Please make an INFORMED DECISION when you VOTE!
Apparently the "rules" in the DNC flex with which candidate is running....
Sen [Rafael] Ted Cruz (R-Texas) CANADIAN CITIZEN
Exclusive: Audio recording of Ted Cruz calling President Obama an N-word
Published on Jun 1, 2015
This recording was made a by a The Stately Harold reporter at a fundraiser in San Antonio
For the full story, go to: http://www.thestatelyharold.com/#!Exc...
Video Of Hillary Clinton Blaming Homeowners For The Financial Crisis Comes Out
Video of Hillary Clinton speaking to bankers and blaming homeowners for the financial crisis isn’t exactly her telling Wall Street to “cut it out.”
I’ve been writing about the foreclosure crisis since 2009. I’ve been interviewed on TV and radio as well as featured on the front pages of the Huffington Post. In 2010 I travelled to D.C. with MASSPIRG and Americans for Financial Reform to lobby Congress for financial reform. I met Austan Goolsbee, a member of the Council of Economic Advisers and Chief Economist of the President’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board.
Over the years I’ve worked with activists, attorneys, judges, and politicians to help homeowners facing foreclosure as a direct result of Wall Street’s fraud on American homeowners. The terms “irresponsible homeowners” and “deadbeat” are terms that I and nearly 11 million people who fought to keep their homes are familiar with. It started the day CNBC’s Rick Santelli stood on the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange on February 19, 2009, and unleashed what can only be called a rant against the Obama Administration’s proposal to help homeowners facing foreclosure refinance their mortgages.
“Do we really want to subsidize the losers’ mortgages?” Santelli shrieked. “This is America! How many of you people want to pay for your neighbor’s mortgage that has an extra bathroom and can’t pay their bills?”
That tirade not only spawned the Tea Party as we know it, but led to a misinformation campaign across the country that vilified homeowners who were facing homelessness through no fault of their own. Wall Street and people around the country blamed homeowners for the financial crisis.
Since then, books (now a film) like “The Big Short” and a majority of financial experts put 90 percent of the responsibility for the housing crash on the backs of Wall Street banks. The subprime mortgage bubble was built as a result of institutions like Bank of America and JP Morgan Chase who gave out home loans with no underwriting, meaning homeowners weren’t required to prove they could pay back the loans. Effectively, the banks knew the loans were destined for foreclosure before a loan was even granted.
With the amount of evidence that has been presented since then, anyone who still believes that the financial crisis was caused by irresponsible homeowners, is an idiot. Trust me, I know some people who still argue that the world economy nearly imploded due to cab drivers, waitresses, and strippers buying enormous houses.
That said, anyone on Wall Street or close to Wall Street who ever believed that homeowners caused the crisis at any point in time is also either an idiot or a liar – and more than likely the latter – or they had no business working on or dealing with Wall Street.
Out of all 50 states, New Yorkers were some of the hardest hit by the foreclosure crisis. The U.S. Department of Justice’s $13 billion mortgage fraud settlement with JP Morgan set aside an entire $1 billion just for New York homeowners. The bank was sued for selling mortgage-backed securities to investors, knowing full well the investments were bogus.
In 2014, Bank of America paid out a $16 billion settlement for committing the same crime in the years leading up to the financial meltdown. Bear Stearns helped package mortgage-backed securities for JP Morgan; Bank of America’s partner-in-crime in peddling bogus securities was Merrill Lynch. Out of the $16.65 billion, $300 million was set aside for New York homeowners.
In 2007, Hillary Clinton, in her second term as Senator of NY, gave a speech at the NASDAQ headquarters—before the financial crisis reached its boiling point — about Wall Street’s housing loan practices, largely excusing financial criminals for their behavior.
“Now these economic problems are certainly not all Wall Street’s fault – not by a long shot,” Clinton said.
No, not “all,” just 90 percent.
Clinton’s address amounted to essentially asking the lenders in attendance to take voluntary action or else she would “consider legislation” to stop banks from kicking families out of their homes. But in the speech, Clinton placed equal blame for the subprime mortgage crisis on homeowners.
