Why Is Warren Losing? Because She’s the Real Threat to Wall Street (video)

9
969
Elizabeth Warren

Why is relative political newcomer and policy wonk Senator Elizabeth Warren losing the presidential primary to two old white men who are Washington DC political insiders and life-long politicians? Because the smart woman with the plans is the real threat to the billionaire class and Wall Street’s hold on our federal government.

Settle down… yes… I know Senator Bernie Sanders rails against billionaires and Wall Street. (I shot multiple videos of Bernie in 2015-16.) My point is not that I disagree with Bernie, but that he is a lightning rod with a lot of baggage. (Rep. Anthony Kern showed me his Facebook page and his Bernie promotions. That should scare everyone.)

I think the billionaire class (which currently runs our government) is more afraid of Warren because she can get things done. My opinion on the Arizona Presidential Primary is: anyone who is for Warren should vote for her. We need to show all of the good old boys– regardless of party– that we believe in her and her ideas. Her research into bankruptcy and economics and the creation of the Financial Products Safety Commission (which was saving consumers billions of dollars until Trump took over) are of great value to the American people.

Warren must not be silenced by the media, the billionaires, or the establishment. She has great plans, and many of us trust her. [NOTE: I wrote this blog post before Warren left the presidential race. I still believe that her ideas and plans must be kept alive because they are important for the American people.]

To prove my point about Wall Street, here is a blog post of mine from June 16, 2015. The banks have been after Warren for a long time because she knows their game.

Progressive Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have been calling for the feds to bust up the banks.

Boo Hoo… Wall Street Says Elizabeth Warren Doesn’t Understand Global Banking

JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon thinks Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren doesn’t “understand global banking system”.

So, it’s not that Dimon and Warren have a basic disagreement on how banks should be managed and regulated. According to Wall Street, Liz is just stupid. Obviously, if she fully understood what Dimon and his band of thieves were doing, she wouldn’t be fighting them so hard. Ironically, in recent weeks, President Obama also called Warren’s opinions on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) ignorant. In March, Berkshire Hathoway CEO Warren Buffet she is too “angry” and “violent” in her critiques of Wall Street.

It pisses me off as a woman, as a progressive, and as a banking reform advocate that Dimon, Obama, and Buffet resorted to personal smears rather than honestly debating Wall Street’s gambling operation and actually doing something about it– like busting up the too-big-to-fail banks OR (better yet) taking control of the US money supply out of the hands of privately owned banks OR not having presidents and Treasury Secretaries with Wall Street resumes and/or hefty Wall Street campaign donations.

Warren didn’t take Dimon’s insult lying down.

She told the Huffington Post, “The problem is not that I don’t understand the global banking system. The problem for these guys is that I fully understand the system and I understand how they make their money. And that’s what they don’t like about me.”

Think Progress reported the Dimon and Buffet comments and offered some great background information regarding why Warren is not Dimon’s favorite Senator. They also reported that the banksters threatened to withhold campaign donations to Senate Democrats to protest Warren’s outspokenness. JP Morgan Chase said that donations hinge on a friendlier atmosphere. Here’s an excerpt…

Warren’s résumé comes with nearly 20 years of experience teaching corporate law at Harvard University, publishing nine books, chairing the Congressional Oversight Panel that oversaw the bank bailouts in 2008 (of which JP Morgan was a beneficiary), and coming up with the idea for and helping to create the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which has already helped consumers avoid numerous predatory lending schemes and recouped more than $4.8 billionthrough its enforcement actions.

She has also become widely known for her tough critiques of the banking industry. She has questioned why the government didn’t break up the biggest banks, like JP Morgan, when it offered bailout money in 2008 and joined a group of Senators in 2013 to propose reinstating a Depression-era rule that separated commercial and investment banking. She’s been a staunch supporter of the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform bill and stood in opposition to Republicans’ attempts to roll parts of it back.

