Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., criticizes both Bill Clinton and Michael Bloomberg in her upcoming book “This Fight Is Our Fight,” which is due out Tuesday, The Washington Examiner reported. The excerpts come from the conservative research group America Rising.
In her book, Warren also explains why she didn’t run for president in last year’s election. Her husband warned her the environment would be very toxic. Warren went all out to support comrade Sanders instead.
Also in the book, Warren took aim at a spring 2016 commencement speech made by Bloomberg, a billionaire and former mayor of New York City, during which he chided Democrats for blaming the country’s problems on “the wealthy and Wall Street.”
“In the spring of 2016, billionaire Michael Bloomberg climbed up to the podium at the University of Michigan to deliver the commencement address to tens of thousands of cheering students and families … Resplendent in flowing black robes trimmed in black velvet and gold braid, Bloomberg took the opportunity to denounce those who ‘fan the flames of partisanship,’ and he accused both Republicans and Democrats of demagoguery,” Warren wrote. “He scolded Republicans for blaming our problems on ‘Mexicans who are here illegally and Muslims’ and Democrats for blaming our problems on ‘the wealthy and Wall Street.'”
“The equivalence between illegal immigration arguments and Wall Street set her off. “That might all be true in Michael Bloomberg’s Alternative Billionaire World – but not so much here on planet Earth,” she said.
This story, Warren said, scares me “down to my toes” because it reminds her “of two fundamental truths: the playing field isn’t level, and the people at the top often don’t notice that.”
Elsewhere in the book, Warren strongly criticizes the Clintons for getting “on the deregulation bandwagon big-time”.
She was particularly upset with the repeal of Glass-Steagall, a remnant of the Depression era and FDR.”As he signed the repeal of Glass-Steagall, President Bill Clinton, cracked a few jokes, then praised the move for ‘making a fundamental and historic change in the way we operate our financial institutions,” she wrote.
Clinton “presciently explained” that the repeal would “‘expand the powers of banks,” Warren wrote.”
That’s a favorite Democrat myth NPR debunked though NPR left open the possibility it had a small effect they can’t put into fact-form. Even President Obama acknowledged that “there is not evidence that having Glass-Steagall in place would somehow change the dynamic.”
If you look at the institutions that ran into severe problems in 2008-09 – Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, AIG, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – none would have come under Glass-Steagall’s restrictions.
As for the FDIC-insured commercial banks that ran into trouble, the record clearly shows that what got them into trouble were not activities restricted by Glass-Steagall. Their problems arose from investments in residential mortgages and residential mortgage-backed securities—investments they had always been free to engage in.
Elizabeth Warren and her ilk want to see public servants – politicians in particular – as selfless and bankers, financiers as “greedy” profit-seekers out for themselves requiring very strict controls by the selfless government regulators.
Ironically, government interference is what led to the 2008 crash.
Warren, who helped craft the Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation passed by the Obama administration, has called for a new Glass Steagall Act for the 21st Century.
The 67-year old fake Indian and Socialist is a leading contender for the 2020 Democratic nomination.
The America Rising PAC providing the excerpt has begun “the Elizabeth Warren Initiative” to “make Warren’s life difficult during her 2018 Senate re-election contest” and to conduct research to “damage” her 2020 presidential prospects, the executive director Colin Reed said.
Her book is considered a soft launch before her upcoming quest to be president.
The PAC plans to make four general arguments against Warren: that she has put her presidential ambitions ahead of her constituents in Massachusetts; she has fallen short “of the Kennedy standard”; that she is “left of the far left”; and she is a hypocrite on a variety of issues, including school choice and equal pay.