The Bern Identity
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
Bernie Bombs in NYDN Editorial Meeting, Reveals Just How Substance-Free His Campaign Is
by Alex Griswold | 12:28 pm, April 5th, 2016
For all the attention that Donald Trump has gotten for his policy-free trainwreck of an editorial meeting with The Washington Post and later The New York Times, not much attention has been given to the fact that Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders gave an equally disastrous interview to the editorial board of the New York Daily News.
NYDN released its transcript of the editorial meeting late last night, and boy is it a doozy. The worst parts are below, but those with the time to spare should really read the whole thing. Suffice it say, it was more or less an hour-long exercise in the editors asking serious and well thought-out questions about policy, and Sanders revealing that he was in way, way over his head.
Right off the bat, when it came to the central message of Sanders’ campaign– that Wall Street should be prosecuted for their role in the 2008 financial collapse– he couldn’t even say what laws they were supposed to have broken, saying he only “suspected” and “believed” they broke the law.
Daily News: …Do you have a sense that there is a particular statute or statutes that a prosecutor could have or should have invoked to bring indictments?
Sanders: I suspect that there are. Yes.
Daily News: You believe that? But do you know?
Sanders: I believe that that is the case. Do I have them in front of me, now, legal statutes? No, I don’t. But if I would…yeah, that’s what I believe, yes.
When pressed further on the topic, Sanders sounded downright Trumpian, repeating the word “fraudulent” ad nauseum but giving little insight into the actual law.
Daily News: What kind of fraudulent activity are you referring to when you say that?
Sanders: What kind of fraudulent activity? Fraudulent activity that brought this country into the worst economic decline in its history by selling packages of fraudulent, fraudulent, worthless subprime mortgages. How’s that for a start?
Subprime mortgages were (and still are) legal. It’s possible industry practices towards subprime mortgages in the lead-up to the financial crisis were illegal, but if so Sanders clearly can’t articulate why.
When it comes to his campaign promise to break up the large financial institutions, Sanders clearly has given little thought to how he would actually carry it out. In the span of a few questions, Sanders told the Daily News he will pass a law to do it, then claimed the administration already has the power to do so under Dodd-Frank, and then claimed the Federal Reserve has the power to do so by fiat.
Likewise, Sanders has evidently given little thought to what impact his policy would actually have on the large institutions he wants to break up:
Daily News: So if you look forward, a year, maybe two years, right now you have…JPMorgan has 241,000 employees. About 20,000 of them in New York. $192 billion in net assets. What happens? What do you foresee? What is JPMorgan in year two of…
Sanders: What I foresee is a stronger national economy. And, in fact, a stronger economy in New York State, as well. What I foresee is a financial system which actually makes affordable loans to small and medium-size businesses. Does not live as an island onto themselves concerned about their own profits. And, in fact, creating incredibly complicated financial tools, which have led us into the worst economic recession in the modern history of the United States.
Daily News: I get that point. I’m just looking at the method because, actions have reactions, right? There are pluses and minuses. So, if you push here, you may get an unintended consequence that you don’t understand. So, what I’m asking is, how can we understand? If you look at JPMorgan just as an example, or you can do Citibank, or Bank of America. What would it be? What would that institution be? Would there be a consumer bank? Where would the investing go?
Sanders: I’m not running JPMorgan Chase or Citibank.
Daily News: No. But you’d be breaking it up.
Sanders: That’s right. And that is their decision as to what they want to do and how they want to reconfigure themselves. That’s not my decision.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sanders-files-bill-to-break-up-big-banks
The Sanders and Sherman legislation would give banking regulators 90 days to identify commercial banks, investment banks, hedge funds, insurance companies and other entities whose “failure would have a catastrophic effect on the stability of either the financial system or the United States economy without substantial government assistance.”
The list would have to include Bank of America, Bank of New York Mellon, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, State Street and Wells Fargo. These eight institutions already have been deemed “systemically important banks” by the Financial Stability Board, the international body which monitors the global financial system. Under the legislation, the U.S. Treasury Department would be required to break up those and any other institutions deemed too big to fail by the treasury secretary. Any entity on the too-big-to-fail list would no longer be eligible for a taxpayer bailout from the Federal Reserve and could not use their customers’ bank deposits to speculate on derivatives or other risky financial activities.
To read the bill and a summary click here and here.
To read Sanders’ statement at the news conference, click here.
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sanders-files-bill-to-break-up-big-banks
The Sanders and Sherman legislation would give banking regulators 90 days to identify commercial banks, investment banks, hedge funds, insurance companies and other entities whose “failure would have a catastrophic effect on the stability of either the financial system or the United States economy without substantial government assistance.”
The list would have to include Bank of America, Bank of New York Mellon, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, State Street and Wells Fargo. These eight institutions already have been deemed “systemically important banks” by the Financial Stability Board, the international body which monitors the global financial system. Under the legislation, the U.S. Treasury Department would be required to break up those and any other institutions deemed too big to fail by the treasury secretary. Any entity on the too-big-to-fail list would no longer be eligible for a taxpayer bailout from the Federal Reserve and could not use their customers’ bank deposits to speculate on derivatives or other risky financial activities.
To read the bill and a summary click here and here.
To read Sanders’ statement at the news conference, click here.
