Politicizing the DoJ, Bush/Obama Tag Team Edition

posted at 2:55 pm on June 9, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Morgen at Verum Serum took the opportunity presented by the Supreme Court’s halt of the sale of Chrysler to Fiat to do some digging — and he came up with an interesting tidbit.  While the Treasury and the White House does its best to force a marriage between the rump of Chrysler and Fiat, the Department of Justice had its own interest in Fiat, too.  That interest suddenly disappeared in December of last year, as Chrysler circled the drain:

This struck me as a little odd given the definitive nature of this statement, which seems to clearly contradict the sense of urgency that has been fostered by Chrysler and it’s benefactors in the Administration. Perhaps it can be explained by the fact that Fiat is receiving a 20% equity stake in a restructured Chrysler while contributing nothing (that’s right – $0). But I wondered whether there still might be more to this. Especially in light of a report in the Wall Street Journal over the weekend that claimed that the Obama Administration had forced the Fiat deal on Chrysler. Despite reservations on the part of Chrysler management regarding Fiat’s financial condition, and Fiat’s failure to disclose information that had been requested. According to the WSJ report, an unnamed Chrysler advisor even went so far as to express concern that the perception might ultimately be that they “were in bed with a shady partner”, meaning Fiat.

There is more truth to this statement than perhaps he knew, and it apparently applies not only to Fiat but to those in the Administration behind this deal as well. It turns out that back on December 22, right before Christmas, the U.S. Justice Department reached a settlement of sorts with Fiat and a group of affiliated companies. Fiat apparently had been under DOJ investigation for their participation in the UN “Oil for Food” scandal dating back to the early to mid 90’s. I called this a “settlement of sorts” because in actuality it is a deferred prosecution agreement, where the DOJ filed but deferred prosecution against Fiat on charges including wire fraud, falsification of books and records, and conspiracy to commit said crimes.

In exchange for Fiat signing a “Statement of Facts” admitting to and accepting responsibility for these crimes, and remitting a penalty of $7 million to the U.S. Treasury, the DOJ agreed to defer any further prosecution for a period of 3 years. Importantly, during this 3 year period Fiat is required to “cooperate fully with the Department and any other authority or agency, domestic or foreign, designated by the Department” in allowing the U.S government full access to their books and other financial records to verify that no further corrupt or fraudulent activity has taken place. If, and only if, they are deemed to have been in full cooperation with no additional violations has the DOJ agreed to move to actually dismiss the underlying charges.

By December, the outgoing administration had already given Chrysler $4 billion it knew the US would never see again.  Unlike GM, which had a chance of surviving a bankruptcy, Chrysler would have been liquidated by a bankruptcy court — unless a buyer could be found for the crippled car company.  But who would buy it, even at nothing down?  How about a company about to get reamed by the US for its role in propping up Saddam Hussein through the UN Oil-for-Food program?

But how could either the Bush or Obama administration make that work, especially if Fiat was liable for hundreds of millions in damages and criminal penalties?  Simple — cut a deal to get the Fiat issue off the table at a relatively low cost to Fiat, and then push Chrysler into Fiat’s arms.

Be sure to read all of Morgen’s post.  We need more information, but this doesn’t look coincidental — and it indicts both administrations, if true.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Be sure to read all of Morgen’s post. We need more information, but this doesn’t look coincidental — and it indicts both administrations, if true.

Yep…this period was Bush’s biggest, alltime foul-up…and Paulson should have been given his walking papers long ago…his name is going to live in infamy.

AUINSC on June 9, 2009 at 2:59 PM

Unbelievable! When is someone…. anyone going to do something about this corrupt, destructive “administration”? Are we no longer a Nation of Laws?

Key West Reader on June 9, 2009 at 3:01 PM

Politicization or saving tens of thousands of US jobs?

Also interesting given that Fiat said they aren’t walking away from the deal today and the Obama administration doesn’t seem that concerned about the Indiana lawsuit…

Skywise on June 9, 2009 at 3:02 PM

Wow. This is truly stunning if true. And it sure doesn’t pass the smell test.

rockmom on June 9, 2009 at 3:03 PM

Oh, boy. Is the whole world corrupt? No, don’t answer that.

