Huge mistake by Obama administration re BP negotiations

[JDPriestly]

Democracy Now reported on this in an interview with a representative of Public Citizen

http://www.democracynow.org/

Listen at around 18-20 minutes.

The Obama administration's agreement with BP is essentially worthless because Obama only bound the BP subsidiary with operations in the Gulf. That's the only security or collateral that Obama got for the fund to remediate the Gulf.

Guys. This is Corporations 101. Anyone who has ever worked in any litigation involving these kinds of large companies knows how you have to negotiate and deal with these corporations. This was incompetence. Didn't Obama have an attorney who had experience in litigation with BP at his side when he negotiated with BP? If not, why not? Was it hubris?

[yourout]

1. One of many sorry to say.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[KittyWampus]

3. LOL! Yeah, I'm sure you know all about how to deal with these corporations

[Historic NY]

5. +1 really you think he did anything with a legal review.........

why were the Pukes crying then that he shook them (BP) down.

[Curmudgeoness]

8. The OP makes sense. Whether or not the a person could

deal with corporations themselves is irrelevant. We all know that corporations always seem to pull aces out of their sleeves, and it isn't just luck.

[JDPriestly]

11. This was not an ace pulled out of a sleeve.

Any lawyer who has dealt with big corporations knows to watch out for this problem.

[ThomCat]

14. Why wouldn't the poster know how to negotiate with corporations?

There are quite a few people here with quite a lot of corporate experience. Before you go insulting people's knowledge you might want to consider that many people actually have some.

Knowing that corporations use subsidiaries and shell companies to limit any restrictions placed upon them isn't exactly a big secret.

Knowing that you any restriction has to be worded so that it applies to (something along the lines of) the parent company, all subsidiaries, agents and contracted representatives isn't that difficult a concept to grasp.

Creating a restriction that deliberately only applies to one part of the company (one named subsidiary) is a very obvious move to LOOK like they are holding BP responsible. It is a Public Relations move, and nothing more.

I'm sure Obama has a whole lot of legal experts available in his Administration who could have told him exactly how to craft an binding and effective punishment for BP. But he also have a whole lot of Political Advisers on staff who can tell them how to create very effective slaps on the wrist that look good. Who is Obama more likely to listen to?

[JDPriestly]

16. Thank you.

DU contributors include people with all kinds of backgrounds -- lots of academics, professionals, lots of experts on different subjects.

Problem is that learning about parent companies and subsidiaries is very elementary corporate law. I suspect that MBAs also study this. This is not esoteric knowledge. Knowing this about corporate organization doesn't require the ability to read hieroglyphs.

Don't people understand that corporations are formed by people who want to "own" the corporation while limiting their liability to just what they invest in the corporation, no more. Don't people know that the corporate form exists so that people can invest without risking their entire fortunes?

That is why this is shocking. Does anyone else remember reading that Eric Holder was in the room with Obama when he negotiated with BP? Eric Holder represented corporations in settlements I think. How could he have missed this important issue?

[Swamp Rat]

4. Get used to eating poisoned seafood America.

:hi:

[lonestarnot]

12. Nope, never eating any again.

:hug: :hi:

[Karmadillo]

6. It's not a bug, it's a feature.

nt

[glitch]

13. +^ :) nt

[readmoreoften]

7. Are you kidding me? Another PR scam. I'm so sick of this shit.

[metapunditedgy]

9. It's business as usual until BP execs are in jail. n/t

[Poboy]

10. Yet another flim-flam con job. This will never end.-nt

[bvar22]

15. The Chicago Razzel Dazzel

Razzle Dazzle
From the soundtrack “Chicago” (No Kidding)


“Give 'em the old razzle dazzle
Razzle Dazzle 'em
Give 'em an act with lots of flash in it
And the reaction will be passionate
Give 'em the old hocus pocus
Bead and feather 'em
How can they see with sequins in their eyes?
What if your hinges all are rusting?
What if, in fact, you're just disgusting?
Razzle dazzle 'em
And they'll never catch wise!


Give 'em the old Razzle Dazzle
Razzle dazzle 'em
Give 'em a show that's so splendiferous
Row after row will crow vociferous
Give 'em the old flim flam flummox
Fool and fracture 'em
How can they hear the truth above the roar?
Throw 'em a fake and a finagle
They'll never know you're just a bagel,
Razzle dazzle 'em
And they'll beg you for more!


Give 'em the old double whammy
Daze and dizzy 'em
Back since the days of old Methuselah
Everyone loves the big bambooz-a-ler
Give 'em the old three ring circus
Stun and stagger 'em
When you're in trouble, go into your dance
Though you are stiffer than a girder
They'll let you get away with murder
Razzle dazzle 'em
And you've got a romance


Give 'em the old Razzle Dazzle
Razzle dazzle 'em
Show 'em the first rate sorceror you are
Long as you keep 'em way off balance
How can they spot you've got no talent
Razzle Dazzle 'em
And they'll make you a star!”

[SidDithers]

17. ...

Dire predictions of doom are a dime-a-dozen 'round here.

Sid