You're watching...
Former AIG CEO Hank Greenberg on his lawsuit against the government over its bailout of AIG.
Also in this playlist...
Auto-advance: ON
Auto-advance
This transcript is automatically generated
Did -- uses a four year the government strong arm saying that maybe that's why AIG is not suing at a minutes -- an AIG board beating -- January's argued treasury department's lawyers saying and I quote.
The government will be your adversary by signing on to the litigation decision could also lead.
To another wave of congressional investigations.
And on the news saying that was Tony Soprano man that's scary isn't -- -- -- AIG is not then joining it's former CEO.
Hank Greenberg's 55 billion dollar class action suit against the government.
The suit claims part of that -- that was pushed in the middle of a meltdown was unconstitutional.
And sloppy to say Italy's.
Here and we had that it.
Your lawyer David points here yesterday arguing.
The merits of this case but you've got the -- and he knows in the exchanges.
And the threats to make its case right absolutely and what are you -- A lot of -- will be that will come out and discovery and depositions of course.
But a lot of it's already in my book.
-- been verified we would Canadian that was not.
You know there are many reasons well we've done it when it's unconstitutional.
And that -- -- Which -- that you're and sex abuse for funerals of original speed on this in the middle -- the -- You argued that onerous conditions were put on AIG.
Unlike any other institution rescue.
Star exorbitant loan shark rates working to grow as a percent.
And that further that that rescue money.
Given energy was in -- -- piggy bank to dole out went through AIG to other instances dressed.
Our Treasury Secretary at the time and most of that was not the case others -- -- that's not the case.
Still insisted it's.
-- sixty billion went out the back door including some foreign banks including the Arab Bank which was -- -- 6% owned.
By Libya.
That they got -- had to you know it went right through it.
Because there's.
Been follow up on that and we know that mean that's a fact that to come -- in the so I would imagine a sign on to and what they did you know -- right but I I think -- opponents -- date it is day.
It it's it's at its -- part of this doesn't look good news -- they gotta be rescued everybody that they didn't really benefited a web front.
And it looks bad to -- the rest.
Well.
You can say that but but the fact but I had a is that right well look the government to take anything they want they had to pay for.
You can't be careful what what you did -- take advantage of would they take advantage of they.
The shareholding you're entitled to vote so they were unfairly screwed it up but many Cyril is voluntarily screwed bullet belts -- well that's up to them that they would have to do know how or AIG shareholders in your big one.
What it what it was disproportionate about the way you were her.
Well first of -- Many people lost their life savings.
Including.
Pension funds including many AIG employees who work the 3540.
Years to build.
The value the company.
We voted to them to do something about this because it was an unlawful taking.
There's no question about that never come out.
In any.
As a win win this first came up that that you you know.
None whatsoever the appearance that it didn't look good for company -- benefited from a bailout.
-- soon people who provided the ballot and you couldn't get past that in the -- -- -- was staring at simplistic argument but that was the year.
Yeah but because there was many other things it could've been done.
Okay then have to go the way that it went.
But AIG.
AIG is did what happened that we need to when you added to look at this is say we want in on this class action thing looks like tank is on a -- we could benefit.
Why didn't AIG doing yeah.
Well -- AIG run an ad campaign.
Just before that thanking the US government but there's another issue here -- that if they turned down going.
Following us -- that would they -- the New York fed.
There are now suing the New York fed.
Is that part of the government -- at the time that was run by parliament tonight.
At that time at that -- let me talk about.
-- offensive even.
Maybe even illegal.
Rescues like a movie that's your argument.
That -- an elegant their sloppy.
But in in times that we reliving then.
It was money get it out prop them up save them -- -- Just to keep the financial system afloat that -- yes they could do that.
OK but it's unlawful they can do it.
But they have to pay for -- they argue in the end the end justified the means however sloppy ever wrong however may be.
Even illegal they -- -- the end result was.
AIG is back the financial system is stacked the rescues.
The government -- 43 billion dollars on that rescue.
Not exactly not exactly had this get up to 55 -- in the Yuma I think that's part of -- maiden -- to okay okay.
Meanwhile you crisscross the -- I guess -- -- travel like crazy on just like commercial where you and several jets could not several okay.
China and its growth has been called into question now the reliability of its figures hints of a slowdown.
-- things aren't going as well there and you were.
-- -- the middle of a they leadership change.
Okay it happens to be ten years -- -- -- -- 10% growth is now only 8% OK.
That's terrible price that but that's terrible.
It's still pretty strong growth you don't depth of continue to be.
They'll continue to be a strong growth.
Country it may not be eight maybe seven Hanford seven but it's still be -- be quite strong.
And then I I think look at that China is here to stay the second largest economy in the world.
We need to have a very constructive relationship for -- it be foolish not to.
On second term Barack Obama we're gonna make much progress.
In what any of the well I hope we're gonna make progress in getting house in order on a balance sheet if you think that's gonna happen.
I'm don't have -- now dead serious doubts.
Steve Greenberg was a pleasure sir those goods and thank you very much.
