Breaking: Obama Administration Sues BP, Others on GulfSspill

[Hissyspit]

Source: Reuters

Obama administration sues BP, others on Gulf spill
Wed Dec 15, 2010 1:59pm EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Obama administration sued BP Plc and four other companies tied to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill on Wednesday, charging violations of U.S. environmental laws, in the opening salvo in what will likely be a lengthy legal battle.

The lawsuit seeks damages from BP, Transocean Ltd, Anadarko Petroleum Corp, Mitsui & Co Ltd unit MOEX and BP's insurer Lloyds of London for their roles in the worst oil spill disaster in U.S. history.

The Justice Department asked a federal judge in New Orleans overseeing the litigation related to the oil spill to hold the companies liable, except for Lloyds, for unlimited damages, beyond the $75 million cap under the U.S. Oil Pollution Act.

Read more: http://us.mobile.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE6BE59J20101215?ca=rdt

[calimary]

1. Well how 'bout that.

[El Supremo]

2. Why not Haliburton?

[madrchsod]

12. hard to prove....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/29/halliburton-gulf-oil-spill_n_775784.html

and uncle dickie`s connections. they just paid 250 million to get dickie off the hook in africa.

[wordpix]

50. can't wait for all the rats to start eating their own with the suits and countersuits

Just what these suits deserve :evilgrin:

[rpannier]

83. That's why suing BP should work so well

BP will flip (hopefully) and then the cockroaches scurry to save their own ass

[dixiegrrrrl]

16. It is up to BP to cross sue Haliborton and TransOcean,

as a defense.

However, Government suing the bad guys is one thing.
Government settling the suit, out of court, confidential agreement, or for 2 cents on the dollar,
THAT is a highly likely outcome, as the SEC and DOJ have been proving countless times in the last few years.

Or government suing and case thrown out of court by a friendly judge because of a government "screwup"...DOJ has done THAT to
businesses, too.
Remember the Ted Stevens case?

[JackRiddler]

26. Interesting. By the way, CEO of Anadarko (Hackett) sits on Halliburton board...

http://www.halliburton.com/AboutUs/default.aspx?pageid=2287&navid=974

Such a little world they have.

[Rainbowreflect]

30. Why not Haliburton??????

Go Horn Frogs!!!!1

[pocoloco]

36. What did they do???

[Rainbowreflect]

37. Halliburton or the HornFrogs?

[FirstLight]

57. Ya, why not them?

they were the ones who poured the shoddy concrete, right?

[CLANG]

90. There's only one animal that can kill a horned frog.

This one:

[chervilant]

62. Indeed,

why NOT Halliburton?!?

[rucky]

64. BP will sue them, now.

[TheMadMonk]

75. Because Haliburton is on record as reccomending a much more...

...comprehensive grouting process than BP chose.

Haliburton did exactly as it was told with its protests on record.


This could well be Haliburton's method, to always recommend more than it knows the customer will go with, then do as it's told each time. Arse permanently covered.

[Nihil]

88. Q: "Why not Haliburton?" A: "Dick Cheney."

Or were people thinking that Obama was going to stand up to him?

:rofl:

[katnapped]

3. Wait...what?

Won't Joe Barton be calling and telling the president to apologize?

[valerief]

87. LOL!!!

:rofl:

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

4. Suing to decresase BP's responsibility, no doubt...

Just a guess based on a feeling...

Hey. Look at me and say it didn't cross your own mind....

:shrug:

[Mnemosyne]

13. First thing I thought too, P#6. "No matter how cynical... n/t

[polmaven]

47. It did not cross my mind!

:banghead:

[monmouth]

5. I first thought this was from the "Onion."....n/t

[Uncle Joe]

6. Kicked and recommended, but El Supremo asks a good question.

Thanks for the thread, Hissyspit.

[MineralMan]

7. Good. That was coming, but it's good to see it filed.

[JDPriestly]

8. So Halliburton has really managed to get off?

I am so pleased to see the Justice Department acting on this.

