Shoddy Reporting Concerning Closed Chrysler Dealers:What the TARP Inspector General Report Does NOT Say.

By Itooktheredpill

Stories at both HotAir.com and MichelleMalkin.com are missing important parts of the picture, and could be unwittingly hurting the dealers.

Nowhere in the SIGTARP Report does it say that the Government “forced” (as Malkin put it) Chrysler to reduce its dealership network.

It’s important for both Ed Morrissey and Michelle Malkin to read and respond to what attorney Leo Donofrio has to say…

The TARP Inspector General’s office, SIGTARP, recently released a report entitled, “Factors Effecting The Decision of General Motors and Chrysler To Reduce Their Dealership Networks“. This report set off a firestorm of shoddy reporting, which, if left unchecked, will confuse those familiar with the Chrysler Dealers’ pending litigation on appeal in federal district court. This blog posting has been designed to educate the public as to the truth of the SIGTARP Report.

My assertion of shoddy reporting is levelled specifically at The New York Times, the AP, and unfortunately also at Michelle Malkin who has been a staunch supporter of the dealers throughout. Regardless, her recent discussion of the SIGTARP report is fundamentally flawed and damaging to the case we have brought in our federal appeal to the Southern District of New York (where a Court ordered oral argument is scheduled for July 28, 2010, a fact the media doesn’t seem remotely interested in mentioning).

Nowhere in the SIGTARP Report does it say that the Government “forced” (as Malkin put it) Chrysler to reduce its dealership network. As to GM, yes the Government did specifically urge dealership reductions, but as to Chrysler the Government did not.  The SIGTARP Report is very clear on this point.

The GM Bankruptcy was a vastly different beast than the Chrysler Bankruptcy.  And the SIGTARP Report stresses this point in multiple citations throughout the 45 page document.

The “contrast” between GM and Chrysler was entirely skipped over by Malkin and the rest of the media reports.

WHY THE CONTRAST IS SO IMPORTANT TO FORMER CHRYSLER DEALERS…

Please follow this link to Leo’s post and read it.

UPDATE:

Mega-Kudos to Ed Morrissey, who updated his HotAir post as follows:

Update: WTPOTUS notes that the government didn’t force Chrysler to close dealerships, according to counsel for some of the dealers:

Nowhere in the SIGTARP Report does it say that the Government “forced” (as Malkin put it) Chrysler to reduce its dealership network. As to GM, yes the Government did specifically urge dealership reductions, but as to Chrysler the Government did not.  The SIGTARP Report is very clear on this point.

I’ve amended the first paragraph to remove Chrysler.  The rest of the post dealt mainly with GM anyway.

Thank you very much for that update, “Captain”.  This is an important distiction, especially as the Chrysler dealers have their day in court this coming Wednesday (which I hope you will recap in a later post).

…82 rejected Chrysler dealers will have their day in court on this very issue before the Honorable Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein – who ordered oral argument sua sponte – on July 28, 2010 at 12:30 PM in the Southern District of New York, 500 Pearl Street, New York, N.Y.