Yup, it’s called The Swamp because…

So I guess Fiat gets off easy if they take the risk on Chrysler? And more Oil-for-Food criminals skate…

This is why Sotomayor should not be on SCOTUS. She wouldn’t have the independence to pull a Ginsburg in the current situation. Which is why Bama wants her, I suppose, as FDR “packed” SCOTUS once before.

The regressive ideas of your just spew from “progressives”.

Harry Schell on June 9, 2009 at 3:04 PM

Libya’s Ghadafi is a share holder of FIAT. Go figgure.

seven on June 9, 2009 at 3:07 PM

“when the world hands you lemons, have your servants make you lemonade.” – D.C. Bureaucrats

moonbatkiller on June 9, 2009 at 3:08 PM

Oscar Wyatt is sitting in a jail cell because of the Oil for Food scandal.

jp on June 9, 2009 at 3:08 PM

The SC is to rule today about 3 if they will take the case. If ANY of the justices give a hoot about the constitution, they will deal with this. We will see. Gads, this gets better by the day. Thanks to all who are digging into this.
L

letget on June 9, 2009 at 3:09 PM

Wow Ed!

Allahpundit, Lt. Dan, and several other HotAir readers would call you a conspiracy theorist nutjob. At least, if they’re staying consistent.

Everyone knows … conspiracies don’t exist.

(Sarcasm off)

Gregor on June 9, 2009 at 3:11 PM

Some of the current worship of powerful executives may come from those who admire strength and accomplishment of any sort. Others hail the display of Presidential strength simply because they approve of the result reached by the use of power. This is nothing less than the totalitarian philosophy that the end justifies the means. If ever there was a philosophy of government totally at war with that of the Founding Fathers, it is this one.
- Barry Goldwater

MB4 on June 9, 2009 at 3:12 PM

It’s the Bilderbergers! I’m not kidding!

From everyone’s favorite…Wikipedia:

According to the investigative journalist Chip Berlet, the origins of Bilderberger conspiracy theories can be traced to activist Phyllis Schlafly. In his 1994 report Right Woos Left, published by Political Research Associates, he writes:

“The views on intractable godless communism expressed by Schwarz were central themes in three other bestselling books which were used to mobilize support for the 1964 Goldwater campaign. The best known was Phyllis Schlafly’s A Choice, Not an Echo which suggested a conspiracy theory in which the Republican Party was secretly controlled by elitist intellectuals dominated by members of the Bilderberger group, whose policies would pave the way for global communist conquest.”[24]

*gulp*

SouthernGent on June 9, 2009 at 3:17 PM

Nah. If it was the Bilderbergers, they’d hate an outsider like Sarah Palin.

:D

Daggett on June 9, 2009 at 3:19 PM

Are we no longer a Nation of Laws?

Key West Reader on June 9, 2009 at 3:01 PM

Look in your rear view mirror. You see that sign about a mile back? If you look real hard you may be able to just make it out.

You are now exiting the “Nation of Laws” zone.

MB4 on June 9, 2009 at 3:20 PM

I don’t mean to sound naive, though I probably am, but for all his faults, I just can’t see Bush doing something this corrupt. Why wait til the very end of his run to do this and the TARP bank mess (specifically forcing banks to take money) for power he wouldn’t have. I know he was magnanimous and bent over backwards to help Obama but damn… really? Am I misunderstanding something?

Monica on June 9, 2009 at 3:21 PM

Unbelievable! When is someone…. anyone going to do something about this corrupt, destructive “administration”? Are we no longer a Nation of Laws?

Key West Reader on June 9, 2009 at 3:01 PM

No, we are a nation of “Czars” who answer only to Dear Leader.

He WON the election. That means he gets to do whatever he wants, right?

wildcat84 on June 9, 2009 at 3:21 PM

I wasn’t feeling good, so I took a nap…………..

……….. now I’m going to go throw up and try to go back to sleep.

Seven Percent Solution on June 9, 2009 at 3:22 PM

SouthernGent on June 9, 2009 at 3:17 PM

Yeah, because again …

Everyone knows Congress is not controlled by elitist intellectuals. I mean, COME ONE! They’re just like you and me and they care about what we think.

Everyone knows the most powerful members of our government do NOT belong to a private club made up of the most powerful political and business leaders in the world. Geez! What nonsense!

And everyone knows that it’s blatently obvious that our leaders are NOT, beyond every bit of common sense, leading us straight into Socialism/Communism.