[elias49]

19. Well, Haliburton had to pay Nigeria $250 million for Cheney

They're probably tapped out. :sarcasm:

[TheWraith]

21. Halliburton provided support services to BP, but wasn't involved in running the rig.

If Halliburton was negligent, it's up to BP and company to sue them. As it stands, the people who actually owned the rig (BP and Anadarko) and operated it (BP and Transocean) are the ones held to be liable.

[JDPriestly]

23. Thanks. That is a great video.

[leveymg]

48. Halliburton cemented the seal in the well that blew out. More than "support services", think so?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/29/halliburton-gulf-oil-spill_n_775784.html

Halliburton's Gulf Oil Spill Admission: Critical Test Skipped On Deepwater Horizon Before BP Oil Spill

CAIN BURDEAU | 10/29/10 05:40 PM | AP


NEW ORLEANS — A federal judge is ordering tests to be performed as soon as possible on cement Halliburton Co. used to seal the BP well that later blew out catastrophically in the Gulf of Mexico.

U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier said some of the components may be "deteriorating over time" and that tests should be done "as soon as reasonably practicable."

The cement components had been subpoenaed by federal investigators looking into what caused the April 20 blowout of a BP well being drilled by the Deepwater Horizon rig. Halliburton was hired to seal the well with cement. The explosion aboard the Deepwater Horizon killed 11 workers and led to a spill of more than 170 million gallons of crude in the Gulf.

Halliburton's cementing work on the well has jumped to the forefront of investigations into the explosion. On Thursday, the president's oil spill commission said tests performed before the blowout should have raised doubts about the cement used to seal the well.

The cement mix's failure to prevent oil and gas from entering the well has been identified by BP and others as one of the causes of the accident.

Barbier, who is overseeing lawsuits filed after the April 20 explosion, ordered tests on the same batch of cement used by drillers in the hours before the explosion. Halliburton said it expected government investigators to retrieve the batch of cement components next week, said Cathy Mann, a company spokeswoman. She declined further comment.

Officials with the Coast Guard and U.S. Department of Interior did not return messages seeking comment.

[lonestarnot]

61. Their asses better be dragged into this fight.

I'd lay money on them being enjoined shortly.

[glinda]

9. I have now a suspicion on everything our Government does. Will wait and see.

[old guy]

15. You are very wise indeed to adopt that attitude.

[sirthomas66]

28. It may be a ruse.

[lonestarnot]

63. It's going to cost somebody some money. Usually us isn't it?

Watching others spend our money w/o discussion on the expenditures.

[obxhead]

10. When they make an announcement about changing subsidies

and tax breaks I'll believe they are serious about clamping down on oil companies. Suing to get back a fraction of what you have given away year after year is nothing more than pandering in my opinion.

http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/oil-companies-billions-subsidies-tax-breaks/19541287/

[Downwinder]

41. Sort of like a kickback.

[obxhead]

yes, sorta like a kickback

We'll give you this, but take back a tiny bit in order to get a few voters to cheer.

Forgive me if I don't get my pompoms out.

[obxhead]

43. delete dupe

[wordpix]

49. well it's a start and I applaud O for starting to grow a pair

:applause:

[obxhead]

55. The suit has just started.

There's plenty of time for him to cave with an out of court settlement.

I'll cheer him when he holds his ground and forces a trial.

[nolabear]

11. GOOD. I hope they break them and use the money to restore the environment they broke.

People need help. People STILL need help. People will need help for a long time, not to just be taken care of, but to be able to take up their lives and livelihoods back on track (TZ music, I swear as I was tying that the words were coming out of Lisa Jackson's mouth).

[dennis4868]

14. BUT BUT BUT.....

DUers have been telling me that he is too pro business....

[Javaman]

68. But but but...

he marched out a "scientist" flunky in August to tell us that 75% of the oil dissipated.

[Cirque du So-What]

17. I fail to see the need for so much sour grapes & snark

BP & others are getting sued. WTF is so wrong with that? Not enough 'meat' with which to bash our President or what?

