Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: NonValueAdded
It also sounds like Lockheed will have to issue guidance to their shareholders on the exposure.

Lockheed has no exposure (as far as their legal department is concerned). IF Obama keeps his word, the taxpayers will fully cover any expenses.

12 posted on 10/01/2012 2:14:59 PM PDT by null and void (Day 1350 of our ObamaVacation from reality - Obama, a queer and present danger)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: null and void

disagree ... promise or not, unless the deal is in writing they are breaking the law counting on the breaking of another law to make them whole. There is a risk and it is the risk that gets disclosed.


23 posted on 10/01/2012 2:38:07 PM PDT by NonValueAdded (Obama gives us the gift of downward mobility)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: null and void
IF Obama keeps his word, the taxpayers will fully cover any expenses.

Therein lies the problem. Under what authority does Obama provide the funds for those expenses?

And even if he has the authority, what if Obama isn't a position to provide them?

If I were a lawyer in HR at Lockheed, I would be pointing out that this is an empty promise, and that the company puts themselves at significant risk.

27 posted on 10/01/2012 3:02:45 PM PDT by justlurking (The only remedy for a bad guy with a gun is a good WOMAN (Sgt. Kimberly Munley) with a gun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: null and void
Lockheed has no exposure (as far as their legal department is concerned). IF Obama keeps his word, the taxpayers will fully cover any expenses.

I am not sure. An agreement to violate the law is unenforceable. So if Lockheed takes this deal, gets sued and loses, the federal government would not have to keep its promise to reimburse fines, penalties, etc. If Romney wins, we could expect that Lockheed would be out of luck. In the unlikely event Obama wins, it may be that a taxpayer would have standing to sue to block enforcement of this agreement. I sure don't want my tax dollars used for this.

As another poster also suggested, this agreement may not only be unenforceable, but also illegal.

49 posted on 10/01/2012 5:28:29 PM PDT by T Ruth (Islam shall be defeated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson