Archive for the ‘Elizabeth Warren’ Category

THE ROOTS OF AMERICA’S DANGEROUS TURN TO THE LEFT

Tuesday, July 10th, 2018

 

This article  will help you to understand the history behind  how the Far Left has been able to take control of the Democrat Party and what their goals are for our country.     It is a fascinating read .   Nancy

www.thetrumpet.com/13314-the-roots-of-americas-dangerous-turn-left

To understand where the radical left plans to take America, you must understand the source of its ideas. We have been warning America about this for over 50 years!
FROM THE JANUARY 2016       TRUMPET PRINT EDITION

America is in serious decline. Many Americans are deeply concerned. The radical left has gained control of the nation. Look at the Democratic Party today: Its leading personalities promote policies that are weakening the nation economically, socially, morally, militarily and geopolitically. How did they get control? What caused this nation to descend into this condition?

You need to understand what has happened inside this country and why. The problem is far deeper, and has been going on for far longer, than most people realize.

During the Cold War, there was a lot of fear within America about the spread of communism. Today, most Americans no longer consider it a threat of any concern.

But it is of grave concern. Few people realize it, but many mainstream political views in America today are identical to—and trace directly back to—the ideals and beliefs of communism.

One popular candidate running for the Democratic presidential nomination claims to be a socialist. Well, many Communists call themselves socialists. The fact that he has so much support reveals how dangerously ignorant the American people are.

What do you know about communism? A growing number of Americans support the government taking over health care and other major segments of the national economy. They fail to understand the dangers that accompany a Communist system.

Understanding Communism

Socialism and communism are alike in fundamental ways. Both say the centralized government or “the public” should own and control production, rather than individual business owners. Both call for centralized planning and control, which make for powerful governments that are highly susceptible to corruption. Socialism is considered the transition stage from capitalism to communism; in some cases, it is a less radical version that might eventually “mature” into communism.

(more…)

Share

REPEALING DODD FRANK

Thursday, June 7th, 2018

 

THE WEEKLY STANDARD

Regulatory Release

May 24, 2018
The partial repeal of Dodd Frank could have gone farther, but it’s a good start.

In 2010, Congress passed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, and President Obama signed it into law. The legislation, more than 2,000 pages long, imposed cumbersome regulations on financial institutions, which the bill’s authors took to be responsible for the 2008 financial crisis and the consequent recession. The law also established the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, or CFPB, an advocacy agency for consumers that, to no one’s surprise, quickly turned into a Naderite anti-corporation attack dog.

Complicated laws passed in the middle of a crisis are guaranteed to make things worse in the long run, and so Dodd-Frank proved. The Democrats, who controlled both House and Senate in 2010, took the blinkered view that the financial crisis had come about exclusively thanks to the unregulated excesses of the private-sector financial industry; regulating that industry was, for them, the only rational response. The law thus deprived the market of liquidity in the middle of a recession—with predictable results.

The Democrats ignored two important points. First, the role of the federal government itself: Government-backed mortgage giants Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae—then as now boasting powerful allies in Congress—encouraged precisely the sort of risky and foolish loans that led directly to the housing-market collapse and attendant financial meltdown. Second, what many of the investment banks did was already illegal: “cooking the books,” to use the popular term. To that extent, it was an enforcement problem, not a regulatory one. Greater regulation of investment banks largely missed the point—though it allowed powerful Democrats in Congress to blame someone other than themselves for the crisis. (The bill’s authors, Chris Dodd of Connecticut and Barney Frank of Massachusetts, both had a long history of encouraging Fannie and Freddie’s worst practices.) One of the law’s further follies is that it shackled small and mid-sized banks with the same provisions despite the fact that they had nothing to do with the financial crisis.

(more…)

Share

CONSUMER FINANCE PROTECTION BUREAU OFFICIAL SUES TRUMP OVER AGENCY LEADERSHIP

Tuesday, November 28th, 2017

 
www.wsj.com/articles/showdown-looms-at-consumer-financial-protection-bureau-1511745899

CFPB Official Sues Trump Administration Over Agency Leadership

Leadership contest is the latest battle to control agency’s direction

Leadership contest is the latest battle to control agency’s direction

White House budget chief Mick Mulvaney is the president’s pick to be acting director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
White House budget chief Mick Mulvaney is the president’s pick to be acting director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. PHOTO: PABLO MARTINEZ MONSIVAIS/ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON—An Obama-era official at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau sued the Trump administration on Sunday night to block budget director Mick Mulvaney from taking control of the agency.

Leandra English, a career staffer appointed Friday to lead the CFPB by former director Richard Cordray, filed the lawsuit in federal court the night before the bureau was set to reopen with dueling temporary leaders vying to take it over. In doing so, she touched off a legal fight that will trigger court interpretations on how different statutes regarding succession apply to the unusual struggle over control of a federal agency.

President Donald Trump asserts he has the power to appoint an acting director, while the departing chief believed the law said otherwise.

Share

WHAT WENT WRONG WITH THE CONSUMER FINANCE PROTECTION BUREAU

Tuesday, November 28th, 2017

 

www.wsj.com/articles/what-went-wrong-with-the-cfpb-1511072512?tesla=y

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

What Went Wrong With the CFPB

I was an aide to Barney Frank. I’ve learned it’s a mistake to create an unaccountable agency.

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Director Richard Cordray testifies before House Financial Services Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee on Capitol Hill, July 30, 2014.
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Director Richard Cordray testifies before House Financial Services Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee on Capitol Hill, July 30, 2014. PHOTO: YURI GRIPAS/REUTERS

Richard Cordray’s resignation as director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau provides a great opportunity for President Trump to appoint a new director who can undo an unfortunate legacy of bureaucratic overreach and political bias. More important going forward is what we have learned from our experience with the CFPB to prevent future similar missteps.

The first lesson is that Congress should never again create an “independent” agency with a sole director, particularly one not subject to the congressional appropriations process. Under the law, the CFPB—unlike the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Communications Commission, the Federal Trade Commission and other independent agencies—is funded by the Federal Reserve, a move specifically designed to avoid congressional oversight.

I had the privilege of working as an aide to then-Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee when the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010, which created the CFPB, was written. I realized that no bill is ever perfect and the CFPB would have its imperfections. The authors wanted the bureau to be a fair arbiter of protecting consumers, instead of what it has become—a politically biased regulatory dictator and a political steppingstone for its sole director, who is now expected to run for governor of Ohio.

(more…)

Share

VIDEO LIZ WHEELER DESTROYS ELIZABETH WARREN AND PLANNED PARENTHOOD WITH FACTS !

Tuesday, July 18th, 2017

 

  Liz Wheeler destroys Elizabeth Warren with FACTS !    Thanks to Bill Mehann for sharing this video.    Nancy
VIDEO  – LIZ WHEELER DESTROYS ELIZABETH WARREN AND PLANNED PARENTHOOD
June 24, 2017   One America News Network 
Share

CORDRAY ‘YOU’RE FIRED”

Wednesday, April 19th, 2017

 

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was the brain child of Elizabeth Warren.   Nancy
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

You’re Fired,’ Trump Should Tell Richard Cordray

Under a dubious statute, the CFPB head can be dismissed only for cause—but there’s plenty of it.

April 13, 2017 6:56 p.m. ET

Messrs. Rivkin and Grossman practice appellate and constitutional law in Washington.

The greatest mystery in Washington involves not Russian spies or wiretaps but Richard Cordray’s continued employment as director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. In the face of President Trump’s mandate for change, Mr. Cordray continues the Obama administration’s regulatory crusade against lenders, blocking access to the credit that supports so many small businesses and so much consumer spending.

Why would a president who made a TV show out of firing underlings now suffer a subordinate who refuses to get with the pro-growth agenda he campaigned on? If reports from the West Wing are to be believed, Mr. Trump’s unusual timidity is the result of overcautious legal and political advice.

Mr. Cordray is insulated from presidential control by a New Deal-era innovation: a statutory clause that allows the president to fire an independent agency head only “for cause,” meaning “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” In October a three-judge panel of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia struck down that restriction as an infringement of the president’s constitutional authority to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

(more…)

Share

HIS AND HER CLINTONOMICS

Saturday, May 21st, 2016
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
HIS AND HER CLINTONOMICS

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and former President Bill Clinton on May 7 in Los Angeles.ENLARGE
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and former President Bill Clinton on May 7 in Los Angeles. PHOTO: ZUMA PRESS

In his 1992 campaign Bill Clinton liked to tell voters they’d be getting two for the price of one, and now Hillary Clinton is dusting off the same promise. She said this weekend in Kentucky that she’d put the First Husband “in charge of revitalizing the economy,” and she’s since added that “he’s got to come out of retirement” to raise incomes and put people back to work.

Mrs. Clinton’s remarks are a revealing turn, not least because so far she’s been running for President Obama’s third term. But since Democrats seem to agree that the economic status quo is dismal, and thus they can’t run on Mr. Obama’s record, the presumptive nominee is trying to confuse voters with halcyon memories of the 1990s boom.

The Clinton gang has since “clarified” that Mr. Clinton’s ministrations will be confined to distressed U.S. regions like inner cities or coal country. Maybe they realized that vowing to outsource one of her most important jobs might diminish her as a candidate.

Her larger problem is that the Obama-era Democratic Party has repudiated the Democratic Party’s Bill-era centrist agenda. They now call themselves progressives, not New Democrats, and they take their marching orders from Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren,not Larry Summers and Alan Greenspan. Mrs. Clinton has accommodated this trend to the pre-Bill left.

(more…)

Share

SHUTTING DOWN THE GLOBAL WARMING DENIERS

Saturday, October 10th, 2015

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Shut Up—Or We’ll Shut You Down

Elizabeth Warren isn’t the only one trying to silence her opponents.

Last month George Mason Professor Jagadish Shukla and 19 others signed a letter to President Obama, Attorney General Loretta Lynch and White House science adviser John Holdren urging punishment for climate dissenters. “One additional tool—recently proposed by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse—is a RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) investigation of corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America’s response to climate change,” they wrote.

In other words, they want the feds to use a law created to prosecute the mafia against lawful businesses and scientists. In a May op-ed in the Washington Post, Mr. Whitehouse specifically cited Willie Soon of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, who has published politically inconvenient research on changes in solar radiation.

The RICO threat is intended to shut down debate because it can inflict treble damages upon a defendant. Enacted to stop organized crime and specifically to prosecute individuals tied to loansharking and murder-for-hire, it was long seen as so powerful a tool that the government warned prosecutors to limit its use.

(more…)

Share

DON’T CROSS ELIZABETH WARREN

Monday, October 5th, 2015

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Don’t Cross Elizabeth Warren
A left-leaning think tank gets a visit from the thought police for heresy on regulation.

By L. GORDON CROVITZ
Oct. 5, 2015
What good is a think tank if thinking isn’t allowed? That’s the question the hard-left senator from Massachusetts, Elizabeth Warren, forced on the soft-left Brookings Institution by getting one of its top economists fired.

Her victim is Robert Litan, a Democrat who served in the Clinton administration and had been associated with Brookings since the 1970s, including as a former director of its economics division.

The ambush of Mr. Litan occurred in Internet time. At 8:30 a.m. on Tuesday last week, the Washington Post reported online a letter Ms. Warren sent to Brookings complaining about him. Twitter lit up, with her fans demanding Mr. Litan’s head. “If @BrookingsInst has integrity will loudly fire ‘scholar’ Robert Litan today, declare new policies. If not . . .” tweeted David Cay Johnston, a left-wing writer, at 8:52. By 9:30 Mr. Litan was gone.

In July Mr. Litan had testified against a Warren-backed Labor Department plan to regulate financial advisers. His cost-benefit analysis estimated that during a market downturn the regulation could cost investors—especially those who aren’t wealthy—tens of billions of dollars by depriving them of advice, such as against panic selling. Half of House Democrats and virtually all Republicans in Congress oppose the plan because of its costs.

Instead of rebutting his argument, Ms. Warren decided to punish it. Her letter to Brookings president Strobe Talbott accused Mr. Litan of concealing a conflict of interest. The first page of Mr. Litan’s testimony says: “The study was supported by the Capital Group, one of the largest mutual fund asset managers in the U.S.” She called that disclosure “vague”—an obvious falsehood.

Mr. Litan had told his colleagues at Brookings, including Mr. Talbott, about Ms. Warren’s complaints, and they seemed unconcerned as late as the morning her letter went public. “Two hours later,” he told me, “it was clear that there was a high level of distress at Brookings, and after 40 years I left. That’s it.” (more…)

Share
Search All Posts
Categories