A YouTube user found video of the statement and put it side-by-side with her claim during the first Democratic debate in which she said she went to Wall Street before the crisis and told them to “cut it out.”
Have a look:
With the pressure on, Robotic Rubio has a breakdown
One of the persistent criticisms of Marco Rubio’s presidential candidacy is that he’s an overly scripted, unprepared rookie who can’t think on his feet and can’t say anything beyond the memorized talking points some handler told him to repeat.
With this kind of reputation, the Florida senator is tasked with a simple challenge: prove the detractors are wrong. Last night in New Hampshire, he did the exact opposite.
As this clip from MSNBC’s coverage last night shows, Rubio, under pressure, kept saying the same thing, over and over again. For those who can’t watch clips online, early on in the debate, the senator said:
“[L]et’s dispel once and for all with this fiction that Barack Obama doesn’t know what he’s doing. He knows exactly what he’s doing. Barack Obama is undertaking a systematic effort to change this country….”
Soon after, in response to a different question, Rubio said:
“Let’s dispel with this fiction that Barack Obama doesn’t know what he’s doing. He knows exactly what he’s doing. He is trying to change this country.”
Later, in response to another question, Rubio added:
“Here’s the bottom line. This notion that Barack Obama doesn’t know what he’s doing is just not true. He knows exactly what he’s doing.”
And soon after, mocked by Chris Christie for repeating his talking points, Rubio once again said:
“We are not facing a president that doesn’t know what he’s doing. He knows what he is doing.”
Just to be absolutely clear, this isn’t a joke. All of the above quotes are exact, word-for-word excerpts from the debate transcript.
I’ve watched more debates over the years than I care to admit, but I’ve never seen anything like this. When it comes to cringe-worthy moments, the only rival that comes to mind is Rick Perry’s “oops” moment.
We’ll have much more on the debate and its significance tomorrow morning, but in the meantime, it’s worth appreciating the fact that the potential fallout from Rubio’s failed debate is significant. This is the kind of embarrassment that rattles confidence in a candidate, raising serious doubts about his preparedness for national office.
And nearly as important, it serves as an arrow hitting Rubio where he’s most vulnerable.
I’m reminded once more of a piece Erik Eisele, a reporter for the Conway Daily Sun in New Hampshire, wrote in December after a 20-minute interview with the Republican candidate. “It was like watching a computer algorithm designed to cover talking points,” the reporter said. “He said a lot, but at the same time said nothing. It was like someone wound him up, pointed him towards the doors and pushed play. If there was a human side to senator, a soul, it didn’t come across through.”
Several years earlier, Jon Chait wrote, “Do you get the feeling that ‘Marco Rubio’ is not an actual human being at all but some kind of computer program designed by the Republican Party? Imagine they had the technical know-how to create a candidate like this. What would they come up with? They’d come up with Marco Rubio, a cinematically handsome Latino from Florida who hews to the Tea Party line while spitting out patriotic cliches that sound as if they were programmed like a computer. I’m not saying I’m sure Rubio is a robot. I’m just saying that I want to watch him walk through a metal detector.”
Crumbling under pressure on national television is bad. Crumbling under pressure on national television while confirming your detractors’ most serious criticisms is much worse.
During the course of Clinton’s political career, JP Morgan contributed nearly $700,000 to her campaign finds, making them her 4th-largest donor. After Clinton left the State Department, she was paid $225,000 by Bank of America for a single speech. Bear Stearns contributed approximately $50,000 to Clinton’s campaign between 1999 and 2004, and Merrill Lynch gave over $33,000 in that same time frame. “Cut it out,” indeed.
So, if you’re looking to elect someone who’s going to be tough on Wall Street and the big banks and isn’t going to throw the little guy under the bus, you might want to look at their financing and legislative record before pulling that lever.
http://samuel-warde.com/2016/01/video-of-hillary-clinton-blaming-homeowners-for-the-financial-crisis-comes-out/
Hills says "progressive" more than this gal....
Mrs. C. The DNC Limo is here....but DEBBIE is driving....
No comments:
Post a Comment