She’s long criticized regulators’ reluctance to go after the biggest banks for their misconduct. Shequestioned the Securities and Exchange Commission, Justice Department, and Federal Reserve on the lack of prosecutions for banks’ misdeeds that led up to the financial crisis, saying, “If large financial institutions can break the law and accumulate millions in profits and, if they get caught, settle by paying out of those profits, they do not have much incentive to follow the law.” Sheproposed a bill that would have made settlements between banks and these regulators more transparent in an effort to tamp down on the government’s exaggerations. Just last week, shesent a letter to the SEC chairman voicing her disappointment in the agency’s failure to enforce existing rules governing the financial industry and its slow pace in writing new rules as mandated by Dodd-Frank.

And she’s also stuck it to JP Morgan itself. In 2013, the bank announced that one of its traders in London, who came to be known as the “London Whale,” had made a series of bad bets that ended up costing the bank $6 billion. The bank was eventually made to pay $900 million in fines and “admit its traders acted recklessly” when it was found the trades violated rules against banks making such bets with their own capital and against market manipulation.

As the episode unfurled, Warren said it made the case for a return to “boring banking” and the institution of the Volcker Rule, which would separate investment and commercial banking, in order to alleviate the risk such trades pose to the industry as a whole. [Go here for the whole article.]

Go, get ’em, Liz! We’re behind you. Bring back the Greenback!

Here is a 2019 video from Warren’s event in Phoenix, which was inspiring.

9 COMMENTS

  1. While I love me some Warren, it’s better that these Senators running for POTUS stay in the Senate. A couple of them are from states with Republican governors, and if they win POTUS or VPOTUS a Republican gets to backfill their seats.

  2. I think for a variety of reasons it’s a mistake for Warren to stay in the Presidential nominating race much longer but it also opens a window for Warren to enhance the passage of at least parts of her agenda. Biden should go to Warren, and then publicly ask her, to stay in the Senate to introduce and work to pass many of her proposed reforms. With a green light signal from a President Biden she would be at least as effective in achieving her goals as she would if she became President.

  3. Hang in there Senator Professor! Despite what the MSM says the primary isn’t over, not by a long shot!

    • Some fairly good analysis in this article…

      Elizabeth Warren ends presidential run
      Warren wowed crowds with her sharp intellect, her clear prognoses for complex problems, and her endless stream of policy blueprints to tackle them.

      March 5, 2020, 8:44 AM MST
      By Ali Vitali and Sahil Kapur
      Sen. Elizabeth Warren is suspending her presidential campaign, a source familiar with the decision tells NBC News, a bitter blow for a senator who was long seen by prominent Democrats as headed for the White House.

      It is unclear whether Warren will endorse another Democratic candidate for president.

      The decision ends a frantic year of campaigning for a candidate who branded herself as a progressive fighter from humble beginnings who was ready to take on a broken and corrupt system.

      The Massachusetts Democrat wowed crowds with her sharp intellect, her clear prognoses for complex problems, and her endless stream of policy blueprints to tackle them. After a long polling rise over summer that continued into the fall, it was clear Warren’s message was catching on, and she rose to the front of the pack in some polls while avoiding conflict with rivals.

      The plan was working. Then it all started to fall apart.

      More…

      https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/elizabeth-warren-ends-presidential-run-n1150436

    • Guess I spoke too soon. She was the most qualified out of the bunch and the primary is lessened without her in it. At least she’s effective in the Senate and wouldn’t it be nice if she became the Senate Majority Leader?

        • Chuck may not like it but on the other hand he’s not a very good “wartime consigliere”. That, and he’s the epitome of a Wall Street Democrat, the last kind of Democrat we need in these times.

        • She would be great in any of those positions but not while MA has a Republican governor. That could imperil a tentative Senate majority. Remember Obama & Janet Napolitano? He made her Director of Homeland Security which subjected AZ to the horrors of Governor Jan Brewer & eternal Republican majorities in the State House & Senate. The consequences of which we’re still living with today.

          “Papers please”. “Uh, I only got a pipe man”. “Then you’d better come with me!”

Comments are closed.