Nomi Prins Fingers Trump's Financial Arsonists: "Next Financial Crisis - Not If, But When"

Authored by Nomi Prins via TomDispatch.com,

There’s been lots of fire and fury around Washington lately, including a brief government shutdown. In Donald Trump’s White House, you can hardly keep up with the ongoing brouhahas from North Korea to Robert Mueller’s Russian investigation, while it already feels like ages since the celebratory mood over the vast corporate tax cuts Congress passed last year. But don’t be fooled: none of that is as important as what’s missing from the picture.  Like a disease, in the nation’s capital it’s often what you can’t see that will, in the end, hurt you most.

 

Amid a roaring stock market and a planet of upbeat CEOs, few are even thinking about the havoc that a multi-trillion-dollar financial system gone rogue could inflict upon global stability.  But watch out.  Even in the seemingly best of times, neglecting Wall Street is a dangerous idea. With a rag-tag Trumpian crew of ex-bankers and Goldman Sachs alumni as the only watchdogs in town, it’s time to focus, because one thing is clear: Donald Trump’s economic team is in the process of making the financial system combustible again.

Collectively, the biggest U.S. banks already have their get-out-out-of-jail-free cards and are now sitting on record profits after, not so long ago, triggering sweeping unemployment, wrecking countless lives, and elevating global instability.  (Not a single major bank CEO was given jail time for such acts.)  Still, let's not blame the dangers lurking at the heart of the financial system solely on the Trump doctrine of leaving banks alone. They should be shared by the Democrats who, under President Barack Obama, believed, and still believe, in the perfection of the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010.

While Dodd-Frank created important financial safeguards like the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, even stronger long-term banking reforms were left on the sidelines. Crucially, that law didn’t force banks to separate the deposits of everyday Americans from Wall Street’s complex derivatives transactions.  In other words, it didn’t resurrect the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 (axed in the Clinton era).

Wall Street is now thoroughly emboldened as the financial elite follows the mantra of Kelly Clarkston’s hit song: “What doesn’t kill you makes you stronger.” Since the crisis of 2007-2008, the Big Six U.S. banks -- JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley -- have seen the share price of their stocks significantly outpace those of the S&P 500 index as a whole.

Jamie Dimon, chairman and CEO of JPMorgan Chase, the nation’s largest bank (that’s paid $13 billion in settlements for various fraudulent acts), recently even pooh-poohed the chances of the Democratic Party in 2020, suggesting that it was about time its leaders let banks do whatever they wanted. As he told Maria Bartiromo, host of Fox Business’s Wall Street Week, “The thing about the Democrats is they will not have a chance, in my opinion. They don’t have a strong centrist, pro-business, pro-free enterprise person.”

This is a man who was basically gifted two banks, Bear Stearns and Washington Mutual, by the U.S. government during the financial crisis. That present came as his own company got cheap loans from the Federal Reserve, while clamoring for billions in bailout money that he swore it didn’t need.

Dimon can afford to be brazen. JPMorgan Chase is now the second most profitable company in the country. Why should he be worried about what might happen in another crisis, given that the Trump administration is in charge? With pro-business and pro-bailout thinking reigning supreme, what could go wrong?

Protect or Destroy?

There are, of course, supposed to be safeguards against freewheeling types like Dimon. In Washington, key regulatory bodies are tasked with keeping too-big-to-fail banks from wrecking the economy and committing financial crimes against the public. They include the Federal Reserve, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Treasury Department, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (an independent bureau of the Treasury), and most recently, under the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (an independent agency funded by the Federal Reserve).

These entities are now run by men whose only desire is to give Wall Street more latitude. Former Goldman Sachs partner, now treasury secretary, Steven Mnuchin caught the spirit of the moment with a selfie of his wife and him holding reams of newly printed money “like a couple of James Bond villains.” (After all, he was a Hollywood producer and even appeared in the Warren Beatty flick Rules Don’t Apply.) He’s making his mark on us, however, not by producing economic security, but by cheerleading for financial deregulation.

