|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:They'd rather Hillary win than a Republican.
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 11:41 |
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Would you rather the DOJ have dropped a few civil rights cases instead? Maybe not investigated the Ferguson PD? What you actually want are examples of things the DOJ was prioritizing at the same time they weren't prioritizing the financial problems, not stuff from the last year or two. Go back further! Also, seriously - anyone? Anyone want to try to sell me on Hillary? She's got a few supporters here, I should have to be begging for this opportunity to consider her in ways I haven't before.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
Maarek posted:Who cares WHY Eric Holder didn't do his job. We can't really prove whats deep within his heart without magical powers. What matters is that he didn't and more importantly he didn't even TRY. I think you're incredibly gullible if you think that these guys all escaped prosecution and coincidentally they gave tons of money to the people who run this country, but in the end it doesn't really make a difference. But they did try, they reached a lot of settlements instead of pursuing into court though. Remember that these laws were written by congress which is probably friendly to the bank industry. In criminal case a jury is supposed to acquit if they do not understand or follow the prosecution's argument so these cases may not be as solid as you might think (hell a lot of the behavior might have been ruled to be legal!). The DOJ by settling gets a commitment for the company to change their practices and do not risk an embarrassing acquittal or worse.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
D_I posted:Yes those principled corporations, never expecting any return on investment. Of course they're expecting some degree of that, but that doesn't mean that she won't generally be tougher on WS than a Republican or softer by anything other than degrees than what she's said because, again, she has people like Liz Warren.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:They'd rather Hillary win than a Republican. Hahah, what? So in this hypothetical America 2020 that elected Hillary Clinton in 2016, people have become SO ANGRY about her not being tough on wall street that she's going to get run out of office as a sitting POTUS like Johnson in 68?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
Crain posted:And literally no one cares. It's not really an "active shooter" if a guy just murders someone specific and leaves.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:Many of the same companies that are donating to Hillary donate as much or more money to Republicans. They're hedging their bets: they'd prefer a Republican to win, but if a Democrat wins Hillary is who they want. That doesn't mean that she's not going to generally do what she says she does.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
D_I posted:Yeah they didn't go after Wall Street because in 6 years they would have to investigate Ferguson... The majority of the 2008 crisis was caused entirely by legal actions. Hard to prosecute Wall Street when they haven't done anything illegal. Most of that anger should be directed at the laws that allowed them to do it-. And the rest towards the weak response at reigning in those laws (dodd-frank), the GOP's complete resistance to it and constant attempts to sneakily remove parts of it. There have been a few cases settled for billions in the last few years though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:It's not really an "active shooter" if a guy just murders someone specific and leaves. lmao
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:But they did try, they reached a lot of settlements instead of pursuing into court though. Remember that these laws were written by congress which is probably friendly to the bank industry. In criminal case a jury is supposed to acquit if they do not understand or follow the prosecution's argument so these cases may not be as solid as you might think (hell a lot of the behavior might have been ruled to be legal!). The DOJ by settling gets a commitment for the company to change their practices and do not risk an embarrassing acquittal or worse. Yes, we can successfully extract millions in fines from banks that made billions of dollars off of 2008. Wall Street beware, Justice is coming for you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
Maarek posted:Hahah, what? So in this hypothetical America 2020 that elected Hillary Clinton in 2016, people have become SO ANGRY about her not being tough on wall street that she's going to get run out of office as a sitting POTUS like Johnson in 68? If she wasn't worried about the left, do you think she wouldn't have shifted left on some policies?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:If she wasn't worried about the left, do you think she wouldn't have shifted left on some policies?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
