demographics are in his favor. By middle of 2nd term this leftist crap will have run its course for those in the middle and Obama will be reduced to naming monuments and signing Exec orders like Clinton.
*crickets*
I just purchased your flag. ;o)
As I understand the situation, the secured lenders including preferred and bond holders are being offered common stock in accord with a complex formulas that will net them about $.22 on the $$ in commonstock. The UAW will get similar deal in exchange for taking on the old pension and health care stuff.
The post deal common will include another big slug I can’t remember who gets. That is possibly what the new company is offering and the government is buying.
The final result is tons of very bad common stock that is pretty much worthless.
The deal must be approved before the deadline and it is not a sure thing. There is strong sentiment among the debt holders to reject the deal, go to bankruptcy and divy up the assets to the secured or to force the trustee to honor them as first in line before all others including the government.
The person who gave Reuters the story glossed over or didn’t know the details. The story is in my view very superficial.
In Russia you can pray in school..........
In a normal world, this is as it should be.
I hope the secured creditors stick to their guns, and the bankruptcy judge is a strong person who cherishes the law.
I'm going to post this so that EVERYONE who thinks we are powerless to do something about this understands how best to go about it. We need to find the legal remedy enabling us to charge our representatives with disobeying their oaths of office and start removing them one by one. Here is the case.
Exhibit A, The Twentieth Amendment, Section 3 reads as follows:
" ”3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.”
Exhibit B U. S. Code, CITE: 3USC19
TITLE 3--THE PRESIDENT, CHAPTER 1- PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS AND VACANCIES Sec. 19. Vacancy in offices of both President and Vice President; officers eligible to act ”(a)(1) If, by reason of death, resignation, removal from office, inability, or failure to qualify, there is neither a President nor Vice President to discharge the powers and duties of the office of President, then the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, upon his resignation as Speaker and as Representative in Congress, act as President. “
Exhibit C: U. S. Constitution, Article Six Oath of Office for elected officials:
” The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
Exhibit D: The Electoral Vote Counting Act of 1877:
The process currently provides that someone “challenge” the electoral votes during a short, specified time frame while the Electoral College votes are opened and tabulated. This process does not cover challenges to "eligibility" qualifications. In fact, if this act pretends to do so in the manner in which it prescribes, it is unconstitutional. Any act of this sort that does not require that qualifications be presented by the President elect serves to undercut the provisions in the Constitution itself. No act that does not support the Constitution is constitutional. In order to change the requirements of the Twentieth amendment, one would need to pass another amendment. An “Act” doesn’t cut the mustard.
The portion in bold stating “or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify” in section three is particularly interesting in that it plainly seems to infer that a “qualification” of some sort must be made in order to serve as President. Certainly, one cannot argue that it does not require a qualification process for one to “qualify”. To infer that the lack of a “specified” qualification process means that stated eligibility “qualifications” for the office of president can be ignored is fallacious. The wording of this passage in the twentieth amendment clearly infers that a qualification is required, regardless of how this is done.
There is only one set of qualifications listed anywhere in the Constitution that are not health related and they are listed in Article two, section one.
” No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”
To satisfy meeting the requirement of the twentieth amendment to “qualify”, a president elect must present evidence that he meets it’s requirements for eligibility to serve. This means that a proper birth certificate HAD to be presented by the president elect in order to serve as president. If this was done, where is that certificate and to whom was it presented? If this was done, why would we not have the right to verify and inspect it under the freedom of information act?
If it was NOT done, then under the provisions of the twentieth amendment, Barrack Obama has “failed to qualify” and should not be serving as president of the United States of America.
Based upon the above, I conclude that:
1. We currently have a vacancy at President because no one has yet “qualified” as required in the Twentieth amendment. The terms "The President elect shall have failed to qualify" clearly places this burden upon the President elect and not on someone raising their hand in objection.
2. Anyone serving in Congress (see “Congress” in bold in Exhibit A), or anyone who is currently serving under the oath of office in Article six has "standing" and can DEMAND that their oaths be met by receiving proper “qualifying” documentation from Mr. Obama. This charade at the time of counting the Electoral College votes does not limit their ability to do so at any time they so choose. The very fact that they are duty-bound by oath to "support" the Constitution REQUIRES them to respond to any and all attacks against it. No judge can deny any of them the standing to do so. It would ask them to break the law in their effort to enforce the law.
3. We need to start pressing legal charges against all of our local representatives and senators covered by the oath of office in Article six for disobeying their oaths to support the Constitution as it pertains to the language of section three of the Twentieth amendment. Put PRESSURE on them to represent the document that gives them their authority in the first place. We are looking into how best to do this down here. We all should be looking into this approach. NOW.
If I could find a 1969 Firebird in my price range that has been brought up to speed; I would at least look at buying it. LOL
I was wondering how there could be Russian billionaires. I guess we have to learn how to do it Russian style.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Russian_billionaires
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.