The Sanders and Sherman legislation would give banking regulators 90 days to identify commercial banks, investment banks, hedge funds, insurance companies and other entities whose “failure would have a catastrophic effect on the stability of either the financial system or the United States economy without substantial government assistance.”
The list would have to include Bank of America, Bank of New York Mellon, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, State Street and Wells Fargo. These eight institutions already have been deemed “systemically important banks” by the Financial Stability Board, the international body which monitors the global financial system. Under the legislation, the U.S. Treasury Department would be required to break up those and any other institutions deemed too big to fail by the treasury secretary. Any entity on the too-big-to-fail list would no longer be eligible for a taxpayer bailout from the Federal Reserve and could not use their customers’ bank deposits to speculate on derivatives or other risky financial activities.
To read the bill and a summary click here and here.
To read Sanders’ statement at the news conference, click here.
Likewise, Sanders has evidently given little thought to what impact his policy would actually have on the large institutions he wants to break up:
Daily News: So if you look forward, a year, maybe two years, right now you have…JPMorgan has 241,000 employees. About 20,000 of them in New York. $192 billion in net assets. What happens? What do you foresee? What is JPMorgan in year two of…
Sanders: What I foresee is a stronger national economy. And, in fact, a stronger economy in New York State, as well. What I foresee is a financial system which actually makes affordable loans to small and medium-size businesses. Does not live as an island onto themselves concerned about their own profits. And, in fact, creating incredibly complicated financial tools, which have led us into the worst economic recession in the modern history of the United States.
Daily News: I get that point. I’m just looking at the method because, actions have reactions, right? There are pluses and minuses. So, if you push here, you may get an unintended consequence that you don’t understand.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So ridiculous to question Bernie Sander's for unintended consequences to break up these big banks. Was the selling of the subprime mortgage bundle (rated AAA) from these big banks create the (unintended consequence)? Yes. These banks create the financial crisis to not only the USA, but to Europe, Asia and others. They sell these crap junk with the AAA rating all over the world.
Daily News: So if you look forward, a year, maybe two years, right now you have…JPMorgan has 241,000 employees. About 20,000 of them in New York. $192 billion in net assets. What happens? What do you foresee? What is JPMorgan in year two of…
Sanders: What I foresee is a stronger national economy. And, in fact, a stronger economy in New York State, as well. What I foresee is a financial system which actually makes affordable loans to small and medium-size businesses. Does not live as an island onto themselves concerned about their own profits. And, in fact, creating incredibly complicated financial tools, which have led us into the worst economic recession in the modern history of the United States.
Daily News: I get that point. I’m just looking at the method because, actions have reactions, right? There are pluses and minuses. So, if you push here, you may get an unintended consequence that you don’t understand.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So ridiculous to question Bernie Sander's for unintended consequences to break up these big banks. Was the selling of the subprime mortgage bundle (rated AAA) from these big banks create the (unintended consequence)? Yes. These banks create the financial crisis to not only the USA, but to Europe, Asia and others. They sell these crap junk with the AAA rating all over the world.
Isn't this Bernie guy about to die from being too old? I thought so.
The rigged system is exposed for all to see. The Bern destroys Clinton in the popular vote and then only manages to pick up a 3 delegate edge last night. Just in case you're really stupid let me spell it out. Your vote means nothing. Your opinion means nothing. Your life means nothing to these people. Presidents are not elected, they're appointed, and you ain't doing the appointing.
I wish it meant something, Nitro. I honestly do.
Imo, this is at the heart of modern political philosophy in this country. What does it mean to be a Democrat. What does it mean to be a Republican. What can it mean? Are we forever in the straight-jacket of these labels?
Hillary Clinton Says She's Unsure Bernie Sanders Is A Democrat
"When asked whether she believes Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is a Democrat in a Politico interview published Wednesday morning, Hillary Clinton said she was unable to describe Sanders' relationship with the Democratic party.
"Well, I can’t answer that," Clinton told Politico's "Off Message" podcast. "He’s a relatively new Democrat, and, in fact, I’m not even sure he is one. He’s running as one. So I don’t know quite how to characterize him."..."
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...e-sanders-is-a-democrat/ar-BBrqGT4?li=BBnb7Kz
Hillary Clinton Says She's Unsure Bernie Sanders Is A Democrat
"When asked whether she believes Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is a Democrat in a Politico interview published Wednesday morning, Hillary Clinton said she was unable to describe Sanders' relationship with the Democratic party.
"Well, I can’t answer that," Clinton told Politico's "Off Message" podcast. "He’s a relatively new Democrat, and, in fact, I’m not even sure he is one. He’s running as one. So I don’t know quite how to characterize him."..."
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...e-sanders-is-a-democrat/ar-BBrqGT4?li=BBnb7Kz
I don't know it is impossible. Remember, everyone wants you to give up.
- For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill. https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Sun_Tzu
Wall St is pretty certain who will be president
"Recent indications from deep-pocketed institutional investors as well as those who frequent prediction markets say Hillary Clinton will win. And it's not close.
More than 70 percent of respondents to a recent Citigroup poll of institutional clients viewed the former secretary of state, first lady and New York senator as the likely 45th president. Just over 10 percent give Donald Trump the nod, while fellow Republican John Kasich is a few points behind. Democrat Bernie Sanders and Republican Ted Cruz barely register...."
http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/mark...n-who-will-be-president/ar-BBrr4b6?li=BBnb7Kz
Last edited: