About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Fox & Friends advanced disputed allegation against Obama "auto czar"

May 04, 2009 12:15 pm ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

SUMMARY: Fox & Friends hosts repeatedly touted the allegation that Steven Rattner "threatened to ruin" Perella Weinberg's reputation, as Dave Briggs put it, if it continued to oppose the Obama administration's Chrysler bankruptcy plan. Only hours later did anyone on the program mention that the administration and the investment firm have both denied the allegation.

12 Comments

During the May 4 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, guest co-host Dave Briggs and co-hosts Gretchen Carlson and Steve Doocy repeatedly touted, in Briggs' words, "an accusation by a lawyer, who represents ... one of those [hedge fund] lenders who says that" Steven Rattner, the Obama administration's choice to lead its Auto Task Force, "threatened to ruin their reputation, and by using the White House press corps." It was not until a subsequent discussion, approximately two hours later, that anyone on Fox & Friends mentioned that the Obama administration and the investment firm that allegedly came under pressure -- Perella Weinberg Partners -- have denied the allegation, made by lawyer Thomas E. Lauria, a partner at the White & Case law firm.

Indeed, even when Doocy stated during the initial discussion that Perella Weinberg "apparently, according to ABC News, was singled out by Rattner," he did not mention that ABC News senior White House correspondent Jake Tapper, who was reportedly the first national figure to report Lauria's allegation, also reported on May 2 that "[t]he White House and a spokesperson for the investment bank in question challenged the accuracy of the story."

During the initial Fox & Friends discussion, Briggs, Carlson, and Doocy had the following exchange:

BRIGGS: [T]here's an accusation by a lawyer, who represents one of those creditors who you're talking about, one of those lenders who says that the administration -- the auto czar, if you will -- threatened to ruin their reputation, and by using --

DOOCY: Yeah.

BRIGGS: -- the White House press corps even. And this becomes an issue because there is basically a handful of lenders that held out for a better deal in bankruptcy.

DOOCY: Yeah.

BRIGGS: But with GM, which could go bankrupt in the future, they have tens of thousands of lenders, not a dozen or so.

DOOCY: Yeah.

BRIGGS: And there are people all over this country, pensioners, not just hedge funds, that could hold out for a better deal in bankruptcy, as well. So this could have a lot more to come.

CARLSON: I don't think the story is going away, though, about this alleged threat with regard to Rattner, who, of course, is the guy who's been heading up the whole task force for the Obama administration with the auto industry. Remember, he's also potentially in trouble for his own dealings with his own investment firm -- an investigation underway there.

Now, allegations that he did strong-arm some of these hedge funds saying, "Look, you know, we're going to come after you if you don't take this deal." That's illegal. You can't do that. I got a little chuckle out of the fact that he was going to send the White House press corps after them.

BRIGGS: Right.

DOOCY: Yeah. Well --

CARLSON: The last time I checked, they were pretty much in the camp for Barack Obama.

DOOCY: Sure.

CARLSON: Maybe they would turn on hedge funds instead. I'm not sure.

Moments later, Doocy said: "I think -- look, if somebody is standing in the way of a publicly traded company from a government bailout, why not go ahead and say, 'OK, this is who is holding out.' For them to say -- but for this Steven Rattner guy to use these behind-the-scenes strong-arm tactics, is that so bad to say, 'Well, that company is holding out.' " Doocy later added, "It was this particular [hedge fund], though, that apparently, according to ABC News, was singled out by Rattner, and said, 'OK, I'm going to get -- come after you.' "

It was only during the subsequent Fox & Friends discussion, approximately two hours later, that Doocy noted, "The White House says that didn't happen. This hedge fund says it didn't happen."

Tapper reported on May 2 -- two days before Fox & Friends discussed the allegation -- that the administration and a spokesman for Perella Weinberg denied Lauria's account. From Tapper's May 2 entry on his Political Punch blog:

A leading bankruptcy attorney representing hedge funds and money managers told ABC News Saturday that Steve Rattner, the leader of the Obama administration's Auto Industry Task Force, threatened one of the firms, an investment bank, that if it continued to oppose the administration's Chrysler bankruptcy plan, the White House would use the White House press corps to destroy its reputation.

The White House and a spokesperson for the investment bank in question challenged the accuracy of the story.

