Obama bailing out Billionaire oil tycoon friends....

Cancel 2016.2

Cancel 2016.2

The Almighty
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/09/07/how-did-solyndra-get-a-sweetheart-interest-rate/

With all the crap from the left about those oh so evil Koch brothers.... it is shocking... shocking I tell you.... that none of them have bitched whined and moaned about the evil oil billionaire George Kaiser getting a $500 MILLION sweatheart loan from Obama to fund a company that got a B+ rating from Federal appraisers of the deal. Dunn & Bradstreet labeled it a 'fair' investment. Yet Obama pushed through a taxpayer funded $535 MILLION dollar loan at a whopping 1% per quarter?
 
I think it would be good for the country [for Clinton to run for president], I think that it would be good for the Democratic Party – it might even help the Republicans a little bit,” the former Vice President said with a smirk, in an interview with ABC’s Jonathan Karl on Wednesday to promote his new memoir, “In My Time.”
The former vice president said that Clinton might have an opening due to the stagnant economy.
“Maybe if– the Obama record is bad enough– and these days it’s not very good, given the shape of the economy maybe there will be enough ferment in the Democratic Party so that there will be a primary on their side,” said Cheney.
“So far she hasn’t said she would [run], but I think it’s not a bad idea,” said Cheney.


http://hotair.com/archives/2011/09/08/cheney-to-hillary-youre-our-only-hope/
 
Return of Dune said:
I think it would be good for the country [for Clinton to run for president], I think that it would be good for the Democratic Party – it might even help the Republicans a little bit,” the former Vice President said with a smirk, in an interview with ABC’s Jonathan Karl on Wednesday to promote his new memoir, “In My Time.”
The former vice president said that Clinton might have an opening due to the stagnant economy.
“Maybe if– the Obama record is bad enough– and these days it’s not very good, given the shape of the economy maybe there will be enough ferment in the Democratic Party so that there will be a primary on their side,” said Cheney.
“So far she hasn’t said she would [run], but I think it’s not a bad idea,” said Cheney.


http://hotair.com/archives/2011/09/08/cheney-to-hillary-youre-our-only-hope/
Click to expand...

What the fuck does that have to do with Obama bailing out a BILLIONAIRE OIL TYCOON with $535 MILLION in tax payers funds?
 
Superfreak said:
What the fuck does that have to do with Obama bailing out a BILLIONAIRE OIL TYCOON with $535 MILLION in tax payers funds?
Click to expand...

They are both about as logical.

Obama didn't bailout a billionare oil tycoon. That is very misleading. There was no bailout at all, it was a business loan, not a bailout, and was made to a company that the billionare held stock in.
 
Return of Dune said:
They are both about as logical.

Obama didn't bailout a billionare oil tycoon. That is very misleading. There was no bailout at all, it was a business loan, not a bailout, and was made to a company that the billionare held stock in.
Click to expand...

ROFLMAO..... you realize Obama's OWN auditors said it was risky, that Obama pushed it through anyway? that the company is now bankrupt? That the billionaire gets his money back BEFORE tax payers?

You crack me up. If the Koch brothers had received this loan, you would be going ballistic right now.
 
Superfreak said:
ROFLMAO..... you realize Obama's OWN auditors said it was risky, that Obama pushed it through anyway? that the company is now bankrupt? That the billionaire gets his money back BEFORE tax payers?

You crack me up. If the Koch brothers had received this loan, you would be going ballistic right now.
Click to expand...

Yes, the billionare gets his share of the $75 million invested, first, not any of the $535 million.

Let's recap;
1. There was no bailout.
2. The billionare get NONE OF THE $535 MILLION YOU ARE BLEATING ABOUT.
3. Nice Fail, superFail.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
when did the feds get in the business of handing out loans to start business' other than through the SBA???
Click to expand...

