Charlie Rose

vongleichent  04/07/2013 03:53 PM Report

wow what a story. I have not known any of this. Simply outrages what the government had done.

iTrust  03/29/2013 11:41 PM Report

It's a shame the government bailed out and nationalized a company after it made such a questionable set of transactions (you can find observations of this eleswhere). It's no surprise Mr. Greenberg is coming out in an attack mode. It's all been such nasty business he's led AND yet so well tied into the top of the financial system that the government stopped short of taking AIG down... Connections are no excuse: This man would NOT have resigned if he did not have to. The auditors/board would not have asked an honest and inspiring man of integrity to leave BEFORE charges were laid by the Attorney General based on mere accusations that this man -- after the fact -- now claims were false. He wants to rewrite history. Thank you Charlie for asking why AIG wouldn't be a part of this guy's snarky suit (his "war"). Thank you Charlie for pointing out this guy doesn't really need to go to court. But he does. He appears a poor loser who doesn't want to abide by the law. The Attorney's should have taken him down (oh sorry, but he decided to take the fight personal and make it dirty). There is a reason this man was the face of the American financial system and lost his role and money...Yes, it's all a shame. But the facts of this man's story and the story of AIG would be less a shame if AIG was appropriately dissolved and Mr. Greenberg was doing time like the smaller fall-guys for the finanical fiasco.

charliesheep  03/28/2013 08:44 PM Report

FINANCIAL EMPIRES; FAIL,USUALLY THEY ARE THE ONE'S THAT NEITHER -FIXED THE 100 YEAR OLD SEWERS THAT LEAK, THE CHROMIUM SIX IN WATER- FUNDED RESEARCH FOR CANCER- FIXED THE FAILING BANKING SYSTEM! BUT, THEY DID ASK; THE PUBLIC PURSE I.E."CITIZENS' TO "BAIL" OUT THIS "TOO" BIG TO FAIL COMPANY!---- THAT DID ZERO TO FURTHER--- AMERICA'S LONG-TERM INFRASTRUCTURE- OR UNDERWRITE IT'S PROBLEMS!

SCT  03/25/2013 12:12 PM Report

All arguments fall short against the stark truth...Hank built AIG and he would never have abandoned it, leave aside the thought of conciously ruining it! Two other heads of Shell and BP were also replaced before Iraq invasion, why?? They all add up. Feeling on similar lines like him there are other loyal ex AIG employees who are still devastated from what happened. For all of them and the stakeholders, I hope Mr. Greenberg does win the law suit and make those people pay for having brought down such an adorable company.

NoPardonforMichaelMilken  03/24/2013 12:37 PM Report

Love to see a little old lady from Brooklyn or Queens walk up to Hank and start smacking him with her handbag.

Max83  03/21/2013 03:22 AM Report

Bigwig fighting Biggerwigs, quite amusing. When the elitist Establishment fights amongst themselves it is good for the working class and ordinary people so I am pleased to see and hear this.

If a billionaire loses 90% of his or her wealth she or he still has 100 million Dollars in his or her off shore bank account :-)

Let us all throw a Pity Party for the Billionaires, shall we :-)

Live like a shark, die like a shark

SharkswithfrikingLazers  03/21/2013 02:39 AM Report

AIG took the bailout money--no matter what window they were serving the billions and billions and billions of bucks (by the way McDonald's has only served about 250B hamburgers in their entire history).

The term waiver is used in many legal contexts. A waiver is essentially a unilateral act of one person that results in the surrender of a legal right. The legal right may be constitutional, statutory, or contractual, but the key issue for a court reviewing a claim of waiver is whether the person voluntarily gave up the right. If voluntarily surrendered, it is considered an express waiver.

The deal required waivers.

So then Hank doesn't like what AIG did.

Tough, he can only sue the Board as a shareholder not sue the government who was dealing with the leadership of the corporation, who by the way Hank put in power.

Hello?

Gelles  03/20/2013 08:13 PM Report

The voices below from Rose fans and others have decided the United States Secretary of the Treasury and the Attorney General for New York State were probably correct in doing the things for which Hank Greenberg complains by way of law suit.

Hank is suing for compensation to be paid to AIG's owners at the time the firm and many of its insured customers were bailed out.