"The charge is completely untrue," said White House deputy press secretary Bill Burton, "and there's obviously no evidence to suggest that this happened in any way."

A May 3 post on The New York Times DealBook blog reported that Lauria first made the charges in a Detroit radio interview, then did a follow-up interview with Tapper, during which he "identified Mr. Rattner":

In an interview with a Detroit radio host, Frank Beckmann, Mr. Lauria said that Perella Weinberg "was directly threatened by the White House and in essence compelled to withdraw its opposition to the deal under threat that the full force of the White House press corps would destroy its reputation if it continued to fight."

In a follow-up interview with ABC News's Jake Tapper, he identified Mr. Rattner, the head of the auto task force, as having told a Perella Weinberg official that the White House "would embarrass the firm."

Blogs like Clusterstock, Zero Hedge and Finem Respice have picked up on the reports, raising questions about whether the Obama administration acted improperly in negotiating with the debtholders.

But people briefed on the matter told DealBook that Mr. Rattner has never spoken to Mr. Lauria, and that participants on the conference call Mr. Lauria describes have denied his account.

The DealBook post further reported that "Perella Weinberg said in a statement that the firm decided to back the government-proposed settlement Thursday afternoon, after Mr. Obama criticized the lenders in harsh terms," and included the following "full statement by Perella Weinberg":

Suggestions have been made that the Perella Weinberg Partners Xerion Fund changed its stance on the Chrysler restructuring due to pressure from White House officials. This is incorrect. The decision to accept and support the proposed deal was made by the Xerion Fund after reflecting carefully on the statement of the President when announcing Chrysler's bankruptcy filing. In considering the President's words and exercising our best investment judgment, we concluded that the risks of potentially severe capital loss that could arise from fighting this in bankruptcy court far outweighed any realistic potential upside.

We have a very specific mandate from our investors, and that is to carefully weigh investment risks and rewards. It is not our investment mandate to pursue political or risky legal campaigns with our investors' money. This was our assessment of investment risk and reward, nothing else.

While we did and still do believe that the lenders would be justified in pressing their objections under conventional bankruptcy law principles, we believe a settlement would now be in the best interests of all parties in the context of avoiding a drawn out contested bankruptcy litigation proceeding, and we encourage our colleagues in the loan syndicate to pursue this immediately.

From the May 4 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:

DOOCY: Four minutes after the top of the hour. If you are a Chrysler employee, you probably have today off. That's because, of course, they have -- ever since they declared bankruptcy last week, they are shuttering all of the factories. And here's what is happening now behind the scenes.

By -- it sounds like May 22nd -- they are going to have an auction of all the assets. And those stakeholders who drove it right up to the brink, it sounds like they're going to have to settle for between 9 cents on the dollar and 38 cents. So when you look at the fact that the government was saying, maybe you should take this 33 cents on the dollar thing, that could have been the best deal they were going to get.

DAVE BRIGGS (guest co-host): Could be. And that's at the center of this right now, because there's an accusation by a lawyer, who represents one of those creditors who you're talking about, one of those lenders who says that the administration -- the auto czar, if you will -- threatened to ruin their reputation, and by using --

DOOCY: Yeah.

BRIGGS: -- the White House press corps even. And this becomes an issue because there is basically a handful of lenders that held out for a better deal in bankruptcy.

DOOCY: Yeah.

BRIGGS: But with GM, which could go bankrupt in the future, they have tens of thousands of lenders, not a dozen or so.

DOOCY: Yeah.

BRIGGS: And there are people all over this country, pensioners, not just hedge funds, that could hold out for a better deal in bankruptcy, as well. So this could have a lot more to come.

CARLSON: I don't think the story is going away, though, about this alleged threat with regard to Rattner, who, of course, is the guy who's been heading up the whole task force for the Obama administration with the auto industry. Remember, he's also potentially in trouble for his own dealings with his own investment firm -- an investigation underway there.

Now, allegations that he did strong-arm some of these hedge funds saying, "Look, you know, we're going to come after you if you don't take this deal." That's illegal. You can't do that. I got a little chuckle out of the fact that he was going to send the White House press corps after them.

BRIGGS: Right.

DOOCY: Yeah. Well --

CARLSON: The last time I checked, they were pretty much in the camp for Barack Obama.

DOOCY: Sure.

CARLSON: Maybe they would turn on hedge funds instead. I'm not sure.

