Issa questions whether White House pressured Ford to pull ‘bailout’ ad

jackalope

Former Staff
Jan 2010
51,139
17,672
Maine
Issa questions whether White House pressured Ford to pull ‘bailout’ ad
By Justin Sink - 09/29/11 04:48 PM ET
[FONT=Georgia !important]

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) said in a letter to the Ford Motor Company on Thursday that he was "deeply concerned about undue political pressure exerted by the White House."

The House Oversight Committee chairman's letter comes on the heels of reports earlier this week that the company had pulled an ad critical of the auto bailout following a phone call with administration officials.

Ford denied Tuesday that the ad was removed because of political pressure, saying instead that it had simply been taken out of their ad rotation as scheduled.

"For those asking, the ad ran as part of a planned rotation and continues to run online. It contains the unscripted comments of a Ford owner. We supported emergency government support for our competitors and continue to support the decisions we made," Ford said in a statement posted to their Facebook page.But Daniel Howes, a conservative columnist for The Detroit News,said that the advertisement was pulled "in response to White House questions."

(snip ... )

"Given the close relationship between American automobile manufacturers, workers unions and the U.S. Government in the wake of a series of loans, grants, and stimulus programs, accusations of White House interference in private business matters to support its own political and policy agendas are very serious issues and warrant a full airing of the facts," Issa wrote.

The White House has denied that it asked Ford to remove the ad, with White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer calling Howes's column "false."

more: Issa questions whether White House pressured Ford to pull
[/FONT]

Ford denies it. The White House denies it. So, is this just another completely made up out of whole cloth right wing lie?
 
Jun 2011
1,474
217
Ford denies it. The White House denies it. So, is this just another completely made up out of whole cloth right wing lie?
Let's assume it is. Is that the whole issue? This is a natural consequence of the type of government intervention in question; people rightfully begin to question the impartiality of the government.

What of the Toyota issue?

Say Anything » Government Report Exonerates Toyota On Accelerator Controversy

"So basically, in the midst of a big national debate about the government’s effective nationalization of two domestic car companies, that same government launched an attack against the biggest competitor of those companies which turned out to be totally false."

True/False? I don't know, I wasn't there, but is there the potential for bias. Absolutely.
 

jackalope

Former Staff
Jan 2010
51,139
17,672
Maine
Let's assume it is. Is that the whole issue? This is a natural consequence of the type of government intervention in question; people rightfully begin to question the impartiality of the government.

What of the Toyota issue?

Say Anything » Government Report Exonerates Toyota On Accelerator Controversy

"So basically, in the midst of a big national debate about the government’s effective nationalization of two domestic car companies, that same government launched an attack against the biggest competitor of those companies which turned out to be totally false."

True/False? I don't know, I wasn't there, but is there the potential for bias. Absolutely.

Yes, if they're just completely making things up, I think that would be the whole issue.
 
Jun 2011
1,474
217
Yes, if they're just completely making things up, I think that would be the whole issue.
Well, the point is that neither you nor I are actually privy to the conversation. So, who's the most credible party here? Well, we have Issa, the Republican, clearly we can see his anti-government/anti-Obama bias for what that is. We also have the government denying it, but that's nothing more than the "I didn't do it defense" - the most credible assertion IS Ford's because they would be the victim of the duress, but if the underlying assertions are true, they would obviously STILL BE UNDER duress.

The only thing I AM confident of is that the government is no longer an impartial regulator of the automobile industry.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mordent

jackalope

Former Staff
Jan 2010
51,139
17,672
Maine
Well, the point is that neither you nor I are actually privy to the conversation. So, who's the most credible party here? Well, we have Issa, the Republican, clearly we can see his anti-government/anti-Obama bias for what that is. We also have the government denying it, but that's nothing more than the "I didn't do it defense" - the most credible assertion IS Ford's because they would be the victim of the duress, but if the underlying assertions are true, they would obviously STILL BE UNDER duress.

The only thing I AM confident of is that the government is no longer an impartial regulator of the automobile industry.