[TheWraith]

22. Precisely. People would rather have bad news to rail about than good news to celebrate. nt

[SkyDaddy7]

25. IT is SAD SAD SAD! DU needs to change its name...

BASHOBAMAFOREVERYTHINGHEDOESGOODORBADUNDERGROUND.COM

[lillypaddle]

32. yeah, it is very tiresome

:thumbsup:

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[catgirl]

73. Despicable comment

[Javaman]

69. Yeah it really is...

especially when he marched out that "scientist" to say that 75% of the oil was gone!

While I'm glad that it appears as if the DOJ is going after BP, I'm going to wait before I pop any champaign.

[LanternWaste]

31. One may always turn good news into bad news...

One may always turn good news into bad news... I'm reminded of a few weeks past when I stayed with my parents for the weekend and single handedly cooked my first Thanksgiving dinner. Everyone was pleased as punch with the outcome, but the petulant little step-brother could fixate only on what he wanted but didn't receive for his birthday the week before. Although it had little to nothing to do with the dinner itself, he found a way to make it about his agenda.

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[davidthegnome]

18. Seriously

We're suing these people for destroying the gulf of Mexico? They can afford the loss, it's everyone else who damn well can't. These bastards should be in prison, not loosing their private jet money.

[Zenlitened]

20. K&R. Here's the Associated Press report on the announcement:

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department on Wednesday sued BP and eight other companies in the Gulf oil spill disaster in an effort to recover billions of dollars from the largest offshore spill in U.S. history.

The Obama administration's lawsuit asks that the companies be held liable without limitation under the Oil Pollution Act for all removal costs and damages caused by the oil spill, including damages to natural resources. The lawsuit also seeks civil penalties under the Clean Water Act.

"We intend to prove these violations caused or contributed to the massive oil spill," Attorney General Eric Holder told a news conference.

The amount of damages and the extent of injuries sustained by the United States as a result of the Deepwater Horizon Spill are not yet fully known, the lawsuit states.

More:
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/12/15/business/AP-US-Gulf-Oil-Spill-Justice.html?hp

[dipsydoodle]

24. Maybe say goodbye to the Escrow Account

until the case is settled.

[Hoopla Phil]

74. That's what I was thinking. Wasn't that part of a deal so the U.S. would NOT sue?

[dipsydoodle]

78. I do believe so.

Notwithstanding that at least BP made the provision for claims whereas other parties may not have done so.

[Generic Other]

27. About time!!

I have been waiting to hear this.

[JackRiddler]

29. Good. It may be too little, but it isn't too late.

BP for causing through its witting actions a disaster on a worse scale and far higher cost than any terrorist attack should have been treated as a hostile corporation and had all of its reachable assets expropriated under the emergency order issued for the Gulf. In a world where corporations did not run governments, the case would have seen BP's shareholders as plaintiffs trying to get anything back after everything's doled out as damages to the people they screwed in the Gulf, not the government trying to get anything from BP.

[chervilant]

70. BP's legal team is about to get REALLY busy...

BP has a long history of safety and environmental violations, one of which resulted in the largest (to date) fine in OSHA history:

BP has had problems, to say the least, at the Texas City refinery in the past. Last year, the company was fined $87 million by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) for failing to correct safety violations there. In March 2005, an explosion and fire at Texas City killed 15 workers.

The fine was the largest in OSHA’s history. OSHA said BP hadn’t made safety improvements promised in a settlement reached with safety inspectors in September 2005. According to The Wall Street Journal report published at the time, an OSHA official said last year that BP still had a “serious systemic safety problem,” both at Texas City and across the company. The company denies OSHA’s claims, and a hearing is scheduled for later this month.

At present, several hundred residents in and around Texas City are suing BP over the release earlier this year of over 500,000 pounds of benzene-tainted emissions. Benzene is harmful to bone marrow, and can cause decreased production of red blood cells. Furthermore:

The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) has determined that benzene causes cancer in humans. Long-term exposure to high levels of benzene in the air can cause leukemia, cancer of the blood-forming organs.

BP did not inform the public of this massive release of benzene-tainted pollutants over a period of forty days, starting April 2--just two weeks before the Deepwater rig blew.

[KamaAina]

33. Yup. Exactly like Bush.

Not one iota of difference.

