The Daily Kos published the post Hillary Clinton Tells Wall Street She Believes Anti-Wall Street Rhetoric ‘Foolish’ on Dec 22, 2013.

According to a piece in Politico Magazine former Secretary of State and likely 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had some harsh words related to progressives in her $400,000 speeches for Goldman Sachs and friends. Clinton decided to use her speaking opportunity before the super rich to attack those criticizing Wall Street and its numerous criminal practices.
.
.
.
And now Hillary is signaling a return to the good old days for Wall Street after taking $400,000 of their money. Can we afford a second Clinton Crash?

Why would I post this now?  Well, it seems like the Democrats who are promoting Hillary Clinton for President in 2016 seem to have an amazing stroke of amnesia when it comes to understanding who Hillary Clinton is.  If I can leave some hints on my blog that may jar these people’s memories back to life, then I will feel like I have accomplished something.

We can’t even get the Obama administration to prosecute these Wall Street crooks when they are handed evidence, on a silver platter, of the criminal behavior of these people.  See my previous post The DOJ and the SEC Spurn their Ace in the Hole: Richard Bowen.

As the topic of this current post shows, we certainly have no reason to expect better from Hillary Clinton.

Talking Points Memo has the article Cruz Criticizes Wife’s Firm, Goldman Sachs, Over ‘Crony Capitalism’ (VIDEO).

Presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) on Tuesday evening criticized the “crony capitalism” at Goldman Sachs, where his wife is(sic) employed.

Could it possibly be that even Raphael Edward (Ted) Cruz is better on this topic than Hillary Clinton?  He doesn’t go so far as to even hint at the fraud that these companies’ top executives have committed, but at least he recognizes that these companies do cause problems and need to be down-sized.

Politicus USA has the article A Day After Calling For The ACA’s Repeal, Ted Cruz Is Signing Up For Obamacare.

Sen. Cruz can’t lie his way out of the delicious irony that one day after he vowed to get rid of Obamacare, he now has to sign up for it.

When I read a headline like this yesterday, I didn’t bother to check it out.  I figured it had to be a satire, but this certainly seems like it could be true.  The reason that Raphael Edward (Ted) Cruz can make such devastating claims about Obamacare seems to stem from the fact that he makes things up (lies).

Senator Elizabeth Warren has posted the video on YouTube.

Senator Elizabeth Warren’s Q&A at a March 24, 2014 HELP Committee Hearing titled “Continuing America’s Leadership: Advancing Research and Development for Patients.” More information about the hearing is available at Full Committee Hearing – Continuing America’s Leadership: Advancing Research and Development for Patients

On Facebook, Senator Warren posted the following introduction:

It’s time for Congress to stop just talking about increasing NIH funding, and start doing something about it. Watch today’s HELP Committee hearing with four medical innovation experts, explaining what NIH funding does for our health, our economy, and our future.

Of course Facebook is up to its old tricks of pretending the video does not come from YouTube. This pretense is the epitome of unfair use, and they ought to be ashamed of themselves. At least I have a higher standard of ethics.

The obvious question seems to be, “Why do the Republicans hate America so much?” They seem to be doing everything they can to knock us out of our current preeminent position in the world.

New Economic perspectives has the article The DOJ and the SEC Spurn their Ace in the Hole: Richard Bowen. This is the second part of a three part series by William K. Black. I posted about the first part in The Lessons Richard Bowen’s FCIC Testimony Should Have Taught the Nation.

To give you a sense of the dereliction of duty of Obama’s Department of Justice, I give you the following excerpt from the latest Black article:

Competent and vigorous government financial regulators are typically superior witnesses compared to whistleblowers.  They are rarely subject to similar damaging psychological pressures.  They have nice titles and expertise in their fields.  They have no personal axe to grind.

In the savings and loan debacle (less than one-hundredth the size of the current crisis) our agency, the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) made over 30,000 criminal referrals.  The referrals produced over 1,000 felony convictions in cases designated as “major” by DOJ.  The cases that were prosecuted were hyper-prioritized through the “Top 100” process.  We worked closely with the FBI to prioritize the worst 100 fraud schemes.  That represented slightly over 300 S&Ls and 600 individuals.  They were nearly all prosecuted and despite having the best criminal defense lawyers in the world we achieved a 90% conviction rate.  The ability of the regulators to take the lead in successfully prioritizing cases for prosecution is one of the collateral advantages of superb regulatory criminal referrals.

Compare this record to the zero, yes I said zero, criminal referrals in the aftermath of the latest crisis.