Pffft! Crazy nutjobs! Careful! You’ll give conservatives a bad name if you claim there’s powerful people working together for a common goal of securing power.

CONSPIRACY!

Gregor on June 9, 2009 at 3:25 PM

This deal is getting better by the minute.

Iblis on June 9, 2009 at 3:25 PM

This would explain the very curious statement made by Fiat’s head this morning:

“We would never walk away,” Marchionne said in response to a question about whether Fiat would pull out of the deal if it isn’t completed by the June 15 deadline. “Never.”

Fiat has the contractual right(and I’d daresay responsibility)to walk away from this deal if the SCOTUS holds up the deal (as it should.) I found his comment very strange.

JiangxiDad on June 9, 2009 at 3:25 PM

This is more evidence of Chicago style corrupt deal making in the White House. If the deal goes through, how many Obama supporters will be appointed to the Fiat board?

Loxodonta on June 9, 2009 at 3:29 PM

“We would never walk away,” Marchionne said in response to a question about whether Fiat would pull out of the deal if it isn’t completed by the June 15 deadline. “Never.”
Fiat has the contractual right(and I’d daresay responsibility)to walk away from this deal if the SCOTUS holds up the deal (as it should.) I found his comment very strange.

JiangxiDad on June 9, 2009 at 3:25 PM

I wonder if this also has something to do with Chrysler just announcing additional time to the dealers being shut down. Today was supposed to be the final liquidation day, now it’s been extended to another week.

Knucklehead on June 9, 2009 at 3:31 PM

Monica on June 9, 2009 at 3:21 PM

Bush is a good man, and trusts people to do what is right…

Which means that a Cabal of Bankers could easily take adavantage of a lack of information flow on a subject like this.

Take the initial bailout. I’m sure he beleived his advisors, that it would be used to buy toxic Mortgage assets… even though the day after the bill was signed the treasury “changed plans” and to date, not a single toxic asset has been bought with that money…

Think Bait and Switch… and Bush, like many others, fell for it…

Real question is who is running this “conspiricy”…

Remember, Geithner came from the New York Fed… the exact same Fed who FAILED so badly at their oversite job that the banks started failing…

Romeo13 on June 9, 2009 at 3:32 PM

It always goes back to Saddam, doesn’t it?

Chuck Schick on June 9, 2009 at 3:33 PM

It’s information like this that makes me think that elections aren’t going to be enough to right this ship.

myrenovations on June 9, 2009 at 3:33 PM

Monica on June 9, 2009 at 3:21 PM

I think by then he had just handed the ball off to Paulson and was letting him call the shots. dubya eptitomized a lame duck pres.

a capella on June 9, 2009 at 3:34 PM

Starting next year, every politician in DC needs to be replaced.
Everyone in that town is corrupt.

ChrisM on June 9, 2009 at 3:57 PM

Hmmm… just did a quick search but didn’t find anything…

Anyone know what Hank Paulson is doing now? ie…

What Boards is he on?
Is he working for someone?

Follow the money…

Romeo13 on June 9, 2009 at 3:58 PM

Don’t you just love it when a plan comes together right in front of you? Hell, we don’t need a conspiracy theory to explain this do we? These guys have been making it up on the fly for the last 2 years so I wouldn’t have any problem believing that the Fiat deal fell in their lap like a piece of fruit just when they needed another idea. After all, that’s what legal staff brain-storming sessions are for.
I could see some bright-eyed young legal eagle sitting in a room full of sweaty lawyer types with their ties loosened and sleeves rolled up with a two day shadow on their faces, working on the Chrysler problem and suddenly saying “Hey guys, I got an old frat brother over at Justice working on the Fiat/Food for Oil deal. Why not put these two deals together and shove Chrysler into Fiat in exchange for a plea deal?”
This is a scene right out of “Law and Order”, which is really the irony of it all, isn’t it? Because it’s neither lawful nor orderly! But of course ever since this banking mess broke in 07 the government itself has been neither lawful nor orderly. Its been short-term, narrow-focus bob-and-weave pragmatism every day, one day at a time. Indeed, these people have no idea what they’re going to do or say 24 hours from now.
And of course that’s really the problem right there isn’t it; A government limited only by pragmatism – HAS NO LIMITS!