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[Bette Noir]

34. Hey, just because this Pres has disappointed us on some issues,

doesn't mean he's all bad. Maybe a 60-40 blend, where a Republican would exhibit a 5-95 ratio of good to evil.

[Poll_Blind]

35. This is an absolutely reflexive action and implies little about what BP is going to...

...actually be accountable for, ultimately. Read the press release.

The thing to pay attention to is not the fact that the government sued BP and others, it's what the government is willing to claim was damaged by how much. That's the important part, and I still have not seen hide nor hair of the government's assertion about what has been harmed. Although there are a number of different Federal organs (like the EPA, the Coast Guard, NOAA, etc.) involved, it still remains to be seen exactly what the scope of damage is according to the Federal government.

In other words, it's far from partying time. A big portion if not all of the most fertile portions of the Gulf of Mexico has been rendered toxic and uninhabitable to most forms of life, both at the surface and according to recent reports using the submersible Alvin, the sea floor itself.

Understand that the government (FDA) has already painted itself in a corner by declaring Gulf Seafood safe to eat by grossly lowbaling the amount of seafood eaten and also by refusing to test for anything beyond PAH's (one type of residue from oil pollution) while refusing to broaden tests to include "oil range organice" and by still not having a test to determine how much CorExit dispersant is in the food coming from the Gulf.

What the government does not accurately reflect the damage of, it cannot gain an appropriate settlement for.

I have read so many stories like this in the last 10 years. People stop paying much attention after this part. Then there's a shitty settlement and everyone wonders what the fuck happened.

PB

[defendandprotect]

38. What could this possibly mean?

[crim son]

39. We have earned the right to question what this means.

When credit is due I'll give it. Until then I remain skeptical.

[ironrooster]

40. Tell ya'll what's goin to happen...

The AG's Office will "botch" it like they did the Ted Stevens trial and BP will get off on a technicality. Or, after a ruling
is handed down, improprieties on the part of the AG's prosecutors will be leaked and the ruling overturned. BP will never
pay any more than it has already.

Just fuckin wait and see. I don't believe a goddamn thing this admin says anymore.

[ima_sinnic]

85. +1

as I mention below, a big bunch of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

[femrap]

42. And what did Exxon end up paying for

the Valdez? Big whoop.

Corporations rule. Judges are bought. I'm not impressed. We just gave the Rich all they wanted.

The Decline of the American Empire continues.

[catgirl]

72. Using less oil could have punished them

Was anyone so outraged that they turned down their heat? Or changed their driving habits? Nope.

[femrap]

86. First, I never buy gas at

Exxon/Mobil. I plan all of my errands for one big trip. And if it is above 68 degrees in my apartment, there's something wrong with the thermostat.

I hate giving corporations any more money than absolutely necessary. But I've always been like that.

Where I spend my money is all the power I have...so I spend money from my heart and soul.

I no longer purchase gas from BP. With gas at $3/gal, I'm not going anywhere.

edit for spelling.

[chervilant]

76. The

decline of the human species continues...

[bushisanidiot]

45. Go get 'em, Mr. President!

I'm behind you!!

[Creative]

46. Interesting--I thought BP had already agreed to pay $20 billion.

[killbotfactory]

51. Not good enough!

Obama should arrest the CEOs and have them WATERBOARDED on national TV until they confess everything! That he doesn't proves he's a centrist sell-out!

[AlbertCat]

52. BOIIIIINNNNG!

Talk about a double take. They did something right?

Sounds good, anyway.

[SemperEadem]

53. CAN WE PLEASE MAKE SURE THAT NONE OF THE JUDGES

HAVE ANY FINANCIAL INTERESTS IN ANY OF THE COMPANIES INVOLVED OR IN ANY COMPANY THAT IS TRYING TO FIGHT THIS, PLEASE!!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

Can we please vet these boneheads before giving them free reign to fuck over people?

[lovuian]

56. What about NALCO?

The Corexit ...is that under BP too

[Lucky 13]

58. Hell yes!

:applause:

[Major Hogwash]

59. Boo-yah!! Make them clean up the Gulf!!

Especially all of that oil on the floor that they sunk on purpose!!!!

