American International Group, the mega-insurer that nearly collapsed in 2008 before being bailed out, is now considering joining a lawsuit filed by its former chairman against the federal government. The lawsuit, filed in 2011 by former AIG chairman Maurice Greenberg, contends that the federal government violated the Fifth Amendment by taking too large a share in the company and charging it excessive interest rates on the $182 billion in loans it gave the company.

Greenberg, who led AIG for nearly four decades, says the deal crushed the company’s shareholders, and he will make the same case to AIG’s board of directors to urge them to join his lawsuit, the New York Times reports:

The board of A.I.G. will meet on Wednesday to consider joining a $25 billion shareholder lawsuit against the government, court records show. The lawsuit does not argue that government help was not needed. It contends that the onerous nature of the rescue — the taking of what became a 92 percent stake in the company, the deal’s high interest rates and the funneling of billions to the insurer’s Wall Street clients — deprived shareholders of tens of billions of dollars and violated the Fifth Amendment, which prohibits the taking of private property for “public use, without just compensation.”

In recent weeks, AIG has run a series of ads on network and cable television across the country thanking American taxpayers for saving it. AIG repaid the $182 billion, and the government sold its last stake in the company in August. The ads tout AIG’s role in recoveries from natural disasters, including $144 million in insurance claims it paid after the Joplin, Missouri tornadoes and $2 billion in claims it expects to pay to Hurricane Sandy victims. It also boasts that it is the “lead insurer” of the new World Trade Center and that taxpayers turned a profit on the bailout:

AIG CEO Robert H. Benmosche accompanied the ads with a letter to the New York Times, in which he wrote, “It is a result of our employees’ determination to repay America that A.I.G. not only supports our customers and employees but also contributes directly to the financial stability of the United States. Thank you, America.”

While Greenberg says the bailout hurt shareholders, government officials that spoke to the Times anonymously said the shareholders would have fared worse going through bankruptcy. And though Greenberg is correct in his reading of the Fifth Amendment, which prohibits government seizure of private property without fair compensation, AIG’s stock price at the time of the bailout was “slightly north of zero.”

As Mitt Romney struggles to gain ground with voters in Ohio, he has attempted to redefine his position on the federal auto rescue that saved as many as 1.3 million jobs. Romney released a highly misleading ad in Ohio this week that criticizes President Obama’s handling of the bailout and touts his own apparently unreleased plan to help the auto industry.

Romney’s actual plan was to oppose federal financing of the auto companies’ bankruptcy; instead, he wanted the private sector to finance the rescue while the government guaranteed post-bankruptcy loans. But private sector financing was “pure fantasy” at the time, according to industry insiders, because credit markets were “bone-dry” in the middle of the financial crisis.

Reporters and auto insiders aren’t alone in their criticism of Romney’s stance on the auto rescue, though. Here are six Romney supporters who have also contradicted his view of the auto bailout or criticized his plan:

1. Michigan Rep. Fred Upton: In February, Upton told Western Michigan University’s WMUK radio that only the government could have saved the auto industry. “There was no one that was willing to come up not only with the cash to keep them afloat but also to serve the warranties of everyone, you and I that drive all these cars,” Upton said. “There was no one that could have picked up those pieces other than the federal government.” He also contradicted Romney’s claim that the rescue was a bailout of auto unions, saying it was “bi-partisan from the get-go.” Without the bailout, Upton said, Michigan “would have hit 40 percent unemployment rates.”

2. Michigan Rep. Thad McCotter: “There was no choice” but to use government funds to save the auto industry, McCotter told MSNBC in February. “So to my fellow Republicans I’ll simply remind them, if you were in Congress at the point in time or if you were President Bush, you could leave all $700 billion of taxpayers hard-earned money with the Wall Street people, or you could take some back to Main Street to keep America a balanced, vibrant economy,” McCotter said. “To me there was no choice.”

3. Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder: In November 2011, Snyder urged Republicans to stop second-guessing the auto rescue, even if they disagreed with how it was done, because it had delivered incredible results for Michigan and the auto industry. “I would have had some differences on how they did it, but I’m not going to second-guess it,” Snyder told the New York Times. “The more important thing is the results. And the auto industry is doing very well today.”

4. Auto Industry Task Force member Harry Wilson: Wilson, a member of Obama’s Auto Industry Task Force who has run for office as a Republican in New York, criticized Romney’s view of the bailout last week. “I’m, as you know, a Republican who supports the governor. But I think on this issue, I think he’s really mishandled it,” Wilson told Bloomberg. “He came out both in 2008 and earlier in 2012, in a piece in one of the Detroit newspapers, and said he wouldn’t have supported any government capital because private capital was available. That’s simply not true.”