Lew on June 9, 2009 at 4:01 PM

Hmmm… just did a quick search but didn’t find anything…

Anyone know what Hank Paulson is doing now? ie…

What Boards is he on?
Is he working for someone?

Romeo13 on June 9, 2009 at 3:58 PM

You mean aside from being Secretary of the Treasury?

Here’s some general info:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Paulson

AUINSC on June 9, 2009 at 4:03 PM

This is amazing. I’ve been getting more and more scared of what Obama has been doing, but I’ve been mad at Bush all along for opening the door and giving Obama the ability to third party all of this mess.

For all the folks on the left screaming about Bush’s war crimes I’m convinced this was his biggest mess and the blunder he will be remembered for.

jhspaybar on June 9, 2009 at 4:09 PM

AUINSC on June 9, 2009 at 4:03 PM

Geithner has that job now.

I’d also be really curious as to what Paulson’s up to these days.

Monica on June 9, 2009 at 4:18 PM

I don’t mean to sound naive, though I probably am, but for all his faults, I just can’t see Bush doing something this corrupt. Why wait til the very end of his run to do this and the TARP bank mess (specifically forcing banks to take money) for power he wouldn’t have. I know he was magnanimous and bent over backwards to help Obama but damn… really? Am I misunderstanding something?

Monica on June 9, 2009 at 3:21 PM

The way I see this, it’s very possible Bush was involved, however….it was, and still is a democrat controlled White House, and Congress. It’s very possible the Dems were doing this under the radar, and it went full fledge after Obama took the oath.

Either way, this is a huge issue of corruption, and criminal indictments need to go out.

capejasmine on June 9, 2009 at 4:19 PM

AUINSC on June 9, 2009 at 4:03 PM

Don’t think for one moment, that this wasn’t possibly a deal done by both parties. No blaming one, or the other here, until we know more, but my guess is, if this isn’t buried somehow, a lot of names are going to be named.

capejasmine on June 9, 2009 at 4:20 PM

Monica on June 9, 2009 at 4:18 PM

That’s a horrible gaffe on my part…sorry. Damn.

AUINSC on June 9, 2009 at 4:21 PM

AUINSC on June 9, 2009 at 4:03 PM

Uh, Tim Geithner, the EX head of the New York Fed is now Secretary of the Treasury.

Paulson was head of Treasury under Bush…

Romeo13 on June 9, 2009 at 4:22 PM

That’s a horrible gaffe on my part…sorry. Damn.

AUINSC on June 9, 2009 at 4:21 PM

LOL… no prob… its hard to keep up with all the liars cheats and Politicians in charge….

or… is liar, cheat, and politican just different words for the same subset?

Romeo13 on June 9, 2009 at 4:24 PM

capejasmine on June 9, 2009 at 4:20 PM

Yeah, I’m sure that is true…but Bush panicked on this and opened the door for Obama on a lot of these things. Paulson was a disaster.

AUINSC on June 9, 2009 at 4:24 PM

Thanks Romeo and a capella. I don’t think Bush always made the best decisions (mainly the last 6 months in office) but I always believed that he truly loves/d the US and did what he thought was in our best interest. This just doesn’t seem right.

Paulson does seem to be more savvy than I’d ever given him credit for. Is Goldman Sachs the portal to hell? It reminds of that evil law firm in The Devil’s Advocate.

Monica on June 9, 2009 at 4:26 PM

Romeo13 on June 9, 2009 at 4:24 PM

Yeah, just call me Joe Biden…but only for the rest of today…

AUINSC on June 9, 2009 at 4:26 PM

I don’t mean to sound naive, though I probably am, but for all his faults, I just can’t see Bush doing something this corrupt.

Monica,
Agree. I think it more likely this was done in the Justice Dept. The civil attorneys there reportedly voted for Obama by 80% or something like that. And by December, Obama’s people would have been crawling all over that department.

I think this was cooked up by O’s team.

But don’t pay much attention to my opining. I’ve often thought of the mafia as I watch the thuggish Chicago-style tactics of these pols. And Fiat is Italian. And Italians are….well, you get my drift.

jeanneb on June 9, 2009 at 4:27 PM

Yeah, I’m sure that is true…but Bush panicked on this and opened the door for Obama on a lot of these things. Paulson was a disaster.