You have two parties - both say it's false. That's what's credible.
 
Jun 2011
1,474
217
You have two parties - both say it's false. That's what's credible.
Really? That's enough for you? Police show up at a domestic violence call, husband says, "I didn't do it" - Wife, battered to shit, says, "I tripped"

Why does the wife lie? There are potentially many reasons of course, but one of them is obviously that she fears the future wrath of her husband (yes, she can get a temporary injunction).

You sure those Ford Fusions aren't subject to a recall?
 

jackalope

Former Staff
Jan 2010
51,139
17,672
Maine
Really? That's enough for you? Police show up at a domestic violence call, husband says, "I didn't do it" - Wife, battered to shit, says, "I tripped"

Why does the wife lie? There are potentially many reasons of course, but one of them is obviously that she fears the future wrath of her husband (yes, she can get a temporary injunction).

You sure those Ford Fusions aren't subject to a recall?

Your example is one where there's evidence. This example is one where there is none given. Some guy says someone said something. The people involved say, nope, that didn't happen.


One of those parties has no credibility, and it's the one reporting something with no evidence.
 
Feb 2011
11,977
8,313
The greatest place on Earth California
Anything with Issa involved in it can't be good.
 
Feb 2011
11,977
8,313
The greatest place on Earth California
Yes, I do not trust him at all.
You do know he was a crook in his younger years? Has a record. San Jose Mercury News Sunday February 6, 2011


Powerful figure’s S.J. past

Darrell Issa, the Southern California congressman who chairs the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, is known as an indefatigable man who made serious money in car alarms.
But every time Issa assumes a new role of prominence - as he has now - a different kind of alarm goes off about his youthful brushes with the law, including a San Jose case dating from 1979.
The latest is a long piece in the New Yorker (www. newyorker. com), which examined allegations of auto theft, arson and illegal gun possession that have dogged the powerful 57-year-old Republican.
Because this column is primarily a local endeavor, I'm interested in the San Jose case, in which Issa and his older brother, William, were charged with grand theft. Because the story involves a red 1976 Mercedes sedan, a classic car, it is at the very least memorable.
According to court records, the story began on Dec. 28, 1979, when William Issa showed up at Smythe European Motors in San Jose to sell Darrell's Mercedes. William carried an Ohio driver's license with his brother's name. The dealer paid him $16,000 for the car.
Not much later, Darrell, then a 26-year-old soldier stationed at Ft. Ord, reported
that the car had been stolen from the Monterey airport, where he had left it before heading home to Cleveland for the holidays. He told authorities he had left the title in the trunk.










Police sketch

When police showed Darrell a police sketch of the man who had sold the stolen car, he said he couldn't identify him. A retired San Jose detective who investigated the case told the Mercury News in 2003 that the sketch was a "dead-on" likeness for William.
The police suspected that the two had conspired to sell the car and collect the insurance money. Court records indicate that Darrell Issa stonewalled investigators, at one point sending the sketch to his mother to have her determine whether it was William.
The office of then-District Attorney Louis Bergna concluded that Darrell had falsely reported the theft when he already knew that William had sold the car. But detective Ron Christiansen told the newspaper that he was unable to prove Darrell knew about the theft beforehand or intended to share the proceeds.
Local charges
Though Municipal Court Judge Wayne Kanemoto ruled there was enough evidence to hold the brothers for trial, prosecutors later dropped the charges. A prosecutor told Christiansen that the case was too difficult to prove to a jury.
Darrell Issa, who bought the car back from Smythe for $17,000, says the entire affair was his brother's fault, a story he told the New Yorker and the Mercury News. "One will assume that you don't immediately try to implicate your brother," he told the newspaper in 2003. "I made every effort to confront my brother and to inform the police once I was sure."
The case is messy and confusing. But the Smythe story is San Jose's footnote to Darrell Issa's biography. And who knows? Maybe we can take an odd pride that a piece of the strange resume of a powerful man unfolded here with a classic red Mercedes.

Contact Scott Herhold at sherhold@mercurynews.com or 408-275-0917.