[craigmatic]

60. It never fails to puzzle me as to the poor timing of this administration and this democratic

congress. Why didn't they do this shit when it could've helped them in the election or when the oil was still spilling?

[davidwparker]

66. This, and tax cuts for the middle class earlier, are the

64,000 questions.

Just for a start. There are about 30 more 64,000 questions that I have.

[The Straight Story]

67. Have to defend them on this one

It takes time to build up the case, get all the paperwork together, prepare to file, etc - if you want it done right and not as a feel good measure.

Of course, they have had plenty of time to nail cheney and bush and have not filed any charges or launched any investigations - which leads me to believe they have no desire for justice when it comes to their 'buddies'.

[wordpix]

71. +1

[davidwparker]

65. Woa. Stop the presses.

Did I just read the Obama administration is going after someone?

Big news, indeed.

[ima_sinnic]

77. who gave them carte blanche to begin with?

At the time, the abuses, cover-up, and violations were flagrant.
BP openly ignored EPA and OSHA "regulations" concerning Corexit and use of hazardous material suits and masks. It, a foreign corp, denied access to American beaches by American citizens and journalists while using the United States Coast Guard, a taxpayer-funded branch of the US military whose basic aim is to protect the interests of THIS country and its citizens on the sea, as its own personal escort service--in other words, a foreign corporation was allowed to take command of a branch of our military. Where was the president on this matter?

BP blatantly lied about the amount of oil gushing into the Gulf and polluted the entire earth with Corexit (because of the way currents and wind streams and storms connect the atmosphere around the world)--in full view of the world and in flagrant violation of EPA and OSHA "standards" (which apparently are not enforced if you have enough money --as with taxes, only the little people are subject to regulations--if you spill a vial of alcohol in a lab at a university, the hazmat people have to come in -- but if you pollute the entire world with a toxic substance -- hey, no problem!) Later, a friend in Jamaica told me that grease was raining out of the sky and people were getting sick--as predicted quite vociferously--so wow, what a surprise -- NOT. In fact, every country on earth should be suing BP. Why was no effort made to rein these people in at the time? It's not like any of this was a big secret or anything--quite the opposite.

These blatant violations and usurpations of American citizens' rights were ignored and even encouraged as our president gave BP carte blanche, with the attitude "they broke it so they should be allowed to do whatever they want, no matter how WRONG it is to allow a foreign corporation to take over our resources."

BP's assets could have been seized at the time--and a major citizen's initiative to do that was launched--and Tony Hayward should have been arrested for a long list of crimes. This court gesture is simply that: a gesture, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. BP will be fined some puny amount (which I am sure is figured in as a cost of doing business in a world that annoyingly wants to hold it accountable) and go about its merry well-documented and historical business of plunder, pollution, and death.

[whathehell]

79. Encouraging...Good. nt/

[pampango]

80. BBC: Gulf of Mexico leak: BP shares hit over legal move

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12006764

BP shares have fallen after the US said it was suing the oil giant for alleged violations of federal safety laws over the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. BP's shares in London dipped 2.5% in early trading.

The lawsuit asks BP and and eight other firms be held liable without limitation for all clean-up and damage costs.

BP has set aside $39.9bn (£25bn) to cover the costs stemming from the disaster. But our business editor said that if BP were found to be grossly negligent, the costs it faced could rise significantly.

It could potentially add almost $16bn to the penalties BP would have to pay under the US Clean Water Act, he said. And it would make it "perhaps impossible" for BP to recover costs it is incurring in the clean up and restitution from its co-owners of the Macondo Well, Anadarko and Mitsui, he added.

[Hubert Flottz]

81. OIL? What Oil? I don't see any oil?

Let the show trials begin, in about 10 years, when a republican is back in the White House.

[rpannier]

82. Rec Number 100

Assah!!!!!!!!!!

[Pholus]

84. Excellent! Good news to start the day!

Finally, some chance that our new corporate persons might have some responsibilities to go with all their newfound rights.

[kenfrequed]

89. 'bout time

Hopefully something will come of this.