Alternet slams the Clintons as crony capitalist

Who knew that alternet is actually good for something. I am surprised that dipshit didn't post this character assassination article.

Warning: This article may cause libtards to go into convulsions and blow a fuse.

Multiple libtard media outlets including NYT and alternet are slamming the Clintons. They clearly do not want Hillary as POTUS. You libtards need to get with the program and fall in line you sheeple.

Some quotes below below.

The Clintons Made Wall Street Richer, and It Returned the Favor

The disclosures detail the incomes of both Clintons going back to 2014. From what was offered to the press, we know that in less than a year and a half, the Clintons raked in over $30 million, the vast majority from speaking fees they charged to foreign and domestic corporations and other organizations willing to pay speech honorariums.
--------------------------
But the bigger story is why the Clintons are so rich. Their wealth is derived from an army of corporations that benefited from the very laws the Clintons passed [bold mine], and now they are returning the favors. Although corporations from every sector of the economy developed this symbiotic relationship with the Clintons, none is more prominent than Wall Street.[bold mine]
------------------------------------
Making Wall Street Richer

In 1999, President Bill Clinton rallied allies in Congress to pass the Financial Services Modernization Act, which repealed the Depression-Era Glass Steagall law separating commercial and investment banking. The result was a spree of mergers and growth that involved a huge growth in the size of the nation's biggest banks and their profits.
---------------------------------

A month after leaving office, Bill Clinton gave a speech to Morgan Stanley for $125,000, which advocated for the Wall Street deregulation. [bold mine] (What!? Wait!? I thought deregulation was all Bush's and the repubs fault.)
-------------------
As Bill Clinton traveled across the United States and the globe speaking to financial firms and others paying top dollar, his wife was in Washington deciding on matters these institutions had interests in. In 2001, Senator Clintonbacked a bankruptcy bill that made it much harder for people to qualify for Chapter 7 bankruptcy; the bill was primarily supported by banks and credit card issuers.
-----------------------------
Over the years Hillary Clinton was in the Senate, the financial industry paid millions of dollars to the couple's shared bank account.


 
Last edited:
The only reason The One isn't a CC is `cuz he's just too plain incompetent. The vast majority of the current nominees from both sides are cronies. Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated. And you will not get any of that cool cyborg gear. :(
 
Last edited:
...In 1999, President Bill Clinton rallied allies in Congress to pass the Financial Services Modernization Act, which repealed the Depression-Era Glass Steagall law separating commercial and investment banking. The result was a spree of mergers and growth that involved a huge growth in the size of the nation's biggest banks and their profits.
Nonsense.

As ET's tmarket pointed out almost 7 years ago, the bill was introduced by Republicans, passed both houses but never debated and signed by the lame-duck president, Bill Clinton:

http://www.elitetrader.com/et/index.php?threads/how-a-the-bucket-shops-were-re-opened.142732/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commod...n_Act_of_2000#Legislative_history_of_the_CFMA

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/17/business/17grammside.html?pagewanted=print&_r=0

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-moore/a-nation-of-village-idiot_b_127340.html

"The loophole was added at the last minute to a 262 page bill, which was itself belatedly and quite suddenly attached in a lame duck session on the Senate floor by then Senate Finance Chairman Gramm to an 11,000 page consolidated appropriations bill for FY 2001."

So, yeah, the Democrats should have somehow spotted this monster at the last minute, since that is when it was intentionally slipped into the 11,000-page omnibus bill, but remember who slipped it in. At the very last minute.

Know your history.
 
Last edited:
Nonsense.

As ET's tmarket pointed out almost 7 years ago, the bill was introduced by Republicans, passed both houses but never debated and signed by the lame-duck president, Bill Clinton:

http://www.elitetrader.com/et/index.php?threads/how-a-the-bucket-shops-were-re-opened.142732/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commod...n_Act_of_2000#Legislative_history_of_the_CFMA

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/17/business/17grammside.html?pagewanted=print&_r=0

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-moore/a-nation-of-village-idiot_b_127340.html

"The loophole was added at the last minute to a 262 page bill, which was itself belatedly and quite suddenly attached in a lame duck session on the Senate floor by then Senate Finance Chairman Gramm to an 11,000 page consolidated appropriations bill for FY 2001."

