UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (25) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Author: kenm47 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 1966776  
Subject: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/15/2013 9:53 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
"Elizabeth Warren Embarrasses Hapless Bank Regulators At First Hearing (VIDEO)"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/14/elizabeth-warren-ba...

Ken
Print the post Back To Top
Author: rinjr715 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860100 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/15/2013 10:07 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Lizzy hasn't been around long enough to have earned the right to rip anybody a new one. She would do well to be careful whose toes she steps on.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: alstroemeria Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860107 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/15/2013 10:31 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 59
Lizzy hasn't been around long enough to have earned the right to rip anybody a new one. She would do well to be careful whose toes she steps on.

She was elected to protect consumers, not to play footsie with banking regulators. And all she did was ask one question: when was the last time Wall Street bankers had been brought to trial? I'd like to know.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: EverettRuess Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860110 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/15/2013 10:51 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
That's what you call "ripping them a new one" ? She was polite and to the point.

Nemo

Print the post Back To Top
Author: cjb44 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860118 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/15/2013 11:34 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
This shows her lack of knowledge of the process and how she's not ready for primetime.

Going to trial means that someone from Wall Street was believed to have committed a crime and challenged the government's charge. If the government charges you with a crime and you know you're guilty you don't go to trial. Trial is to determine the facts, if both sides don't dispute the facts, no trial. Nobody wants to spend a fortune on trial if there is evidence against them. And the government isn't having show trials (well Congress will). No prosecutor is going to trial without knowing they have enough evidence to win.

The correct question is "how many investigations have lead to criminal charges?" Because the SEC has admitted they have gotten consent agreements, which are basically guilty pleas.

Plus Warren should show where the SEC was lacking. Can she show a case of a Wall Streeter who committed a crime and wasn't charged? It's nice to say "Wall Street Bankers should be in jail", but how about telling us what the actual charge should be and back it up with enough evidence to show there show where the SEC was lacking.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SaintPatrick1 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860120 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/15/2013 11:37 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
And all she did was ask one question: when was the last time Wall Street bankers had been brought to trial? I'd like to know.

And like a good lawyer (somewhat of an oxymoron) she knows the answer before she asks the question. The OCC isn't set up for trial ... not when they can skip the trial and access fines.

She is a master at the stage. Master politician.

Hope those two sentences don't mistakenly come off as compliments.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: HMALETTER Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860127 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/15/2013 11:55 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Correct SP, it was a question fed to her to make her Appear intelligent, and diligent. They gave good answers, far better answers than Lizzy did when asked why she lied about being an Indian.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: thoughtcrook Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860139 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/15/2013 12:54 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
if we're going to use a diminutive familiar for her, i prefer senator bitsy.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: woodymw Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860169 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/15/2013 3:56 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 15
Lizzy hasn't been around long enough to have earned the right to rip anybody a new one. She would do well to be careful whose toes she steps on.

Which is a sentiment that will be easy to take seriously when you also condemn freshman senator Ted Cruz's behavior in the last three weeks or so.

From that noted liberal source, Fox News:

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) deserves thanks. He managed to go so far over the top in showing poor taste in his shameful questioning of former Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) during this week’s Armed Services Committee hearing on Hagel’s nomination for Defense Secretary that he managed to assure that Hagel will be confirmed, as he should be.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/02/14/it-time-to-confirm...

Print the post Back To Top
Author: albaby1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Favorite Fools Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860173 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/15/2013 4:02 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
And all she did was ask one question: when was the last time Wall Street bankers had been brought to trial? I'd like to know.

I'm curious too....but this is also the sort of information that Sen. Warren could easily have gotten at any time during the last month and a half (if not before). Her chief of staff - even her LA - could have picked up the phone and gotten that kind of information in a day or two. She wanted to make a point, and I daresay she did. I'm not sure whether it will advance the goals she wants to advance, but she did succeed in making that point.