5. The Detroit News editorial board: A self-described “conservative newspaper,” the Detroit News endorsed Romney for president last week. But in its endorsement editorial, the paper blasted Romney for his “wrong-headedness on the auto bailout.” Romney “was wrong in suggesting the automakers could have found operating capital in the private markets,” the editors wrote. “Romney suggested government-backed loans to keep the companies afloat post bankruptcy. But what GM and Chrysler needed were bridge loans to get them through the process, and the private credit markets were unwilling to provide them.”

6. Ex-Chrysler CEO Lee Iaccoca: Iaccoca has endorsed Romney, but he also has praised the auto bailout for its rescue of the industry. “Two years ago, it looked like Detroit and Michigan and the car business was in the toilet,” Iacocca told the Detroit News this month. But after the bailout, he said, “things have turned out pretty well.” And even if Iaccoca has criticisms of pieces of the bailout, the paper said he “praised the government actions over the past two years that gave two of Detroit’s Big Three automakers another chance.”

As Mitt Romney continues to struggle to explain his various positions on the auto rescue that saved General Motors and Chrysler, his presidential campaign has released an ad about the bailout that is littered with falsehoods and misdirections.

Watch it:

The 30-second ad is running in Ohio, a state where Romney is trailing in the polls and has been battered by the Obama campaign for his opposition to the auto rescue. Here is a breakdown of the ad’s misleading, and sometimes false, claims:

1. “Mitt Romney has a plan to help the auto industry.” No specific plan is referenced in the ad, and Romney’s campaign web site does not include a plan to “help the auto industry.” In 2008, Romney wrote a New York Times editorial titled, “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt,” and he re-upped his call against the auto rescue during the Republican primaries this year.

2. “[Romney] is supported by Lee Iaccoca and the Detroit News.” Chrysler Chairman Lee Iaccoca has indeed endorsed Romney. The Detroit News, a self-described “conservative newspaper,” endorsed him last week. But in that endorsement, the paper slammed Romney’s “wrong-headedness on the auto bailout.”

3. “Obama took GM and Chrysler into bankruptcy.” Obama did take both companies into a managed bankruptcy, the path Romney says was originally his idea. Romney, however, supported private sector financing of the bankruptcy, a plan that was “pure fantasy” at the time since no private lenders could lend to the companies in the middle of the financial crisis. Without federal intervention, the companies would have almost assuredly collapsed, costing 1.3 million jobs, according to industry estimates.

4. “[Obama] sold Chrysler to Italians who are going to build Jeeps in China.” This week, Romney claimed he read a news story that said Chrysler was planning to “moving all production to China.” The Bloomberg News piece he referenced, though, made it clear that Fiat, the Italian company that now owns Chrysler, was opening new factories in China to make Jeeps for Chinese consumers. No American plants will be closed, and no American jobs will be lost. The ad’s claim may not be as false as Romney’s previous statement, but it is certainly misleading.

The rescue of American auto giants Chrysler and General Motors has become a major issue in Ohio, the second-largest auto state in the country. And with the election just two weeks away, Mitt Romney and his surrogates are again trying to convince voters that the auto rescue he opposed was originally his idea.

Ohio voters will be “really surprised” to learn that President Obama ultimately followed the bailout plan outlined by Romney, Ohio Sen. Rob Portman (R) told MSNBC this morning:

PORTMAN: Hey look, we’re really happy in Ohio that the auto industry has made a comeback, but the fact is the Ohio voter is going to be really surprised when they learn it was Barack Obama who took them through bankruptcy because these ads in Ohio are saying, “Mitt Romney wanted to take the auto companies through bankruptcy.” Well, you know what, that’s what Barack Obama did. It was a structured bankruptcy as Mitt Romney suggested. Mitt Romney said there ought to be federal guarantees and federal government involvement.

Watch it:

Though Chrysler and GM did eventually enter a managed bankruptcy, the crucial difference between what Romney outlined and the path Obama followed happened prior to the bankruptcy. GM and Chrysler needed a “bridge loan” just to finance their entrance into bankruptcy. The government ultimately provided that loan.

But Romney pushed the government to stay out of it. Instead, he supported private sector financing of the bankruptcy. Private sector companies willing to finance the bankruptcy were nonexistent, however, making it necessary for the government to step in. “The credit markets were bone-dry,” The Economist remembered this year, “making the privately financed bankruptcy that Mr Romney favoured improbable.”

