I'm just gonna leave this here for Jim, Meade and oldr

Sue U · Post by **Sue U** » Wed Apr 06, 2016 5:12 pm

So That's Who Watches The Watchmen: Elizabeth Warren.
Watch Elizabeth Warren Rip A New One For Regulator Who Took A Nap During 2008 Meltdown
By Doktor Zoom -
April 6, 2016 - 12:40pm

Welcome to episode seven million of our popular series, “Elizabeth Warren Gets Righteous On A Douchebag.” The schmuck in the hot seat this time around is one Leonard Chanin, who during the George W. Bush administration was Deputy Director of the Division of Consumer and Community Affairs at the Federal Reserve Board. His office was one of several agencies that had the authority to regulate the speculative markets in subprime loans, but instead blithely sat back and watched that market and the economy burst into thermonuclear flames.

Chanin was ostensibly at Tuesday’s hearing of the Senate Banking Committee to testify about how regulation of consumer finances is a terrible thing for both consumers and banks, because as the Republicans who run the committee know, all regulation is bad. Elizabeth Warren wasn’t about to have a bit of that nonsense, and tore into Chanin.

Of all the people who might be called on to advise Congress about how to weigh the costs and benefits of consumer regulations, I am surprised that my Republican colleagues would choose a witness who might have one of the worst track records in history on this issue.
She treated the committee to a little history lesson, noting Chanin’s role in letting the 2008 financial meltdown develop. Let’s be honest here: her real audience wasn’t the never-regulate-anything dolts on the committee, but the tens of thousands (so far) of people who’ll watch this on YouTube.

Chanin, Warren pointed out, “helped lead the Federal Reserve division that refused to regulate deceptive mortgages — including the subprime lending that helped spark the crisis.” Warren noted that the bipartisan Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission called Chanin’s lack of oversight while at the Federal Reserve a “pivotal failure” and the “prime example” of the kind of hands-off regulatory approach that allowed the crisis to happen.

“You did essentially nothing,” Warren told Chanin, who has since left the Federal Reserve to work for a private law firm advising big banks. “Now, your failure had devastating consequences.” Chanin was brought forth by Republicans to argue against regulations like those imposed by Dodd-Frank.
Warren had no plans to go along with that agenda, thank you very much, and rejected the very idea that Chanin is any sort of expert at all:

So when you talk now about how certain regulations are too costly or too difficult to comply with, you sound a lot like you did before the 2008 crisis when you failed to act. So my question is, given your track record at the Fed, why should anyone take you seriously now?

Senator Feistypants reminds us why we love her in this video. When Chanin tries to get away with a whopper, claiming there was “simply no data presented to the Fed on a statistical basis that suggested that there was a meltdown in the mortgage market in 2005 or 2006,” Warren is clearly incensed that even after multiple investigations have found his office responsible for ignoring the signs of impending collapse in the subprime bubble, he’s still claiming it was a complete surprise to everyone:

Warren: I’m sorry, are you saying there were no data in the lead up to the financial crash that showed the increasing default rates on subprime mortgages and what they were doing to communities across America? Did you have your eyes stitched closed?

Chanin: There was anecdotal evidence to be sure, but there was no hard data —

Warren: I’m not talking anecdotal. Are you telling me you never saw any data about the increases in mortgage foreclosure rates before the crash in 2008? Is that what you’re saying here?

Chanin: No hard data was presented to the Fed until the crisis erupted

Warren: Oh my god.
Warren listed several investigators and officials, including the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission and former Fed chair Alan Greenspan, who said Chanin’s office and his inaction had driven the collapse, pointing at him and saying “That was you.”

If you are still defending your time at the Fed, and saying you had no information about a problem that was emerging, then frankly, that raises even more questions about your judgment.
We enjoyed watching Chanin squirm. So will you. Watch this video again and again. It’s much better than Cats.

[Salon]

Source.

RayThom · Post by **RayThom** » Wed Apr 06, 2016 6:03 pm

Wow! Damn, she's good.

BIDEN / WARREN... 2016. In hindsight, this team would have been a slam-dunk.

