Skip to comments.GM Sure Recalled A Lot Of Cars Right After The Feds Sold Their Shares
Posted on 05/26/2014 6:16:12 PM PDT by george76
According to recent reports, GM just recalled another 2.4 million vehicles this week, bringing the total number of recalled GM vehicles this year to a record 13.6 million. USA Today got right to the point when it asked, Are there any GM cars that havent been recalled?
GM knew about serious problems with the ignition switch for years, going back to at least 2007. At that time, GM had hard data from multiple crashes showing that some of its ignition switches had failed to function properly. The U.S. government officially bailed out the automaker in December of 2008. Throughout the five-year period of U.S. government ownership, nothing was done to address the deadly switch. According to one timeline of events, GMs new CEO, Mary Barra, claims she did not even learn of the problem until December of 2013, which just so happens to be when the federal government sold its final shares of GM stock (at a loss of $10 billion, naturally).
Even though the company had data demonstrating a faulty ignition switch for years, it didnt initiate a full investigation or recall until February of 2014, two months after the government sold its stake in the company.
Our nation is in the safest and most ethical of hands.
(Excerpt) Read more at thefederalist.com ...
Some insider information?
I’m sure the SEC will be right on this insider trading case.
“Mary Barra, claims she did not even learn of the problem until December of 2013, which just so happens to be when the federal government sold its final shares of GM stock (at a loss of $10 billion, naturally).”
Let me guess. She found out about it in the
New York Times.
The same gov’t the f’d up healthcare insurance surely couldn’t f up government motors.
Somebody contact Eric Holder!
I am sure its just a coincidence
At least it was “stylish” to appoint the first woman to run an auto company.
Surely FedGov, led by the most ethical administration in history, wouldn’t be involved in insider trading.
The only GM automobile I ever owned was a 1934 Pontiac. That was in 1963 when I was still in high school. That car also has the distinction of being the only GM vehicle I ever will own.
Or is that as the goverment looses it’s control over GM it also so looses protection.
Our gov't is SO F'd up.
Pew last updated their "Trust in Government" poll last October. It's got to be much worse today (how in the world could true have soared during Clinton???).
I wish the article had included a paragraph about the crones that were cycled through the chairmanship to get a nice payoff for past favors; like the first one, Rahm Emmanuel’s buddy who’d rigged a mega million payoff for Rahm from the communications industry that Rahm knew nothing about. That was ok, because that guy admitted he knew nothing about cars.
it’s called insider trading.
does the surprise anyone?
GM need afrikan women now as CEO, she nou kars, she drove one (or two), she fix GM.
Remember GM’s door-mounted seatbelts? Why you ask? It was to skate around the SRS mandate.
In a side crash, you were unrestrained.
Once the feds got a hold on GM, it was inevitable.
If the naysayers would just go away and die, he’d have a perfect approval rating.
Like if everybody became a discouraged worker — we’d have a 0% Unemployment Rate!
Too bad the GM Bondholders couldn’t do that...
The real lousy part is, I have to drive a 3/4 or one ton truck, as I do electrical in Alberta. Dodge doesn’t stack up, the ride is like a sitting on a brick down the road and the cummings is just an average engine now. Ford doesn’t add up, their diesel isn’t even on the same page as the duramax. So, I’m forced to hold my nose.
I wish Toyota would get with the program and just make a good one ton diesel already.
Tyranny is defined as that which is illegal for the citizens and legal for government.
If that is true there should be an article in the WSJ real soon about the blood bath amongst the senior management at GM because a CEO would never accept that such potentially damaging information would be kept from them. The board of directors should be demanding that heads roll if this was truly kept secret.
It is one thing to keep such info under wraps within the company. Such decisions are made at the very top. But if such info is kept at lower levels of management and the CEO is surprised by it; those managers are fired.
Of course it is ridiculous to believe that a secret of that magnitude could be kept from the senior leadership. The corporate lawyers would have to know and that means the top of the leadership train would have to know.