The facts and law involved are complicated enough to confuse anyone who knows about the matters only second hand. Yet, Hank Greenberg was so compelling a witness, I immediately bought the book "AIG", which was instantly delivered to my reader.

It is exquisitely written. So far, I'm all for Greenberg and against his critics in this archive.

Hank and I are exactly the same age. He was a giant success in business. I was only a small cog in the machinery of government invisible to the likes of Hank and his level of operators. Yet, for a very brief time I did command an LST in the US Navy and have always had an interest in law and economics. I expect to see things fairly and to be more on Greenberg's side than against him. I am a died in the wool Keynesian and no friend of private for profit insurance in theory. I believe in mutual insurance systems and government insurance for almost all insurance needs. But private for profit insurance, like Lloyds of London, have been instrumental in modern commercial development. They are entitled to the protection of law, faithfully administered. This is America, not a banana republic or state without due process in the Anglo-American tradition.

I not only bought "AIG", I also bought Ben Bernanke's lectures published as "The Federal Reserve and the Financial Crisis" and "The Battle of Bretton Woods",by Benn Steil.

The bail out of banks and others who failed the American people in the second decade of this new century was obviously incomplete. We should have made all of us whole who lost great wealth, jobs and homes, and lost their lives in this calamitous period. Had Keynesian thought prevailed, and FDR's Second Bill of Rights become the law of these United States, we would not have come so close to repeating the horrors of the 20th Century.

I do not think Hank Greenberg of AIG was an ardent Keynesian scholar like John Galbraith and people like myself. But he was an insurance giant in the tradition of Lloyds of London, or so it seems to me, a person who never liked commercial insurance from the outside looking in.

In the Wikipedia entry on Maurice "Hank" Greenberg there is much to admire about this man. In a nation that is far from fully developed as what it will be in coming centuries, it has needed private business and business leaders with imagination and energy. I hope to learn from Charlie's guest a lot more than I now know. His critics below strike me as poorly informed and less than kind in these trying times than would make good sense.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  03/20/2013 06:56 PM Report

Something stinketh Charles . . .

May 26, 2005: New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer sues AIG and Greenberg, saying they used accounting tricks to mislead regulators and investors. (THIS IS WHAT ENRON DID.)

Feb. 9, 2006: AIG agrees to pay $1.64 billion to resolve state and federal allegations that it misled investors and regulators. (HANK, THIS DOES NOT BODE WELL FOR YOU AND PUTS YOU IN WITH BP.)

March 3, 2009: Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke says AIG operated like a hedge fund, and having to rescue the firm made him “more angry” than any other episode in the credit crisis. (HANK, AGAIN YOU LOOK REALLY BAD. HEDGE FUND?)

Jan. 27, 2010: Geithner says the AIG bailout prevented an “utter collapse” of the U.S. economy. (HANK, YOU ALMOST KILLED US.)

March 12, 2012: Former oversight panel members led by Elizabeth Warren say AIG got a “stealth bailout” by avoiding taxes. Treasury has said that laws prohibiting the transfer of tax assets when a company changes hands don’t apply to government rescues. (HANK, YOU ARE BITING THE HAND THAT SAVED YOUR 10% AND GAVE YOU A TAX BREAK.)

Dec. 11, 2012: Overall profit on the bailout climbs to $22.7 billion. (WELL AT LEAST THERE IS A POSITIVE SOMEWHERE.)

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-11/aig-bailout-ends-four-years-after-two-year-plan-timeline.htm l

Charlie, you must be deputized so you can start making arrests.

tabs  03/20/2013 06:55 PM Report

Never, ever get in between Mr Greenburg and his pursuit of money. Mr Greenburg is a no nonsense type of guy, especially when it comes to business. One does tend to believe Mr Greenburg about AIG not being caught holding the fuzzy end of the lollipop when the music stopped in 2008.

1. Mr Greenburg is one of the few left that actually has a memory of what it was like during the Great Depression of the 1930's. As such he knows what the REAL consequences of risk are.

2.AIG was Mr Greenburg's Baby,and as such he would be carefull in seeing that no harm befell his accomplishment.