If I'm not being clear enough I was just trying to politely imply that even you don't believe that is going to happen or a thing that could possibly happen.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
Mitt Romney posted:The majority of the 2008 crisis was caused entirely by legal actions. Hard to prosecute Wall Street when they haven't done anything illegal. Except for all those companies that broke a whole poo poo ton of laws that we know about because several of their employees turned whistleblower and went public, that the regulatory agencies effectively covered for. There was enough cirminal wrongdoing a few high-profile cases to at least give people some confidence something meaningful was being done should have been possible. Instead, we've got a handful of cases where the government BI NOW GAY LATER posted:If she wasn't worried about the left, do you think she wouldn't have shifted left on some policies?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:48
|
|
|
Maarek posted:If I'm not being clear enough I was just trying to politely imply that even you don't believe that is going to happen or a thing that could possibly happen. I think, generally, that there's enough resentment from the left that it would be big enough of a thing to keep her at least mostly honest on the promise, because even if she didn't get actively primaried she has to worry about, and will, what happened to Bush 41. JT Jag posted:She's fending off the primary challenge she has now, not worrying about one in four years. I think that any modern presidential campaign starts gaming out the next election as soon as the current one is over.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
Can we really call them "Mass Shootings" when they don't occur in church at Mass?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
Yeah it's pretty amazing how D&D has effortlessly slid into the Obama narrative of what happened after 2008.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
Joementum posted:The idea that it's Jesse Jackson's fault there are no viable black maoist parties in the US is... far-fetched. I agree, that would be an absurdly overstated reading of the history, which was that Jackson's radical contingent was assimilated into the party and relentlessly colonized until it was nearly unrecognizable. Blaming any one person (the victim even, in a sense) for this emergent systemic outcome would be absurd.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
Maarek posted:Yes, we can successfully extract millions in fines from banks that made billions of dollars off of 2008. Wall Street beware, Justice is coming for you. That's why the companies settled. If Justice settled for that then they may have thought that there was a very real chance that the company would be acquitted. Or worse, whatever the behavior was was ruled legal as a matter of law. If you're talking about the mortgage transfer fraud that's all at the state level unfortunately.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
It's not state level if you use RICO.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:You seem to be a big supporter, so I'll ask you in particular - where has Hillary demonstrated the sort of executive leadership skills that would indicate she'd be a good President? I honestly do not know much of anything she's actually taken the lead on. She was incredibly effective as a senator as being a real workhorse -- that's well documented. She also laid the foundations for rebuilding our reputation abroad as SoS. She's consistently championed women's issues and has been better on HCR than Obama ever thought about being. I think, more than Sanders, she's understands governing in prose and I don't see him in that fashion.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
Maarek posted:Supporting a war that has cost us trillions of dollars, thousands of lives, and resulted in the death or displacement of countless more and the rise of the Islamic State is not really something you can just call a mulligan on. I'm not a single issue voter but if I have my pick between someone who voted against that and someone who voted for that I'm gonna lean to the former. You realize Bernie voted multiple of times to keep dumping those trillions, right? And he's voted for how many big military projects for his home state?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