We get the government we deserve.

rubato · Post by **rubato** » Wed Apr 06, 2016 6:41 pm

She's smart, tough and articulate. I'd vote for her.

yrs,
rubato

Crackpot · Post by **Crackpot** » Wed Apr 06, 2016 6:43 pm

You'd vote for a bag of manure if it had a D after it's name.

Bicycle Bill · Post by **Bicycle Bill** » Wed Apr 06, 2016 6:57 pm

Crackpot wrote:You'd vote for a bag of manure if it had a D after it's name.

After seeing what we've gotten after voting for legislators with an 'R' after their names, I'd be willing to try almost anything.
Including said bag of manure.
Besides, manure fertilizes things and stimulates growth.

-"BB"-

rubato · Post by **rubato** » Wed Apr 06, 2016 7:04 pm

Crackpot wrote:You'd vote for a bag of manure if it had a D after it's name.

Oh look children, another ignorant shitbomb post.

Psst, I have never been a member of any political party and I voted for Tom Campbell (R) for Congress as well as Bruce McPherson for State Senate and Secretary of State (we was a Republican until 2012).

yrs,
rubato

Crackpot · Post by **Crackpot** » Wed Apr 06, 2016 11:37 pm

Glad I could help shoulder your burden.

MajGenl.Meade · Post by **MajGenl.Meade** » Thu Apr 07, 2016 12:22 am

Wize it for me, Suze? Got nowt to do with her class baiting quote from another post.

BoSoxGal · Post by **BoSoxGal** » Thu Apr 07, 2016 3:59 am

Boom! Thanks for sharing Sue! Made today's cheat worthwhile.

Sanders/Warren 2016!

oldr_n_wsr · Post by **oldr_n_wsr** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 1:36 pm

Thanks for that SueU. I still don't like her tone (or what she said) when she made her "you didn't make that" speech.
To me it was dierected at the people (the little people) that struggle to build a business every day. Those little people who are not "to big to fail". Who, if they don't pay their taxes and don't pay their licensing fees and don't pay thier payroll taxes, will get perp walked.
She should keep he focus on those "elite" who will never see the inside of a jail even when they caused great hardship on the nation as a whole.
And those "little" shop keepers and small business owners who went belly up did not get any kind of government bailout like those who caused it did.
So let her consentrate on what she is good at (going after the elite and the causes) and keep her mouth shut about those little people who really make this country work.

oldr_n_wsr · Post by **oldr_n_wsr** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 1:37 pm

We enjoyed watching Chanin squirm. So will you. Watch this video again and again. It’s much better than Cats.

I am curious to see at the the and of all this what will happen to any of them?
I am guessing that nothing will happen.

Lord Jim · Post by **Lord Jim** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 2:06 pm

If Sanders, Hillary, Warren, and the rest of the Liberal Indignant, all think that the banking bigwigs should be criminally prosecuted, then why aren't they out there every day condemning the Obama Administration's Justice Department for failing to do so?

You'd think that would make sense...

After all Obama and Co. have had seven years to bring cases, and they've brought nary a one....The failure to bring prosecutions is entirely on them...

Where's the outrage? Where's "The Occupy Movement"? Where are the rallies? Where are the marches?

Instead all we hear on this score is...

BoSoxGal · Post by **BoSoxGal** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 2:08 pm

Iceland got advice from our lead savings & loan scandal prosecutor, and used that advice to put all of their negligent bankers in prison.

Why aren't we doing it? Because the bankers own the government, lock, stock & barrel.

Lord Jim · Post by **Lord Jim** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 2:15 pm

Why aren't we doing it? Because the bankers own the government, lock, stock & barrel.

Then why aren't we hearing from prominent Liberals who have been trumpeting this issue, about how The Obama Administration is owned "lock stock and barrel"?

The failure to prosecute is all on them. You can't blame Congress for this one. Supposedly there are plenty of existing laws that could be used to bring criminal prosecutions against many of these folks; no congressional action is required. The decision to bring cases is entirely within the purview of the Obama Justice Department.

The one and only reason that prosecutions haven't been brought is because the DOJ isn't bringing them...