DOOCY: I know, and see, keep in mind the big banks said, OK, we'll take the deal. But it was those hedge funds, and in fact on -- I think it was Thursday -- Thursday, we gave the name of the three -- the names of the three hedge funds that were holding out, and this was one of them. The outfit was --

CARLSON: Perella Weinberg Partners.

BRIGGS: Perella Weinberg Partners.

DOOCY: That's it exactly. I had to look --

CARLSON: I'm not so sure that they shouldn't hold out. I mean --

DOOCY: I think -- look, if somebody is standing in the way of a publicly traded company from a government bailout, why not go ahead and say, "OK, this is who is holding out." For them to say -- but for this Steven Rattner guy --

BRIGGS: OK.

DOOCY: -- to use these behind-the-scenes strong-arm tactics, is that so bad to say --

CARLSON: But why shouldn't they hold out?

DOOCY: -- "Well, that company is holding out."

CARLSON: 'Cause the union --

BRIGGS: See, I agree with you.

CARLSON: You know, the union, pretty much, I'm not sure --

BRIGGS: Well, they can -- no, they can --

CARLSON: -- that they had to take 50 cents on the dollar.

BRIGGS: You get pulled out -- if you're getting a better deal --

DOOCY: Oh, go ahead and hold out.

BRIGGS: The government --

DOOCY: Go ahead and hold out. Sure.

BRIGGS: -- was getting a much better deal --

DOOCY: Yeah.

BRIGGS: -- than these lenders were offered. The UAW is getting far better deal than these lenders were offered.

DOOCY: Right.

BRIGGS: Why not hold out? It's their own self-interest.

DOOCY: They can hold out, but --

BRIGGS: That's what capitalism is all about.

DOOCY: -- but why not go ahead and say, look, we had a deal except for this one company. This great, big hedge fund said they weren't going to take the money.

CARLSON: I don't think it was just one though.

BRIGGS: It wasn't just them.

CARLSON: There was 20 hedge funds.

BRIGGS: It was Oppenheimer --

CARLSON: The four largest creditors: J.P. Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, and Goldman Sachs. But then there's up to 20 hedge funds who made up the rest of the difference.

DOOCY: Right. It was this particular one, though, that apparently, according to ABC News, was singled out by Rattner, and said, "OK, I'm going to get -- come after you."

BRIGGS: Well, Oppenheimer was also a holdout. Stairway Capital Management was also a holdout, among --

DOOCY: There were four.

BRIGGS: -- among the few.

DOOCY: Four big ones.

[...]

BRIGGS: Let's talk the latest about the big three. Plants for Chrysler begin shutting down today for the next 30 to 60 days. All but four, at this point, will reopen. Four of those expected to shut down by September in Ohio, Wisconsin, Missouri, and Michigan.

Also some controversy, guys, as you know, about some of the lenders that may have been strong-armed before Chrysler went into bankruptcy.

DOOCY: That's right. This story came from ABC News that suggested that the car czar, Steven Rattner, apparently had threatened one particular hedge fund. And remember, hedge funds were the stakeholders. Hedge funds and big banks owed a lot of money by Chrysler.

Anyway, this one, Perella Weinberg Partners, apparently and reportedly the White House, in the form of Rattner said, unless you take this deal where we're offering 33 cents on the dollar, we're going to embarrass you. We're going to just drag you through the mud and make you look bad with the press corps and stuff like that.

The White House says that didn't happen. This hedge fund says it didn't happen. But, nonetheless, it is interesting to think that, that story was circulating, that they felt that they were being pressured by the White House to take the deal.

CARLSON: I believe it was an attorney for this particular hedge fund that went on the record saying that this, in fact, did happen. If this happened, folks, this is huge news. This is huge news, because a lot of people already concerned about government involvement in general in the car companies, in the banks, in other businesses.

And now, if there are strong-arm tactics being used -- I got a chuckle at least out of the fact that they were going to sic the White House press corps --

BRIGGS: Who is clearly in the tank.

CARLSON: -- on this hedge fund, who's -- yeah, who hasn't necessarily been siced on the Obama administration --

BRIGGS: Yeah.