Mitt Romney posted:The majority of the 2008 crisis was caused entirely by legal actions. Hard to prosecute Wall Street when they haven't done anything illegal. This isn't really true.. There were a multitude of actual crimes, not least of them fraud, that Holder's AG simply refused to prosecute. Taibbi's _The Divide_ is a good source. Basically, Holder is a living avatar of regulatory capture. Or Hell, look at Corzine.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:What you actually want are examples of things the DOJ was prioritizing at the same time they weren't prioritizing the financial problems, not stuff from the last year or two. Go back further! Rebuilding the Civil Rights division was a huge resource sink from the very start of the Obama administration, as it should have been. The ability to investigate the later cases (and the voting rights cases started pretty quick) is because they spent a ton of resources building up the department. this_is_hard posted:or maybe they could have actually prosecuted some of the corporations and people directly responsible for the largest financial catastrophe in a generation? Basically this: hobbesmaster posted:But they did try, they reached a lot of settlements instead of pursuing into court though. Remember that these laws were written by congress which is probably friendly to the bank industry. In criminal case a jury is supposed to acquit if they do not understand or follow the prosecution's argument so these cases may not be as solid as you might think (hell a lot of the behavior might have been ruled to be legal!). The DOJ by settling gets a commitment for the company to change their practices and do not risk an embarrassing acquittal or worse. Combined with the fact that the DOJ is just out gunned versus Wall Street. If you're a big Wall Street firm facing DOJ investigation, you're basically willing to spend as much money as it takes to avoid or reduce billion dollar fines (or worse). Meanwhile, if you're the DOJ you're got dozens of equally well funded firms and you don't have the resources of even just one of these firms. GlyphGryph posted:You seem to be a big supporter, so I'll ask you in particular - where has Hillary demonstrated the sort of executive leadership skills that would indicate she'd be a good President? I honestly do not know much of anything she's actually taken the lead on. You're probably not going to get a good answer in this thread, since this isn't a primary thread.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
euphronius posted:It's not state level if you use RICO. If you use RICO there aren't any statutes of limitations either.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:01
|
|
|
There were a myriad of whistleblower cases that COULD have been prosecuted but DOJ took a knee until the clock ran out on them. I don't know, I guess we have fundamentally different views of the way this country works if you think Justice really wanted to get those crooks but just couldn't do it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:This isn't really true.. There were a multitude of actual crimes, not least of them fraud, that Holder's AG simply refused to prosecute. Also that Loretta Lynch's DOJ has already said that they will go after individuals.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Also that Loretta Lynch's DOJ has already said that they will go after individuals. Yeah, exactly. If it was Just Impossible Nothing Can Be Done You Don't Understand These Things, we wouldn't be seeing such a strong and immediate policy change. The "it was all legal, what can you do" mythology is the left wing version of Just World. Nobody got prosecuted, so it must all have been legal!
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:You realize Bernie voted multiple of times to keep dumping those trillions, right? And he's voted for how many big military projects for his home state? Yeah, when you really think about it voting for budgets and pork really are just as bad as supporting the invasion of Iraq.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
Aurubin posted:So is the House going to pass a spending bill or does the government shut down again? Nobody even knows this is about to happen. Nobody where I work has had any clue this is looming when I bring it up. It's what, a week away?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:She was incredibly effective as a senator as being a real workhorse -- that's well documented. quote:She also laid the foundations for rebuilding our reputation abroad as SoS. quote:She's consistently championed women's issues and has been better on HCR than Obama ever thought about being. I think, more than Sanders, she's understands governing in prose and I don't see him in that fashion.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:12
|
|
|
Sander's foreign policy is bad and it only manages to look good or passable when you compare it to the amazingly awful foreign policy of our political leaders and country. He's ok with blowing up Palestinians, he was okay with bombing the Balkans, etc. Even Bernie 'Bombman' Sanders wasn't on board with Iraq, which is going to go down as our worst foreign policy disaster since Vietnam, and I wish that we could stop pretending voting for that war was not a big deal.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:Also, seriously - anyone? Anyone want to try to sell me on Hillary? She's got a few supporters here, I should have to be begging for this opportunity to consider her in ways I haven't before.  Boy, have I got the thread for you! And everyone else who seems to not be aware that there is a thread that explicitly exists to keep the Hillary vs. Bernie slapfight quarantined elsewhere!