Why hasn't Elizabeth Warren used any of her talent for self self-righteous excoriating on Loretta Lynch? (Or before her, Eric Holder)

Ya know, if I was a cynical fella, I might get the impression that this bunch is more interested in scoring political points and whipping up outrage to motivate their base, then they are in actually seeing anything done about this...

Big RR · Post by **Big RR** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 2:20 pm

If you check you'll see Sanders has made that charge many times, Warren as well. I don't know where Hillary stood on it, but then she was secretary of state and could hardly condemn the DOJ/president while she was part of the cabinet.

As for every day, many have given up the condemnation/protest thinking it does little to no good; this is not the 60s where we can move the government this way, and most people will not rock the boat so long as they have a little money and can go about their lives. Sanders has tried to fight the system from within, but has been blocked by the establishment again and again, which is why he is running for president. But face it, most people have lost their idealism or any belief things can get better, so you won't be seeing the protests anytime soon. At best what you'll see is people cheering a cretin like Trump, and voting for him, not because of his policies (because they've given up on the idea of a president being able to change or implement much) but because it pisses "them" off.

oldr_n_wsr · Post by **oldr_n_wsr** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 2:22 pm

It's so much easier to chastize/imprison the little guy. The big/elite/insider guys just get yelled at and made to "squirm" but at the end of the day, nothing happens. And they all know it. But the "show" is important.

And people (those in charge of the parties) wonder why trump and bernie are popular.

Lord Jim · Post by **Lord Jim** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 2:38 pm

It's so much easier to chastize/imprison the little guy.

It's also a lot easier, if you are a Democratic office holder, (or office seeker) to rail in general terms about the "outrage" that none of the people involved in the 2008 Banking Meltdown have been criminally prosecuted, than to rail about where the blame for this failure to prosecute squarely belongs...

When where the blame for this failure squarely belongs is on a Democratic Administration...

Big RR · Post by **Big RR** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 2:48 pm

It's so much easier to chastize/imprison the little guy.

True, but part of the reason for that is that the little guys generally do things that are easy to prove, like not submitting tax payments on time (without devising any reason why they should not have to pay)--the bigwigs have legions of accountants to try and justify any such actions.

As for blame--there is plenty to go around; face it, no one was anxious to take on their corporate masters to whom they owed their jobs--and I blame the republicans and democrats alike for allowing the system to get to this point. Obama and his DOJ certainly deserves a lot of the blame for the recent failure to prosecute, but few were standing up and clamoring for such prosecutions on either side of the aisle.

Lord Jim · Post by **Lord Jim** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 3:05 pm

As for blame--there is plenty to go around

I will stipulate that when it comes to blame for letting things get to the point they got from a legislative and regulatory standpoint, (and for the failure to to take firmer legislative and regulatory action to prevent another banking meltdown from occurring...which I have mentioned before I support) there is indeed "plenty to go around"...

But I have to take issue with this:

Obama and his DOJ certainly deserves a lot of the blame for the recent failure to prosecute

I take issue with the words "a lot"...

The correct word would be "all"...

Obama has had no problem at all acting unilaterally in areas where the Executive authority to do so is highly dubious...

In this case, the authority is crystal clear and indisputable...

Conducting federal criminal investigations, and determining whether or not to bring federal prosecutions, is a process where the legal authority exists solely and wholly within the DOJ...

In fact the exercise of this responsibility is the main reason we even have a Department of Justice...

Big RR · Post by **Big RR** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 3:34 pm

I will stipulate that when it comes to blame for letting things get to the point they got from a legislative and regulatory standpoint, (and for the failure to to take firmer legislative and regulatory action to prevent another banking meltdown from occurring...which I have mentioned before I support) there is indeed "plenty to go around"...

To that I will add the general support on both sides for campaign finance laws that all but guarantee that the bigwigs will always get what they want, combined with both sides taking the money and then dancing for their masters. There are some exceptions, but in this case most are, to take a word from Nader, republicrats.

So while I understand that the DOJ was under the control of Obama, I also think both sides worked very hard to make sure the big money donors would be protected, regardless of who was in office.

Plan B Forum