Senator Chris Dodd facing fresh political firestorm

[peejay 327]

Dodd facing fresh political firestorm

Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) looks like he may be facing a fresh political firestorm.

Dodd just admitted on CNN that he inserted a loophole in the stimulus legislation that allowed million-dollar bonuses to insurance giant AIG to go forward – after previously denying any involvement in writing the controversial provision. .

“We wrote the language in the bill, the deal with bonuses, golden parachutes, excessive executive compensation that was adopted unanimously by the United States Senate in the stimulus bill,” Dodd told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer this afternoon.

“But for that language, there would have been no language to deal with this at all.”

Dodd had previously said that he played no role in writing the controversial language, and was not a part of the conference committee that inserted the language in the bill. As late as today, Dodd’s spokeswoman denied the senator’s involvement.

The AIG bonuses have caused a political firestorm, with Republicans and Democrats alike looking to lay blame for who’s responsible, and leading lawmakers looking to revoke the bonuses.

Dodd’s role in the legislation will likely come up as he faces the likelihood of a tough re-election. Former GOP congressman Rob Simmons announced he was running this week, and has already taken issue with Dodd’s stewardship as chairman of the Senate Banking Committee.

UPDATE: Dodd put out the following statement this evening:

“I’m the one who has led the fight against excessive executive compensation, often over the objections of many. I did not want to make any changes to my original Senate-passed amendment but I did so at the request of Administration officials, who gave us no indication that this was in any way related to AIG. Let me be clear – I was completely unaware of these AIG bonuses until I learned of them last week.

“Reports that I changed my position on this issue are simply untrue. I answered a question by CNN last night regarding whether or not a specific date was aimed at protecting AIG. When I saw that my comments had been misconstrued, I felt it was important to set the record straight – that this had nothing to do with AIG.

“Fortunately, we wrote this amendment in a way that allows the Treasury Department to go back and review these bonus contracts and seek to recover the money for taxpayers. Again, I have led the fight to curb excessive executive compensation, and will continue to do so.”

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090318/pl_politico/30833

[fozzie 41]

I hate politicians!

[I'm Gone 60]

http://www.dcexaminer.com/politics/Big-AIG...d-from-Fed.html

Big AIG bonuses got nod from Fed

American International Group’s unpaid CEO Edward Liddy said the company’s board has been in close consultation with the Federal Reserve since November about whether to hand out the $165 million in bonuses it issued to its top employees last week.

The disclosure took Capital Markets subcommittee chairman, Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa., by surprise and he asked Liddy to clarify his statement.

Since the bonuses were disclosed last week, the Obama administration has said they found out about the payments just before they were handed out by AIG, which is the recipient of $170 billion in government funds and is slated to receive $30 billion more soon.

“Am I to understand you’re saying that Chairman Bernanke or his designated person at the Federal Reserve was informed that you were going to make these payments and acquiesced in that decision?” A puzzled-looking Kanjorski said.

“Yes,” Liddy assured him. “Everything we do, we do in the partnership with the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is at our board meetings, at our compensation committee meetings, at our various meetings on strategy. And they have the ability to weigh in either yea or nay on anything that we decide.”

Liddy told a panel of angry House lawmakers that the AIG board agonized over the bonuses and with the help of the Fed, came to the conclusion that they should pay the money rather than risk losing employees who are managing complicated portfolios that could implode if they quit.

“There was great angst over the payments of these bonuses on all of our part and the judgment we made was that the risk was too great that we would lose all the progress that we made if we didn’t pay these bonuses,” Liddy said.

Rep. Mike Castle, R-Del., who has been critical of Geithner’s involvement in the bonus controversy, asked Liddy to submit in writing a list of the meetings about the bonuses and who was present.

[I'm Gone 60]

http://www.dcexaminer.com/politics/Dodd-si...8-41404342.html

Dodd silent on language in stimulus that allows AIG bonuses

Dodd’s state of Connecticut is home to a large division of AIG, which has given the former Democratic presidential candidate more money than to any other lawmaker. Dodd received more than $101,000 in campaign donations from AIG employees in 2008 and $223,000 since 2003, according to OpenSecrets.org.

I'll say it once again Dodd and Barney Frank are two of the biggest slime balls in the whole mess we are in.

If it wasn't for Frank pushing for loans to be made to people that couldn't afford them and Dodd protecting companies like AIG from greater oversite we wouldn't have this mess.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

It's all misdirection, check this out:

Glenn Beck rips Barney Frank, AIG, and Fannie/Freddie with Judge Napolitano

Yesterday Glenn Beck put together one of his better monologues complete with a rotund Barney Frank white board drawing. He had Judge Andrew Napolitano sitting by for backup.

Beck explains why Obama and Democrats (like Frank) are using the art of political misdirection to push us away from the real problems we are facing. He does it in an entertaining and informative way.

Beck shows the history of AIG, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the connections they have to the housing bubble assisted by the very members of Congress that today are crying foul.

I found myself earlier today yelling at my car radio that Obama and the Feds have no right to tell AIG to return their bonuses or tax them especially high. First of all, it’s unconsitutional (as the Judge points out). Secondly, where does the interference end? Apparently, once the bailout/nationalization door is pushed open it stays open. The government is the gift that keeps on giving. Unfortunately, the gifts that are being given are owned by us, not the government. There is another word for that: theft.

Watch Beck at his best below. It is in two parts (the embedded playlist should play both for you).

http://libertymaven.com/2009/03/18/glenn-b...apolitano/4826/

[Ban Hammer 14,269]

[HAL 9000 96]

Gee I wonder what this means:

“Reports that I changed my position on this issue are simply untrue. I answered a question by CNN last night regarding whether or not a specific date was aimed at protecting AIG. When I saw that my comments had been misconstrued, I felt it was important to set the record straight – that this had nothing to do with AIG.

“Fortunately, we wrote this amendment in a way that allows the Treasury Department to go back and review these bonus contracts and seek to recover the money for taxpayers. Again, I have led the fight to curb excessive executive compensation, and will continue to do so.”

[dalegg 143]

Gee I wonder what this means:

“Reports that I changed my position on this issue are simply untrue. I answered a question by CNN last night regarding whether or not a specific date was aimed at protecting AIG. When I saw that my comments had been misconstrued, I felt it was important to set the record straight – that this had nothing to do with AIG.

“Fortunately, we wrote this amendment in a way that allows the Treasury Department to go back and review these bonus contracts and seek to recover the money for taxpayers. Again, I have led the fight to curb excessive executive compensation, and will continue to do so.”

Weren't these guys complaining their bonuses were too small last month?

[HAL 9000 96]

Gee I wonder what this means:

"Reports that I changed my position on this issue are simply untrue. I answered a question by CNN last night regarding whether or not a specific date was aimed at protecting AIG. When I saw that my comments had been misconstrued, I felt it was important to set the record straight – that this had nothing to do with AIG.

"Fortunately, we wrote this amendment in a way that allows the Treasury Department to go back and review these bonus contracts and seek to recover the money for taxpayers. Again, I have led the fight to curb excessive executive compensation, and will continue to do so."

Weren't these guys complaining their bonuses were too small last month?

J@cka$$es... I know.

To be honest apparently those 'retention bonuses' are for the people to work themselves out of a job.

Still... way over the top.

As for me, I won't be giving my AIG bonus check back.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Dodd and the current administration knew about the bonuses before this month. So what's with the fake outrage and lying from Obama and his people?