I don't get the first point: Were the banks forced by law to be bailed out in terms attractive to the government? Or did the CEOs of these banks take government

I don't get the first point: Were the banks forced by law to be bailed out in terms attractive to the government? Or did the CEOs of these banks take government money because they were the only lenders available. If it's the latter (which is what I thought it was), these guys should look for better investments. The only way I see government using force here is by taxation and devaluing currency by printing more of it. But that's not what these guys are whining about.