See also the another post on my blog Whistleblower from Citi Bank asking WHY DOJ is not acting on his evidence!

If you are as incensed as I am about the failure to prosecute, then I don’t know how you could possibly vote for Hillary Clinton for dog catcher, let alone President.  These crooks are Hillary’s pals.  She has never called for their prosecution.  If a similar crisis occurred during her Presidency, you can bet she would act with as much venality as the Obama administration has acted.

Bloomberg News has the video Was There Wrongdoing Done in the Financial Crisis?

Former Citigroup Chief Underwriter for Consumer Lending Richard Bowen discusses Wall Street whistle blowing and the financial crisis. He speaks on “Market Makers.” (Source: Bloomberg)

Richard Bowen was the subject of my previous post The Lessons Richard Bowen’s FCIC Testimony Should Have Taught the Nation.

I received an email about this news story because of a petition I signed, “DOJ: File criminal charges of fraud against bank officers named in evidence, before the statute of limitations expires this year.”.

Our goal is to reach 1,000 signatures and we need more support. You can read more and sign the petition here

I think this is a very important issue that only the grass roots can make happen. Sign the petition. Forward information about the petition. Post it on Facebook. Tweet about it. Pester your politicians about it.

You can refer back to a comment on this blog where the petitioner asked for signatures.

Bernie Sanders has this post about the deficit on his Facebook page.

Stop, please stop talking about contributing to deficit reduction. We need to tax these millionaires and billionaires so that they won’t keep using their money to create the next financial bubble and collapse. We tax them so that we can spend the money usefully on infrastructure and investment in the country’s future without reducing the deficit one bit. Your concentration on the deficit is starting to get annoying, since I know, and Stephanie Kelton knows that you know better.

Even the Republicans who are willing to increase the deficit to no end in order to fight the next war know better than this.

Senator Ed Markey has posted the article Sen. Markey & Rep. Blumenauer Introduce Bicameral Legislation to Cut $100 Billion from Wasteful Nuclear Weapons Budget on his Senate web site.

He has posted the following comments and summary on Facebook.

We are robbing America’s future to pay for unneeded weapons of the past. As we debate the budget & Republicans rally around devastating cuts to Medicare, Head Start and investments in research and science, it makes no sense to fund a bloated nuclear arsenal that does nothing to keep our nation safe in the 21st century. We should cure disease, not create new instruments of death. We should fund education, not annihilation. Read more about my new bill to cut $100 Billion from wasteful nuclear weapons budget

Liking his Facebook post, and adding supportive comments will let Senator Markey know that you appreciate his efforts in Congress, and you appreciate his new found activism on social media. I think using 21^st century technology to communicate with us voters is a brilliant strategy for overcoming the media control by the oligarchs.

Markey’s comment that “We are robbing America’s future” in no way contradicts my statements that in a country that is sovereign in its own fiat currency, the government will never run out of money. What it can use up is resources and workers. We ought not to waste those things on useless weapons, or anything useless.

The Hill has the article Sanders offers infrastructure amendment to budget.

Sanders, the ranking member of the Budget Committee, said the costs of his proposal would be offset by closing “huge” corporate tax loopholes.

When will progressives admit what even Republicans know?  Increased government spending in one area does not need to be offset by decreases elsewhere.  While closing tax loopholes is a commendable idea, it has nothing to do with offsetting other spending.

A country that is sovereign in its own fiat currency will never run out of money.  When the Republicans want to go to war without “paying” for it, that is a tacit admission that they agree with my analysis of fiat currency.

It is way past time to stop making amendments that mix two unrelated topics.  The side topic only detracts from the main topic.  It gives the opposition another avenue of attack that we do not need to provide.  On top of which this talk of offsetting spending only gives credence to a total myth that the Republicans and their oligarchic patrons want us little people to believe.

Furthermore, it gives credence to the idea that we need to increase taxes on the ultra-rich as a way of paying for government spending, when the real reason for increasing taxes is to prevent the ultra-rich from creating financial bubbles.  We are the ones that will drown when the bubble breaks.  Taking this money out of the hands of the ultra-rich by raising taxes on them is a way of protecting ourselves from the harm that this excess wealth will cause the country (and is causing the country).  The ultra-rich could avoid high taxes if they used their wealth for good purposes like raising income levels for the wage earners.  When they insist on using it to create financial havoc, then drastic actions need to be taken.

By the way, thanks to Mo Bracken for posting this on Facebook.