Federal Financing Bank

The Federal Financing Bank (FFB) is a government corporation, created by Congress in 1973 under the general supervision of the Secretary of the Treasury. The FFB was established to centralize and reduce the cost of federal borrowing, as well as federally-assisted borrowing from the public. The FFB was also established to deal with federal budget management issues which occurred when off-budget financing flooded the government securities market with offers of a variety of government-backed securities that were competing with Treasury securities. Today the FFB has statutory authority to purchase any obligation issued, sold, or guaranteed by a federal agency to ensure that fully guaranteed obligations are financed efficiently.
​
http://www.treasury.gov/ffb/
 
Superfreak said:
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/09/07/how-did-solyndra-get-a-sweetheart-interest-rate/

With all the crap from the left about those oh so evil Koch brothers.... it is shocking... shocking I tell you.... that none of them have bitched whined and moaned about the evil oil billionaire George Kaiser getting a $500 MILLION sweatheart loan from Obama to fund a company that got a B+ rating from Federal appraisers of the deal. Dunn & Bradstreet labeled it a 'fair' investment. Yet Obama pushed through a taxpayer funded $535 MILLION dollar loan at a whopping 1% per quarter?
Click to expand...

Mathematics is not my strong suit so I have to ask. "Is 1% per quarter equal to 4% per year? If so, that sounds reasonable.

Mind you, I'm in the Great White North but variable rate mortgages are obtainable here at just over 3%. For example a 1 Year Fixed Rate Mortgage @ 3.190%"
http://www.tdcanadatrust.com/mortgages/numbers.jsp
 
Return of Dune said:
Federal Financing Bank

The Federal Financing Bank (FFB) is a government corporation, created by Congress in 1973 under the general supervision of the Secretary of the Treasury. The FFB was established to centralize and reduce the cost of federal borrowing, as well as federally-assisted borrowing from the public. The FFB was also established to deal with federal budget management issues which occurred when off-budget financing flooded the government securities market with offers of a variety of government-backed securities that were competing with Treasury securities. Today the FFB has statutory authority to purchase any obligation issued, sold, or guaranteed by a federal agency to ensure that fully guaranteed obligations are financed efficiently.
​
http://www.treasury.gov/ffb/
Click to expand...

that sounds extremely unconstitutional.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
how do those two make sense?
Click to expand...


How could it make sense otherwise?

The billionare invested 75 million in the company and became the first lienholder.

The company got a loan of 535 million. The investor received none of it, nor was he entitled to any of it. It is all in the article linked to in the OP.

1. No bailout.
2. Investor got none of the $535 million.
3. You folks really need to look into superfreak's bullshit, and stop giving him the benefit of the "expert" mantle he wears.
 
Return of Dune said:
How could it make sense otherwise?

The billionare invested 75 million in the company and became the first lienholder.

The company got a loan of 535 million. The investor received none of it, nor was he entitled to any of it. It is all in the article linked to in the OP.
Click to expand...

thanks. that makes better sense.
 
Return of Dune said:
Yes, the billionare gets his share of the $75 million invested, first, not any of the $535 million.

Let's recap;
1. There was no bailout.
2. The billionare get NONE OF THE $535 MILLION YOU ARE BLEATING ABOUT.
3. Nice Fail, superFail.
Click to expand...

The company he was in gets $535 MILLION in tax payers dollars. Yet it still went into bankruptcy. Just because Obama's buddy was an idiot and couldn't make it work doesn't mean he didn't benefit from the loan.
 
apple0154 said:
Mathematics is not my strong suit so I have to ask. "Is 1% per quarter equal to 4% per year? If so, that sounds reasonable.

Mind you, I'm in the Great White North but variable rate mortgages are obtainable here at just over 3%. For example a 1 Year Fixed Rate Mortgage @ 3.190%"
http://www.tdcanadatrust.com/mortgages/numbers.jsp
Click to expand...

Oh, it is quite reasonable..... until you compare it to the 2-3% per quarter others had to pay.... and keep in mind, this is for a high risk business loan.... not a secured mortgage. In fact, it is not secured by ANY of the assets of the firm. Which is why the tax payers are left holding the bag.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top