AUINSC on June 9, 2009 at 4:24 PM

I agree. However….Obama could have stopped the train wreck. Instead he added to it, and things are an even bigger mess, that we may never get out of. At the expense of our children, grandchildren, and far beyond that. Is this REALLY the legacy we want to leave for them? We enjoyed the freedoms, and liberties America had to offer. They won’t get to know that, and for me, that is heart breaking!

capejasmine on June 9, 2009 at 4:30 PM

capejasmine on June 9, 2009 at 4:30 PM

Agreed…please don’t think I’m letting Obama off the hook for anything here…his disasters have already dwarfed those of Bush, in his last several months, by several orders of magnitude.

AUINSC on June 9, 2009 at 4:33 PM

Even if all of this circumstantial “evidence” is accurate, I’m not so sure it indicts anyone. The plea deal with Bush’s DOJ seems to have simply set up a Fiat company eager to stay in the Obama DOJ’s good graces for the remainder of the three-year probational period. Whether the plea deal was good or bad, who knows? It doesn’t sound so very misguided.

The Chrysler loan, though, was indeed one of the lowlights for President Bush, and was yet another example of his eagerness to be liked more than to be right. It was a favor to a president-elect who had built his entire career on Bush-bashing, and who would go on to blame his predecessor for every ill known to man.

So yes, the Bush Administration set almost everything in motion with the last few months of flailing about trying to “do something”; but no, I’m not really seeing a big quid-pro-quo here.

Now, when it comes to the Obama Administration, if there was leverage to be had against Fiat because of the plea deal, you can bet that the power-hungry new president exerted himself in this way. Crime? No, but par for the course in terms of a mad king on the loose.

cackcon on June 9, 2009 at 4:37 PM

Hmmmm… another question springs to mind…

Why was the US Justice Department going after an ITALIAN Company in the first place?

What did this have to do with the US?

Apparently they were going after Fiat for messing up the Oil for Food stuff… but just HOW does the US have jurisdiction? I could see Italy going after them… I could see the UN getting involved (as it was their program)…

But why the US Justice Department?

Romeo13 on June 9, 2009 at 4:50 PM

Oh, boy. Is the whole world corrupt?

My thoughts exactly. This puts an even deeper stink on the “Oil for Food” program that is still biting the US Taxpayers in the butt.

And now that we know the DOJ is involved in this, how can we ever expect justice will see the light of day.

Cackcon: how can you say this is not a crime? Of course it’s a crime! The US President has sworn to uphold the Constitution and protect and defend the United States (that would include US taxpayers). No where is the President given the power to twist the balls of foreign businesses so the US taxpayers can get screwed one more time. The deal is not for the benefit of anyone but the US Government’s intent on socialism.

And yes, where the H*LL are the Republicans and any other government official interested in actually doing their job and protecting the people from a massive government take over of private business at the expense of the US taxpayers and their great grandchildren. What the H*LL do those people in Washington DC do anyway?

katablog.com on June 9, 2009 at 4:54 PM

Agreed…please don’t think I’m letting Obama off the hook for anything here…his disasters have already dwarfed those of Bush, in his last several months, by several orders of magnitude.

AUINSC on June 9, 2009 at 4:33 PM

No worries at all!

capejasmine on June 9, 2009 at 5:00 PM

Nah. If it was the Bilderbergers, they’d hate an outsider like Sarah Palin.

:D

Daggett on June 9, 2009 at 3:19 PM

Which is why I wonder if she can be elected considering they probably do hate her.

Wonder if the Left will pursue THIS angle against Bush since they want him in jail so badly? I doubt it too!

freeus on June 9, 2009 at 5:14 PM

Small, but relevent point, I think….

Richard Reuben left the Treasury as god in 2000……he helped to run Citibank into the ground thereafter.

Deafdog on June 9, 2009 at 5:47 PM

If this is true then there should be prison time for officials from the Bush administration and the Obama administration. And the sale should be blocked regardless of if it results in the UAW losing its stake

JKotthoff on June 9, 2009 at 6:04 PM

Somebody please remind me why the private holding company that is the majority owner in Chrysler has never had to pony up more cash (at least not that I’ve heard)?

Yasabe on June 9, 2009 at 7:35 PM

Am I the only one who thinks this guy looks like a Bond villain?

CurtZHP on June 9, 2009 at 7:45 PM