CARLSON: -- that wholeheartedly, but it will be interesting to see what they could do to a hedge fund.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by mk3872 (May 04, 2009 12:23 pm ET)
         
      We all know that no one will hold Drudge responsible for pushing this bogus story, just as know one held him accountable for leading the McCain volunteer FAKING being beaten up by a black man during the election last year.

      But when will ABC News start holding Tapper accountable for playing footsie with the right wing?

      He has been co-opted by Rush, Drudge and Fox News to be their mouthpiece and push this type of garbage.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Margo (May 04, 2009 7:35 pm ET)
          4
        I would say Tapper should stop reporting fair news, when 99% of MSM stops going to bed with you Lefties. The media is so one sided and the minute anyone says anything negative towards the left you throw temper fits. Your like a bunch of spoiled children, a;ways wanting what you don't deserve or work for. Your administration is ruining our countries safety and driving the economy into the ground!!
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Baculus (May 04, 2009 11:06 pm ET)
          3  
          Margo, you're absurd. This entire articles details an untrue rumor that is being pushed by Fox News and right-wingers such as Limbaugh. But, apparently to you, the desire for truth is throwing a "temper fit"?

          That's a ridiculous notion on your part.

          Even worse, is that the seemingly inability for you and the Right to realize that Limbaugh, Fox News, and the many, many right-wing news pundits are, gasp!, the Media. So your entire "99%" is either an outright fabrication or you're totally clueless to what constitutes the MSM.

          Worst yet, if ANYONE is behaving like a bunch of spoiled children, it's the angry, unhappy conservatives and Republicans who rely upon outright falsification for their attacks on the Obama administration, and their inability to contain their emotions over losing an election.

          Just watch Sean Hannity or Glenn Beck for perfect examples of this behavior.

          Furthermore, your entire post is a perfect example of projection: You are throwing a "fit" over someone questioning the lies of Fox News. You also exemplify the willingness of the American Right to accept lies, as long as they bash the Left and Obama.

          How childish is that?
          Report Abuse
        • Author by solon (May 04, 2009 11:13 pm ET)
          4  
          You are delusional. WE all know this is what Rush TOLD you to think but it has no relationship WHATSOEVER with reality. The media is NOT liberal. You know the media that LED the runup to the war us lefties wanted no part of that tried to burry the downing street memo? That refused to call Bush on his near constant lying? THAT media, they are not liberal and no matter how many times you repeat the brainwashed mantra that they are it will not magically become true. I urge you to leave the cramped confines of Planet Wingnut and try someday to visit planet EARTH. Give reality a shot, drive it around the block see if you can tolerate it at all.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by thejbomb65 (May 04, 2009 12:48 pm ET)
        1
      well no one ever said that fox and friends had enough brain power to equal a dinosaur
      Report Abuse
    • Author by bilbo_dies (May 04, 2009 2:05 pm ET)
         
      I guess no one at Fox wants to mention that certain hedge funds would rather have Chrysler go into bankruptcy, since they had purchased credit default swaps to protect their investment. If they accepted the deal that was on the table the CDS didn't kick in, if Chrysler goes into bankruptcy it does. So the best thing for them was for Chrysler to be forced into bankruptcy. I mean, it is the American way, right? And that way they get all their money back.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by fluffhedd (May 05, 2009 11:35 am ET)
        1  
        Ya, this is complete nonsense. Both out of court restructuring and bankruptcy are treated exactly the same with Credit Default Swaps. Check your facts.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by smarshall1432997 (May 04, 2009 6:47 pm ET)
      1  
      You know, FoxNews (and the Republicans) always argue "loudly" about the "what-ifs" that the Obama Administration "COULD" do wrongly, and has yet to say "loudly" anything "good" about the Obama Administration.

      If MSM were to follow FoxNews 'smear tactics' something like... The country of Austrailia "hates" President Obama and the Democrats so much that this has led to FoxNews Owner, R. Murdoch "demanding" ALL of the Hosts/Reporters at FoxNews to create 'smear and negative' scenarios about President Obama and the Democrats every hour each day to show Murdoch's loyalty to Austrialia. This would be untrue and disrespectful, right? Now think about how FoxNews disrespects our American President and the Democrats day after day. Using FoxNews 'smear tactics' in shameless scenarios this way, may "NOT" be that far fetched. But yet, it is. Just shameless, shameless, shameless.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (May 04, 2009 9:23 pm ET)
           
        SMarshall, it's not even the "what-if?"s on Fox that are being shoveled out to the zombies. Righty radio, particulary El Rushbo, is using the word "guarantee" a lot, regarding Obama's evil plans to run the auto industry, banks, etc.