Albaby

Print the post Back To Top
Author: lowstudent Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860174 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/15/2013 4:06 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Which is a sentiment that will be easy to take seriously when you also condemn freshman senator Ted Cruz's behavior in the last three weeks or so.

From that noted liberal source, Fox News:

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) deserves thanks. He managed to go so far over the top in showing poor taste in his shameful questioning of former Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) during this week’s Armed Services Committee hearing on Hagel’s nomination for Defense Secretary that he managed to assure that Hagel will be confirmed, as he should be.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/02/14/it-time-to-confirm......
___________________________________

Do you clowns even pretend that you are honest when you are alone?

You chose an article from Lanny Davis as proof that non-conservatives agree with you point?

That is impressive even for a PA lib, you should have a blue crown in no time, the dishonesty is truly impressive. Keep up the good work

Print the post Back To Top
Author: woodymw Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860180 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/15/2013 4:19 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 17
Do you clowns even pretend that you are honest when you are alone?

Only to the extent that you pretend not to go after straw men when you're by yourself.

You chose an article from Lanny Davis as proof that non-conservatives agree with you point?

My point wasn't that somebody agrees or doesn't agree - my point was that the behavior is, at best, the same as that being condemned. My point is that consistency breeds credibility and that the sentiment expressed about Elizabeth Warren is not credible unless it is consistently applied to all freshmen senators. The point of that post doesn't change even one bit if I remove the quote altogether.

I assumed even you guys could see that. Whoops.

That is impressive even for a PA lib, you should have a blue crown in no time, the dishonesty is truly impressive.

I haven't been called impressive in awhile. Thanks!

Print the post Back To Top
Author: lowstudent Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860182 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/15/2013 4:25 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
My point wasn't that somebody agrees or doesn't agree - my point was that the behavior is, at best, the same as that being condemned. My point is that consistency breeds credibility and that the sentiment expressed about Elizabeth Warren is not credible unless it is consistently applied to all freshmen senators. The point of that post doesn't change even one bit if I remove the quote altogether.
_______________________

What a cork of manure.

One could make that point without the hey look Fox agrees.

But you chose not to. You chose to use dishonesty

You can play make believe all you want. You did what you did

You put an article written by Fox News and worked it to say that conservatives agree so if you do not agree you must be uber off the wall

You chose to be dishonest. You can lie about it some more, I really do not care. You are free to enjoy your dishonesty, just don't assume everyone does not know you are a phony.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: woodymw Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860183 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/15/2013 4:30 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
You can play make believe all you want. You did what you did

Aaaand ... not a word on the idea of consistency of principle application ... or who gets to step on toes in the Senate. Only about how I poorly sourced a quote.

Check.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: FoolishWaldo Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860187 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/15/2013 4:39 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Lizzy hasn't been around long enough to have earned the right to rip anybody a new one. She would do well to be careful whose toes she steps on.

Or what will happen? It sounds like you think the bankers have mafia connections.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SaintPatrick1 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860192 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/15/2013 5:45 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I'm curious too....but this is also the sort of information that Sen. Warren could easily have gotten at any time during the last month and a half (if not before). Her chief of staff - even her LA - could have picked up the phone and gotten that kind of information in a day or two.

She seems like Senator Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer.
http://snuh.tumblr.com/post/4681288883/phil-hartman-as-keyro...


"You're world frightens and confuses me ... sometimes the honking horns of your cars make me want to run off into the hills...but there is one thing I do know ... when Wall Street bankers have not been brought to trial, it must be because the people of Washington DC have not seen the likes of Senator Liz ... when I appear on the magical television boxes around this country, I think that the words I speak make me demonize the investment industry, while pretending to fight for the little guy."

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jgc123 Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860213 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/15/2013 6:56 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 6
As an ex-prosecutor who still does trial work, I thought it was an excellent question. When I was a prosecutor it did not take me long to figure out which attorneys would brag, whine and bluster but eventually give in and take my offer rather than go to trial. And, as an attorney in private practice, I generally know which attorneys will stand up to me and go to trial vs. those who will brag, whine and bluster but eventually give in.

