Hillary Clinton: Bought & Paid For!

A facebook comment:

While being questioned about her Wall Street ties, Clinton said to Anderson Cooper, the moderator—
“But you know anybody who knows me who thinks that they can influence me — name anything they’ve influenced me on. Just name one thing. I’m out here every day saying I’m going to shut them down, I’m going after them.”
Challenge accepted.
In 2007, while running for president, Clinton made campaign speeches attacking the tax break for hedge-fund and private-equity executives — one of the infamous loopholes that allows rich people to pay way less in taxes than they’re supposed to — but did not sign her name onto legislation that would have ended the tax break and closed the loophole.
Just as she’s doing now, she was “out [t]here every day saying I’m going to shut them down,” but did not actually use her elected-official power to keep her word, and follow through with the simple act of signing her name onto someone else’s bill.
As Politico reports,
When [Clinton] had a chance to support a 2007 bill that aimed to curb a tax break she publicly decried for hedge-fund and private-equity executives, she failed to sign on.
Clinton said one thing in public, but did another behind closed doors. She attacked Wall Street to voters, but helped them as a senator.
Why?
Because Wall Street executives were the biggest donors to her 2006 Senate campaign and her 2008 presidential campaign.
Clinton got millions from the financial industry while also protecting them — she is most assuredly influenced by her Wall Street donors.
That’s one thing right there, per Clinton’s request — but here’s even more.
In 2007 and 2008, Clinton did not work with the other senators in Congress to pass a housing bill to stop individual financial players from destroying the economy.
As ProPublica reports,
When a broad housing bill finally became law in 2008, Clinton was not among the more than dozen senators credited by party leaders as playing a key role.
She was not a leader in the Senate to stop Wall Street’s reckless behavior.
In fact, she was barely even a follower.
Additionally, as Politico reports—
Clinton also has some history with the shadow-banking world she says is a continuing risk to the financial system. While in the Senate, she made a little-noticed overture to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, who was involved in talks to rescue giant insurer AIG with government funds. She was calling on behalf of wealthy investorswho stood to lose millions and had hired two longtime Clinton associates to represent them.
So not only did she not battle for the American people against Wall Street, or even follow those who were fighting for the citizens, she actually fought on Wall Street’s behalf.
Furthermore, the classic “Cut it out” 2007 speech that Clinton has used as evidence of her “tough on Wall Street” record (and now suddenly stopped referencing) was not quite as strict and severe as she’s tried to make it seem.
As Politico reports—
For the second time in the debates she referenced a speech she gave to executives before the economic meltdown. In October’s debate she had described herself as going to Wall Street and saying, “Cut it out! Quit foreclosing on homes! Quit engaging in these kinds of speculative behaviors.”
But what did that speech actually entail?
Clinton gave a shout-out to her “wonderful donors” in the audience, and asked the bankers to voluntarily suspend foreclosures and freeze interest rates on adjustable subprime mortgages. She praised Wall Street for its role in creating the nation’s wealth, then added that “too many American families are not sharing” in that prosperity.
She said the brewing economic troubles weren’t mainly the fault of banks, “not by a long shot,” but added they needed to shoulder responsibility for their role. While there was plenty of blame to go around for the spate of reckless lending, and while Wall Street may not have created the foreclosure crisis, it “certainly had a hand in making it worse” and “needs to help us solve it.”
Finally, Clinton said, if the banks didn’t take the voluntary steps she proposed, “I will consider legislation to address the problem.”
Clinton basically praised Wall Street for their greed and recklessness, and asked them to voluntarily stop being so terribly single-minded and selfish.
Guess what?
They didn’t listen to her and, less than a month later, the economy crashed.
Also contrary to what Clinton said, the big financial institutions absolutely were “mainly [at] fault” for the financial crisis.
As The New York Times reports,
The 2008 financial crisis was an “avoidable” disaster caused by widespread failures in government regulation, corporate mismanagement and heedless risk-taking by Wall Street, according to the conclusions of a federal inquiry.
The behemoth financial industry (as well as the lack of government regulation) was the only one at fault for the 2007 crisis — not the homeowners who got preyed on (mostly people of color and immigrants, groups that are both disproportionately likely to be poor), or anyone else.
For her to paint otherwise is untrue, and scary — and shows how close and friendly she is with Wall Street.
Just imagine, for instance, how different the speech Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders would have given to Wall Street in 2007 or any other year.
--
Hillary Clinton is obviously influenced by the millions Wall Street has given her in campaign donations and speaking fees — she didn’t sign onto legislation that would have ended a tax break she attacked in public; she didn’t help lead the Senate push to pass housing legislation; she didn’t castigate, and barely tut-tutted, Wall Street in her infamous “cut it out” speech; and she actually called on behalf of wealthy investors to see if she could help them save their millions and millions, at a steep cost to the taxpayer.
As Clinton bops from argument to argument trying to persuade the public she isn’t tied to Wall Street — “Cut it out”; 9/11; Wall Street people are running attack ads against me, etc. etc. — keep in mind her record.
It’s nowhere near as squeaky clean as she so adamantly professes it is, and I’ve got to tell you, this level of misrepresentation (basically lying) makes me angry. Really angry.
Our economy and the human beings living underneath it were ruined by the greed and recklessness on Wall Street.
People’s lives were destroyed.
Politics isn’t some sort of game — it’s about real people’s lives, and real people getting hurt.
When a politician misrepresents herself so thoroughly, it’s not just dishonest or disingenuous: it’s dangerous.
Clinton will not attack Wall Street, as her record and current platform show, and that poses a massive risk to you, and me, and everybody else living underneath this — as even Jimmy Carter understands America to be — oligarchic state.
Wall Street very well might crash the economy, and very soon: they’re already too big to fail, again.
We need a president who isn’t beholden to those interests, and who has fought his/her whole life to stop Wall Street, not taken money from, helped, and supported them.
People’s lives are at stake here.
Question everything.
Source: Daily Kos Story “ Clinton Last Night Name Anything Wall street has Influenced Me on.. They responded.