Further Mr Greenburg is joshing the audience when he says that AIG wouldn't have brought the system low if it had been allowed to let market forces have their way with it. Mr Greenburg does not WANT to say that AIG was that importantly intertwined with the financial system as to make or break the system, as it weakens the rational for his law suit. The truth is in what Mr Paulson said about AIG,and that it was a guarntor of so many Pension Funds.

If one recalls the day that AIG was saved, then NY Governor Patterson was on the phone to 14 other state governors before he made that call to Fed Chief Bernanke where he got down on his knees and pleaded for an AIG bailout.

bdwomack  03/20/2013 01:45 AM Report

REMant nailed it as usual but I have some comments.

The US Federal Government HAS to be the ultimate law of the land. These reptiles, because of their immense power and influence have convinced themselves that they are entitled to this immense wealth and power. This extreme attitude is probably what led George Soros to come to the conclusion that the government should have nationalized the banks.

"It was a taking...we have a constitution that says the government can't take property without compensation...it's in the constitution" Me: "Yah...it's there somewhere...I

think it's in the 13th amendment...like manifest destiny...unbelievable!"

AIG was a huge legitimate international insurance company that Greenberg should get credit for with a massively overleveraged FP unit bolted on that may have originally

been intended just to hedge risk. AIG probably WAS made to be a Patsy because the Oracle, Goldman, knew all sides of the trade and knew AIG was the hub of the wheel.

Realizing that his legacy was about to be varnished with excrement Greenberg probably tried to sneak out the back door when Eliot Spitzer was probably tipped off by his

own board to save themselves. These CEOs are used to externalizing everything including blame to their favorite Patsy...the clumsy government.

drbosscool  03/19/2013 11:27 PM Report

what a load of crap!! another lying jew defending his crimes blaming to another jew (spitzer)

MetroMD  03/19/2013 08:37 PM Report

This may be the day and interview in which The Charlie Rose show jumped the shark. Mr Rose has been 'slowing' down for some time - letting people get away with nonsense for quite some time. He's going from interviewer to passive bystander to an enabler of public relations BS. The show should become a PR company and charge people like Greenberg for being on the show. Shame on you Charlie.

MisterMittster  03/19/2013 06:30 PM Report

I am 'Fed' up with the whole "Financial Services" 'INDUSTRY'. They're ALL Scum! They've been destroying this country for the last 30 plus years and they CONTINUE to destroy this country. Why would anybody want to work for a living or create something of real value when they can goof off and create bullshit that the government will just print up more money to pay for; while the rest of the world ... yeah, what about the rest of the world.?.

So the games continue. ... ... ... ...

perverse incentives, won't stop it. ... unforseen consequences, won't stop it. ... moral (Hah) hazard won't stop it.

Eventually the 'Wrath of God' will .. and I will enjoy seeing it happen.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  03/19/2013 04:53 PM Report

Great, GREAT Question Charlie!!!

"Did you do anything wrong at any stage?"

Answer: "No."

Charlie, give him his money back. This poor old man has lost 90% of his worth and his reputation. Come on! Give a dog a bone will ya? You don't need to live off of him.

REMant  03/19/2013 11:09 AM Report

We've already heard most of this from Mr Greenberg. His argument appears to be in essence that the govt is in the insurance business no less than AIG and everyone ought to have been insured equally. But we shouldn't have insured any of them, because in so doing we surreptitiously and fraudulently took everyone's genuine property, and if these paper loses had actually been genuine property, then they wouldn't have needed it. Now it was Fed's fault this happened and thus it is certainly arguable the Fed should have recognized its failure, and, to be equitable, treated AIG the same as the others. But this was a necessary deflation, a market correction, and no company ought to have been in the business of attempting to insure a Ponzi scheme. I don't see then how it can be argued this falls in the category of an ex postfacto law. Whether the govt is culpable in forcing Greenberg out is vitiated by his continuing attitude towards it all, and otherwise irrelevant. While it does seem the govt did what it did primarily to use AIG as a vehicle to bailout others, they did so probably figuring that credit default swaps are only swaps, not deposits. I'm afraid this case has no more merit than arguing Bernie Maddoff's victims ought to be made whole. Tho I'm not surprised Boies took it.