So, yeah, the Democrats should have somehow spotted this monster at the last minute, since that is when it was intentionally slipped into the 11,000-page omnibus bill, but remember who slipped it in. At the very last minute.

Know your history.
Nonsense to your nonsense.

Are you trying to rewrite history? Does the Alternet article not fit your narrative? Just so that it is clear, I did not write the quote in your post. That is directly from the Alternet article.

Perhaps you should know your history.

You are referring to a completely different law than the one referenced in the Alternet article. The law that Alternet references was called the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act AKA the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999. This is the bill that repealed the Glass-Steagall Act. This bill was passed basically because Citigroup had completed a merger with Travelers Insurance that violated the Glass-Steagall Act.

All of your links in your post above are referring to a different law that is called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000(CFMA). The CFMA did not repeal Glass-Steagall. The CFMA ensured that OTC derivatives were not regulated as futures by the CFTC.

For you reference and edification of history:
Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm–Leach–Bliley_Act

Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commod...n_Act_of_2000#Legislative_history_of_the_CFMA

 
In my opinion Glass-Steagall should not have been repealed, and in retrospect Bill Clinton regrets caving on that one, but if it had not been repealed, we still would have had the 2008-2009 crisis.
 
I stand corrected regarding the bill in question. My mistake.

As a point of interest, you noted that the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 is also known as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. Gramm, Leach and Bliley all just happen to be Republicans. So, yes, the Democrats had a hand in this one. But look who authored this one as well.
 
Last edited:
In my opinion Glass-Steagall should not have been repealed, and in retrospect Bill Clinton regrets caving on that one, but if it had not been repealed, we still would have had the 2008-2009 crisis.
I completely agree that Glass-Steagall should not have been repealed and that the repealing of it was more responsible for the Great Recession than anything else. However, it is inaccurate to say that Clinton caved. That is a completely not the case. The bill was rammed through congress by Clinton's Secretary of the Treasury Robert Rubin and Deputy Secretary Larry Summers.

For your reading pleasure:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Rubin

"Rubin and his deputy Lawrence Summers also steered through the 1999 repeal of the Glass–Steagall Act (1933), which had separated investment banking from the retail side. It allowed the banks to develop and sell the mortgage-backed instruments that became a principal factor in the financial collapse. In September 2011, the UK Independent Commission on Banking released a report in which it recommended a separation of investment and retail banking to prevent a repeat of the 2008 crisis."
 
I stand corrected regarding the bill in question. My mistake.

As a point of interest, you noted that the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 is also known as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. Gramm, Leach and Bliley all just happen to be Republicans. So, yes, the Democrats had a hand in this one. But look who authored this one as well.
Agreed. However, please see my previous post above.
 
I completely agree that Glass-Steagall should not have been repealed and that the repealing of it was more responsible for the Great Recession than anything else. However, it is inaccurate to say that Clinton caved. That is a completely not the case. The bill was rammed through congress by Clinton's Secretary of the Treasury Robert Rubin and Deputy Secretary Larry Summers.

For your reading pleasure:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Rubin

"Rubin and his deputy Lawrence Summers also steered through the 1999 repeal of the Glass–Steagall Act (1933), which had separated investment banking from the retail side. It allowed the banks to develop and sell the mortgage-backed instruments that became a principal factor in the financial collapse. In September 2011, the UK Independent Commission on Banking released a report in which it recommended a separation of investment and retail banking to prevent a repeat of the 2008 crisis."
no, that is not what I said, the repeal of Glass-Steagall had little to do with the recession

but yes, I think we all, including the former President agree it was a mistake to repeal it
 
Back
Top