She and bammy have the same intelligence source!
Like the college students, the UAW will soon find out how much the Democrats really care for them.
Any new CEO will immediately work to understand all hidden liabilities, and this is a huge one. Either she is just an incompetent Obama crony or she’s corrupt as the day is long.
And there is the other (community organizer) Alinsky-related Midas touch, for which see http://www.nytimes.com/1987/05/16/obituaries/gordon-sherman-of-midas-muffler.html.
Looks like only the country’s experience under Reagan, initial election of Clinton, and 9/11 have (temporarily) stemmed the disillusionment of first Watergate and then the Carter era.
I am pretty sure Congress exempted themselves, the executive and the judicial branches from that particular law.
That’s what I saw, too. But note that Clinton started at 25% and ended at 45%. I just don’t understand that. And Bush II starts at 45%, peaks on 9/11 at 55%, and then it’s a steady, nonstop slide back to 25%. What did the nation really want us to do after 9/11? Retire into a shell and become isolationist which would have done nothing but invite more attacks. He took the war to the enemy and he was excoriated viciously for it for 7 years.
“I wish Toyota would get with the program and just make a good one ton diesel already.”
They do. You just can’t buy them in the U.S. Hino (a Toyota company) makes some pretty good diesel engines.
Yeah, I probably didn’t look closely enough.
I take it the Reagan and Clinton economies both boosted the scores.
I think W was supported for the initial march to war—just like his Dad apparently was. But the extended battle, moderated effort, high cost, and self-defeating rules of engagement probably all eventually cost him support—and laid the groundwork for Obama’s election.
Yet Obama has kept us in Afghanistan and not a peep from anyone. No scathing editorials, no nightly news coverage, no protests in the street. Nothing. Why?
In the meantime, I am stuck with 3500 GMC or Chevy.
I’ll keep on waiting.
They were actually supposed to release a one ton, then the recession hit.
Look closer. Clinton's first two years were a disaster.
It was only after the Republicans took control of both houses of Congress in 1992 that the data started climbing again. Perhaps the attempt to hold Clinton accountable actually encouraged people. And despite all that, the economy was doing well until the bubble burst just before Bush took office.
I'm not a big fan of Bush, but his biggest enemy was the Democrat-run media. They did everything they could to undermine him, magnifying every little misstep. Compare the Plame controversy to today. And compare the nightly "body count" announcements, which ceased abruptly when Obama took office.
Until conservatives start investing in media assets and either restore some objectivity to the existing players or put them out of business, there will always be legions of brainwashed voters.
The Democrats know how to play this game. One thing that conservatives have to learn: messaging. Unify it, get it out there, and penalize anyone that tries to mask advocacy as news.
For example: after Candy Crowley's miserable performance as debate moderator, CNN should have gotten the "death penalty". Republicans should have just stopped talking to CNN. No interviews, no questions to CNN reporters. I would have even eliminated them from distribution of press releases.
Yes, they would have howled. But privately, they would have gotten the message.
The Democrats do this to Fox News all the time, and no one calls them on it (with one rare exception). Why are the Republicans even talking to any branch of NBC News, given the antics of MSNBC?
IMO, this headline is wrong.
GM has had nothing but trouble since Obama performed a phoney bankruptcy & took over the company, stealing shares & preferred bonds from ordinary citizens & giving the company to the unions.
Anyone in the media care to ask Martha Stewart what she may think of this?
His second biggest enemy was George W. Bush.
The man never seriously fought back against the MSM - ever - and the consequences have been catastrophic.
Like his idiot Father, the son was quoted as saying the Press was “just doing their job.”
Karl Rove was quoted saying that George W. Bush “never watched the news, because he makes the news.”
That kind of political ignorance, the hubris, and the malfeasance are beyond description, not just for “W,” but for decades of Republican leaders.
Down 20% since the U.S. Treasury sold its shares.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.