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
Its pretty clear to my eyes that the only way anything good gets passed in the next 10 years is by doing deals with the devil, either metaphorically (Boehner) or literally.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
There's an entire loving forum for hildawg v. bernie posting holy poo poo I thought something real other than the professor in Mississippi getting shot.ElegantFugue posted:Boy, have I got the thread for you! And everyone else who seems to not be aware that there is a thread that explicitly exists to keep the Hillary vs. Bernie slapfight quarantined elsewhere! what this dude said
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:18
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:What you actually want are examples of things the DOJ was prioritizing at the same time they weren't prioritizing the financial problems, not stuff from the last year or two. Go back further! There's actually no need to sell you; she's going to be the President and nothing can prevent this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
ElegantFugue posted:
I'm not talking about Bernie, nor am I asking questions Bernie supporters care about, not are there any Hillary supporters in that thread that would be willing to answer such questions. I'm not asking about her actual campaign, I'm not discussing her poll numbers or her favorability or her odds of winning or anything. And even then I posted there first and was completely ignored, while here there are people that clearly actually want to discuss it, maybe you should try to convince the Hillary supporters to go there instead of me? GlyphGryph fucked around with this message at 19:22 on Sep 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:20
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:This is a good thing, though not really much evidence of leadership. I don't doubt she's a skilled and hardworking politician, that bit is obvious. Did she fill many/any leadership roles while serving as a Senator? She specifically shied away from it and worked on projects that didn't get her lots of credit/name rec, but were vitally important. GlyphGryph posted:Did she do this through some really stellar appointments? By crafting a new narrative and inspiring the department to pivot and follow it? Or was it mostly be being competent and accomplishing the goals Obama set out for her to accomplish? Because, again, I'm not questioning her competence, I'm wondering about her ability to set the narrative and lead - things Obama was good at, which is why we actually got his Health Care Reform and not Hillary's. These are more or less the same questions. Basically the old addage is that you campaign in poetry and govern in prose. Hillary, in my mind, is much more comfortable with the wonk of running the government and achieving incremental progress than she is big, splashy "narrative things." But she is capable of it. In 1995 she went to Beijing as first lady and gave one of the most spirited defenses of women's rights of any national figure to that point, and she went much further in admonishing the Chinese on the issue than any American figure had publically done, let alone directly to them. As SoS she traveled, doggedly and extensively meeting with world leaders to reestablish ties. ElegantFugue posted:
We've been cleared by AA to talk about the primaries here, for those of us who don't want to wander into RSF.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
Maarek posted:Yeah, when you really think about it voting for budgets and pork really are just as bad as supporting the invasion of Iraq. At least Clinton says the invasion was wrong, has Bernie even been asked if he'd keep funding our assorted military larks including the dronings and poo poo he funded? Has he acknowledged his state's own big profits off it when condemning the military industrial complex? It feels like no matter how much people bitch about coronations no one seems to be interested in asking Bernie any actual questions about his kinda problematic votes. Has anyone even said 'yo you voted against the fuckin Brady Bill, what the hell dude'?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 11:41 |
|
|
Maarek posted:Another thing that could be a big deal: Bernie Sanders in charge of the DOJ instead of someone who has cement mixers full of hundreds being poured into their campaign from wall street. That could be cool, I guess. Are you suggesting he'd end the current profit prison scheme? Because he would run in to even more resistance (from both parties) than Obama did trying to close Gitmo. JT Jag posted:This presupposes that Hillary is more electable. I'd agree that she was, if: The problem with A is that the scandals are a case of "where there's smoke there's fire, and I know there's fire because I lit the match" with the GOP desperately trying to bury her because if they didn't she would completely crush them in the general election. In place of actual crimes they just keep throwing poo poo and then saying that because it smells so bad it must be her fault. I don't like Hilary but the scandals are all bullshit from a group terrified of another Clinton presidency. Trabisnikof posted:Do you really think Eric Holder was bought off by Wall Street? There's zero reason the DoJ couldn't have literally seized the bank that was willingly helping a drug cartel launder money. Instead they got a joke of a punishment when a normal person would be spending the rest of their life in a fedmax. The DoJ doesn't go after Wall Street people who are caught dead-to-rights for the same reason Patreus got a slap on the wrist instead of a cell next to Manning: people in power cover for each other. There was quite literally no possible way for Patreus or the cartel-helping banks to refute the evidence proving what they did and unless a lawyer could get the evidence tossed they'd have been up poo poo creek if the DoJ actually cared to come down on them with full force of the law. Holder might've been better than others on civil rights but he's a total piece of poo poo when it comes to Wall Street. I''m not asking for those people to be executed (though I wouldn't object to a judge ordering it) but people like Holder absolutely engage in some horse trading bullshit that lets people walk because they're sufficiently connected.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:31
|
|
