I could not agree more with the Obama administration when they recently said we need to see unprecedented new investment in American manufacturing.

By making the unprecedented investment in Chrysler and GM the United States government by definition chose not to assist other Americans that are in need.

As I view TARP, TARP is written in a sense or is certainly practiced today by the administration--I am not sure if there is any firm in America that cannot receive TARP funds.

Mr. Mourdock, had the Obama administration's Automotive Task Force chosen to treat the retired teachers and retired policemen and policewomen of Indiana equally to the retired autoworkers of the UAW, have you done a calculation on what…

I would also say to Mr. Borst and Ms. Bertsch, again, you may be right, but we recently, as a Member of Congress, heard from CIT that if they did not receive taxpayer funds that they would have to go into liquidation.

I might have even been happier to see the chairman or the CEO.

Mr. Lauria's allegation is that Mr. Rattner said it. And Mr. Lauria is wrong.

In an interview with the Detroit radio host, Frank Beckmann, Mr. Lauria said that Perella Weinberg was directly threatened by the White House.

How is it wise economic policy to have a subsidized GM and a subsidized Chrysler compete with a non-subsidized Ford?

When you are talking about new GM and new Chrysler, the management made this decision.

As part of the restructuring of Chrysler--I believe I have my facts right--I believe that Fiat has the opportunity to increase their equity stake.