If the SEC attorneys are underqualified, underprepared or understaffed, they will in fact give in to qualified, prepared and well staffed attorneys for the big banks - and they all know it.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SaintPatrick1 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860229 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/15/2013 9:40 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
" As an ex-prosecutor who still does trial work, I thought it was an excellent question.

....

If the SEC attorneys are underqualified, underprepared or understaffed, they will in fact give in to qualified, prepared and well staffed attorneys for the big banks -and they all know it."


How does the question get to the point of SEC attorney's qualifications?

Consider that Dizzy wants to take a process in which a government agency investigates wrong doings and assesses fines and turn it into a process in which the government agency investigates wrongdoings and then starts a trial ...

Print the post Back To Top
Author: rinjr715 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860244 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/15/2013 11:30 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Cruz is a d-bag too, but Chuck Hagel is no damn good and has been no damn good for years. Had the GOP chosen somebody other than a freshman wingnut to rip Hagel a new one, you lefties would have no argument about the questioning.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: lowstudent Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860263 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/16/2013 8:44 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Cruz is a d-bag too, but Chuck Hagel is no damn good and has been no damn good for years. Had the GOP chosen somebody other than a freshman wingnut to rip Hagel a new one, you lefties would have no argument about the questioning.
______________________________

Of course they would have an argument.

They spent prime time and front page space maligning a guy for taking a sip of water, and made the case that it disqualified him from being President.

There is not ever a need for reality to rear its' ugly head for liberals to make an argument. IF they need facts, there are two people somewhere in the foothills of Appalachia to prove their case, and no fear of hypocrisy(in fact they seem to worship at its; altar)

Now be a good little nazi racist and run along, and if you do not agree that the Tea Party and OWS share an ideology then you are just no damn good.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: culcha Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860333 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/16/2013 2:54 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Lizzy hasn't been around long enough ...

Right. She's just getting started. I'm sure we can look forward to more!

culcha

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Melancholia2 Three stars, 500 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860352 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/16/2013 4:03 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Can she show a case of a Wall Streeter who committed a crime and wasn't charged?

Certainly. But it would need to be done by the Justice Department, not the SEC, which can only bring civil charges. The heads of each of the TBTF banks signed off on financial statements that omitted disclosure of material risks. Under Sarbanes-Oxley, they should be charged.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SaintPatrick1 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860394 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/16/2013 11:05 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The heads of banks don't sign off on disclosure risks. The fund manager does that.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: HMALETTER Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860431 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/17/2013 9:42 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
So Lizzy. Obama took over during the worst recession....blah blah.
It was caused by reckless bankers and no supervision or regulations to stop them from ruining the world.

Obama is now in his Second term as President, and you point out nobody's been taken to trial.

Does this mean Obama's Administration is weak and ineffective, or has he been protecting these evil bankers?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: lowstudent Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1860436 of 1966776
Subject: Re: Give 'Em Hell, Lizzy! Date: 2/17/2013 10:17 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Obama is now in his Second term as President, and you point out nobody's been taken to trial.
_______________________

You have been on PA ong enough to know it is all the Republicans fault.

During the first two years when they had zero ability to do anything at all, Obama was too busy compromising with them to get anything done.

In the time that followed, they were busily not allowing Obama to compromise on anything.

Obama will not try to fix anything, because he would perhaps be judged by results, and his results on just about everything suck

Now let the moron chorus start their claims of strawmen, where none exists. Let the show of support that says the world would have ended had anyone but Obama been President begin, with the make believe that we would have dropped off the edge of the earth but for the efforts of our clown in office.

To say this President is nothing special is to overstate the case insanely generously.

Unable to compromise, unable to lead, unable to do anything but dictate to the departments that do not need to work with anyone

An economy that sucks, foreign relations that suck and a lot of make believe that anyone who notices that is somehow getting their information from a false source, because it does not agree with John Stewart

I do not deserve the America you clowns are creating.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (25) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Advertisement