Though Romney and his surrogates continue to claim that the entire rescue was his idea, the auto industry doesn’t share that belief. Auto insiders and reporters who covered the rescue, in fact, have said Romney’s plan was “reckless,” “dishonest,” and “pure fantasy.”

Ohio Republican Senate candidate Josh Mandel, who is running to unseat Sen. Sherrod Brown (D), couldn’t name his position on the auto bailout during an interview with the Youngstown Vindicator, despite being asked half a dozen times in a number of ways.

In the interview with the paper’s editorial board, Mandel continually said he would have “had trouble” supporting the rescue plan because workers at Delphi, a local factory, lost some of their pension and health benefits as part of the package. But Mandel struggled to ever enumerate an actual position on the vote when asked for a yes or no answer.

“As the grandson of a UAW worker, I will do everything I can in the United States Senate to protect auto jobs,” Mandel said. “But it needs to done under the umbrella of the free enterprise system, without the federal government picking winners and losers. And it needs to be done in a way without stripping these hardworking workers of their pensions.”

Watch Mandel’s full answer:

Mandel also struggled to answer the question in an interview with the Columbus Dispatch, though he did manage to call Brown’s support for the rescue “un-American.” Those comments drew fire from the United Auto Workers, whose president said Mandel’s comments were “out of a cartoon or something.”

And though Mandel, like Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, may wish the free enterprise system could have saved the auto industry, the facts belie the argument. The private sector was unwilling to provide General Motors and Chrysler with the loans they needed to enter a managed bankruptcy, leaving government intervention as the only path available. According to at least one auto industry estimate, the auto industry’s rescue saved at least one million American jobs.

A recent report from the St. Louis Federal Reserve highlights that automotive sales continue to be one of the most encouraging aspects of an otherwise sluggish economic recovery. The report notes that “most analysts regard increases in automobile and light truck sales as an important component of an economic recovery.” And ever since the recession and the government rescue of the automakers, the industry has been on a steady upward climb:

During the first six months of 2012, the annual sales rate for automobiles and light trucks was 14.8 percent higher than during the comparable year-earlier period… Most recently, however, slower vehicle sales have mirrored the generally slowing pace of U.S. economic activity, with the July sales rate less than June’s… Yet, July sales of 1.15 million vehicles were 8.9 percent better than the same month in 2011.

August was even better, with sales topping 1.2 million, making it the best August for auto sales since before the recession. And the rebound would not have been possible without the bridge loans provided by the government in 2009.

Numerous industry insiders agree that Mitt Romney’s alternative proposal for private markets to provide necessary capital to complete the bankruptcy process is wildly implausible. The economy was still reeling from the recession, and sources of private capital were in no position to provide that kind of aid. Without government intervention, there would’ve likely been a massive liquidation of the industry, wiping out as many as 1.3 million jobs.

Obama administration policies have helped in other ways as well: New fuel efficiency standards and incentives in the 2009 stimulus are driving American-made cars to be become more competitive in an international market adapting to higher fuel prices.

The automobile industry has been a consistent bright spot in the American economy over the last several months, as automakers have added jobs to meet growing demand. And news from the industry is only getting better, as new estimates expect automakers to sell 14.3 million cars in the United States in 2012 — 1.5 million more than they sold last year.

Factories for both foreign and domestic automakers are now working “at maximum capacity” and the industry is adding shifts and jobs to keep up with that rising demand, the USA Today reports:

Some plants are adding third work shifts. Others are piling on worker overtime and six-day weeks. And Ford Motor and Chrysler Group are cutting out or reducing the annual two-week July shutdown at several plants this summer to add thousands of vehicles to their output.

“We have many plants working at maximum capacity now,” says Ford spokeswoman Marcey Evans. “We’re building as many (cars) as we can.”

Chrysler and General Motors, the major beneficiaries of the auto rescue, have both reported their best profits in more than a decade, and both were already planning to add jobs this year. With factories now struggling to meet demand, both foreign and domestic auto companies are planning to add even more jobs — and, as the Center for American Progress’ Adam Hersh and Jane Farrell noted in April, the industry has added more than 139,000 jobs in the last three years.

The strength of the auto industry is yet another sign that letting it fail would have been a major mistake. Not only would it have cost more than a million jobs at a time when the economy was struggling, it would have prevented the current growth that is helping both the industry and the American economy recover.