March 25, 2009

Andrew Cuomo is a Mutt.

Filed under: Uncategorized — Jim @ 10:10 pm

And a grandstanding, cowardly mutt at that.

When I heard that Andrew Cuomo (Yes, Mario’s boy), the Attorney General of New York, was “taking legal action” against the recipients of the AIG bonuses, I wondered about the legal theory he was relying on to recoup those moneys. Certainly he could not commence a criminal proceeding against these people, for they have committed no crime. None. None at all. To the contrary, they held valid contracts, the payment of which was specifically authorized by the bill passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the President.

So, if they committed no crime, Cuomo would have to proceed against them in a civil action to recoup the money. But, what on what legal theory would he base his case? I suppose he could challenge the validity of the contracts themselves, but no one, thus far, has questioned their validity.

If any lawyers (or non-lawyers) out there would care to suggest why any civil action Cuomo might have brought would not be dismissed for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted, I’d love to hear it.

I’d also like to know why his suit would not be dismissed for lack of standing.

The truth is that all Cuomo had going for him had nothing to do with the law, but rather was all about instilling fear of exposure and resultant physical harm to these people and their families and instilling the fear of being crushed by naked government power. This is made abundantly clear by the letter of resignation written by an AIG employee who agreed to work for a dollar per year in anticipation of receiving payment of the “bonus.”

Cuomo should be relegated to litigating rear-end hits.

14 Comments »

  1. The sumbitch allowed last night that he is asking congress for the power to take over businesses that he THINKS are about to go south. Now as I understand the constitution congress has the power to regulate commerce…but I just can’t find anything in the constitution that gives congress nor the emperor the power to take over a business….at any time for any reason. It is a blatant grab for power and the public is too gotdam ignorant to see it.

    Comment by GUYK — March 25, 2009 @ 10:24 pm

  2. Amazingly, in my opinion, Mr. Cuomo’s actions appear to resemble extortion and terrorism…RICO violations if I understand the statute correctly.

    Comment by David — March 25, 2009 @ 10:33 pm

  3. IANAL (I Am Not A Lawyer), but the only thing I can think of is that if the bonuses were ostensibly for “Performance” (or similarly worded ya-done-good), then the tanking of AIG stock could be prima facie evidence that their performance was unworthy of the bonus. That’s not to say that some departments within AIG didn’t perform well and that SOME of the recipients may well deserve the added income.
    Nor is it anything I’d be interested in arguing — particularly in a court of law.

    Comment by Dave Merriman — March 25, 2009 @ 10:34 pm

  4. After leaving my comment, I went over and read the resignation letter. It looks to me like Mr. Cuomo is engaged in basic political grandstanding and thuggery of the worst kind.

    Comment by Dave Merriman — March 25, 2009 @ 10:42 pm

  5. If the contracts are indeed valid, then the courts would have to uphold them.

    Comment by Kevin — March 25, 2009 @ 10:50 pm

  6. Doesn’t Cuomo deserve a bunch of blame for his role at HUD in the 90′s? Didn’t he go out of his way to hand out HUD loans to folks that had little likelihood of being able to pay? Isn’t he partly responsible then for the mortgage meltdown? So many questions.

    Comment by Ernie Nilsen — March 26, 2009 @ 12:31 am

  7. “Amazingly, in my opinion, Mr. Cuomo’s actions appear to resemble extortion and terrorism”

    More like ex post facto laws and bill of attainder.

    I understand the mayor of New York is unhappy he is responsible for city of some 8 million and really does not want the 40K some who pay about half the taxes to pick up and leave.

    Comment by Dan Kauffman — March 26, 2009 @ 2:15 am

  8. “IANAL (I Am Not A Lawyer), but the only thing I can think of is that if the bonuses were ostensibly for “Performance” (or similarly worded ya-done-good), then the tanking of AIG stock could be prima facie evidence that their performance was unworthy of the bonus. That’s not to say that some departments within AIG didn’t perform well and that SOME of the recipients may well deserve the added income.
    Nor is it anything I’d be interested in arguing — particularly in a court of law”

    As I understand it they were not PERFORMANCE bonuses but RETENTION bonuses

    ie you stay herer and do the work we ask and we pay this a sum for that.

    Comment by Dan Kauffman — March 26, 2009 @ 2:17 am

  9. Look, gang…the bottom line is this. If we continue to allow this and don’t tell our fellow Americans to hold onto their money, it will be tacit approval for government to continue to act like this.
    This Cuomo nonsense shouldn’t even have to be discussed. It should be a given that government has no role in either handing out bail-out money to failed private companies nor do they have a right to decide what a private citizen earns or doesn’t earn.
    You want to tie pay to performance???? Then Congress would be some no earning MFer’s if there ever were accountability measures in place!!!!
    For Congress to actually tell a private business about profitability is plain ludicrous. Get me up on Capitol Hill!!! I ain’t scared. They want to grill me on my business practices, I ‘ll tell ‘em plain. You stop printing money and only work with the money you earn and then come back and talk to me. You, Mr. Congressman…without the ability to print money to bail your own ass out…you would be one broke, bankruptcy ridden douchebag.
    No American businessman should have to put up with this 1939 Germany style government. We, as businesspeople need to stand up to these clowns and say no more.
    And don’t worry about the American people…they weren’t screaming about bonuses when the Dow was over 13,000 and their 401k’s were flush. You want someone to blame for the crash? Talk to The One, he is a good start. Everytime his ass-munch Treasury Secretary opens his stupid mouth, the market tanks and dollar is worth less.
    You want to fire or punish someone???? Start at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave…not Wall St.

    Comment by RobbieRob — March 26, 2009 @ 8:33 am

  10. “This is not my beautiful house. This is not my beautiful wife. My God. How did I get here?”

    Sorry I just keep thinking of the lyrics of that Talking Heads song.

    Comment by dogette — March 26, 2009 @ 8:45 am

  11. Well said, RobbieRob.

    Jimbo

    Comment by Jim — March 26, 2009 @ 9:10 am

  12. IANAL:

    BUT! I HAVE read the constitution, and my reading comprehension is pretty good. That bill violates the constitution. It is ex post facto, it targets a small group and breaks contracts held by the employees getting the bonus monies.

    Do I like the fact that they’re getting a lot money? Hey, more power to them. It really doesn’t matter what I think. It’s the law…something the congresscritters seem to know nothing about.

    Comment by Nancy — March 26, 2009 @ 5:31 pm

  13. The hypocrisy is overwhelming!!

    Comment by Richmond — March 26, 2009 @ 6:49 pm

  14. Would I say that Andrew Cuomo looks like a Mafia thug? Yes I would.
    Would I call Andrew Cuomo a Mafia thug? No I wouldn’t.
    Andrew Cuomo doesn’t have the ethics to belong to the Mafia

    Comment by Tbird — March 26, 2009 @ 9:19 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Powered by WordPress