        I've heard more than one caller to the am boobfests call in and discuss these wild fantasies as if they've already happened.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by markbfoot199 (May 05, 2009 10:17 am ET)
         
      A voter registration drive last year illegally required canvassers to meet quotas to keep their jobs and resulted in thousands of “garbage” registrations gumming up Clark County voter rolls, officials said Monday as they released a criminal complaint against the drive’s organizers.

      The complaint names the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, as well as Chris Edwards, the group’s former Las Vegas field director, and Amy Busefink, who was regional director for voter registration.

      Share & Save

      What is this?






      Most Popular Stories

      ACORN voter registration drive nets charges
      Las Vegas entertainer, 52, dies at home; foul play not suspected
      2-year-old Reno area girl is Nevada’s first confirmed swine flu case
      Three stabbed, one fatally, in early morning incident
      Man arrested in fatal Denny's restaurant stabbing
      Wynn interested in buying some MGM Mirage casinos
      Two more high-rise condominium projects have financial trouble
      Contractors lay off workers at Fontainebleau while waiting on money
      Driver accused in UNLV student's death back behind bars after mistaken release
      Nebraska man indicted on charges related to $14 million gambling debt




      Since MMFA will not talk about this, I posted it anyway.

      In all, there are 26 charges of compensation for registration of voters and 13 charges of being a “principal” in the incident. An initial hearing has been set for 7:30 a.m. June 3 in Las Vegas Justice Court.

      “In Nevada, it is unlawful for a person to provide compensation for registering voters that is based on the total number of voters a person registers,” said state Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by ewl94232 (May 05, 2009 11:27 am ET)
           
        Now markbroot, you’re just going to get called delusional or a dupe of Rush Limbaugh. It’s Narcissistic for our friends on the Left to think only the Right fudges stories and only the Right has corrupt individuals in their midst. There are a few examples of this above. One writer wrongly states that the possibly intimidated investment managers were hoping to take no loss on their investments in bankruptcy. Where did that lie come from? Another has somehow determined that this accusation of intimidation has been refuted and is thus known to be false. Not only is that a misunderstanding of the facts, it’s a statement even MMFA shied away from making.

        Let us learn from their errors. MMFA provides a resource for looking inside the minds of the opposition. Muddied though most of those minds may be, there are some gems of rationality among them that do seem concerned about the truth. At least it gives a chance to hear some of the arguments on the other side.

        I find MMFA too trigger-happy, ready to run with a charge when they don’t yet have all of the available information, to present marginally possible propaganda as though there was no doubt that this was true and to cling to a charge even after the updated evidence suggests that they're wrong, but hey … I see that on the Right as well, all too often. I wish I could say that we are the good guys and they are the bad guys, that we are superior in our conduct, that we are smarter, better informed, more realistic in our thinking or some other rationale that would allow me to trust our spokesmen and dismiss the challenges from theirs, but we are all just humans, on both sides and I see all the foibles and failures to which human beings are subjected manifested evenly across the political spectrum. Both have their boobs and geniuses, both their rats and lions. I believe that the individual freedom and responsibility afforded in Constitutional Conservativism or American Federalism is a better answer for how humans can best organize society, but I’m not omniscient. It may be that too many humans are not ready to act as individuals, that they need a power like government to oversee their lives. I think we are on the verge of an advance in human evolution in which Conservativism of the kind I referred to will provide the roadmap, but I know the Liberals often think the same of their beliefs. Only time will tell.

        In the meantime remember that this is a site dedicated to pointing out the lies and deceptions in Conservative media. They really aren’t able to find much based on this example and most of it is either in error or in doubt. But they deserve a site of their own, where they can try to arm themselves with arguments that support their point of view. We can enjoy prodding them a bit and tweaking their whiskers now and then buit anything we say is dismissed out-of-hand. They’re not going to believe anything you tell them if it suggests they might be wrong.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by skygizmo (May 05, 2009 4:08 pm ET)
         
      I keep seeing that the press is in bed with us lefties. I wish to complain that not once has there been a member of the press in my bed. Now, I have seen a number of them on television that I would welcome, but Chris Matthews is not one of them
      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.