Despite the fact that the Republican platform in election 2016 endorsed reinstating the Glass-Steagall Act, Mnuchin made it clear that he has no intention of letting that happen. In a signal to every too-big-not-to-fail financial outfit around, he also released AIG from its regulatory chains. That’s the insurance company that was at the epicenter of the last financial crisis. By freeing AIG from being monitored by the Financial Services Oversight Board that he chairs, he’s left it and others like it free to repeat the same mistakes.

Elsewhere, having successfully spun through the revolving door from banking to Washington, Joseph Otting, a former colleague of Mnuchin’s, is now running the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). While he’s no household name, he was the CEO of OneWest (formerly, the failed California-based bank IndyMac). That’s the bank Mnuchin and his billionaire posse picked up on the cheap in 2009 before carrying out a vast set of foreclosures on the homes of ordinary Americans (including active-duty servicemen and -women) and reselling it for hundreds of millions of dollars in personal profits.

At the Federal Reserve, Trump’s selection for chairman, Jerome Powell (another Mnuchin pick), has repeatedly expressed his disinterest in bank regulations. To him, too-big-to-fail banks are a thing of the past. And to round out this heady crew, there’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) head Mick Mulvaney now also at the helm of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), whose very existence he’s mocked.

In time, we’ll come to a reckoning with this era of Trumpian finance. Meanwhile, however, the agenda of these men (and they are all men) could lead to a financial crisis of the first order. So here’s a little rundown on them: what drives them and how they are blindly taking the economy onto distinctly treacherous ground.

Joseph Otting, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency

The Office of the Comptroller is responsible for ensuring that banks operate in a secure and reasonable manner, provide equal access to their services, treat customers properly, and adhere to the laws of the land as well as federal regulations.

As for Joseph Otting, though the Senate confirmed him as the new head of the OCC in November, four key senators called him “highly unqualified for [the] job.”  He will run an agency whose history snakes back to the Civil War. Established by President Abraham Lincoln in 1863, it was meant to safeguard the solidity and viability of the banking system.  Its leader remains charged with preventing bank-caused financial crashes, not enabling them. 

Fast forward to the 1990s when Otting held a ranking position at Union Bank NA, overseeing its lending practices to medium-sized companies. From there he transitioned to U.S. Bancorp, where he was tasked with building its middle-market business (covering companies with $50 million to $1 billion in annual revenues) as part of that lender’s expansion in California.

In 2010, Otting was hired as CEO of OneWest (now owned by CIT Group).  During his time there with Mnuchin, OneWest foreclosed on about 36,000 people and was faced with sweeping allegations of abusive foreclosure practices for which it was fined $89 million. Otting received $10.5 million in an employment contract payout when terminated by CIT in 2015. As Senator Sherrod Brown tweeted all too accurately during his confirmation hearings in the Senate, "Joseph Otting is yet another bank exec who profited off the financial crisis who is being rewarded by the Trump Administration with a powerful job overseeing our nation’s banking system."

Like Trump and Mnuchin, Otting has never held public office. He is, however, an enthusiastic proponent of loosening lending regulations. Not only is he against reinstating Glass-Steagall, but he also wants to weaken the “Volcker Rule,” a part of the Dodd-Frank Act that was meant to place restrictions on various kinds of speculative transactions by banks that might not benefit their customers.

Jay Clayton, the Securities and Exchange Commission

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) was established by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1934, in the wake of the crash of 1929 and in the midst of the Great Depression. Its intention was to protect investors by certifying that the securities business operated in a fair, transparent, and legal manner.  Admittedly, its first head, Joseph Kennedy (President John F. Kennedy’s father), wasn’t exactly a beacon of virtue. He had helped raise contributions for Roosevelt’s election campaign even while under suspicion for alleged bootlegging and other illicit activities.

Since May 2017, the SEC has been run by Jay Clayton, a top Wall Street lawyer. Following law school, he eventually made partner at the elite legal firm Sullivan & Cromwell. After the 2008 financial crisis, Clayton was deeply involved in dealing with the companies that tanked as that crisis began. He advised Barclays during its acquisition of Lehman Brothers’ assets and then represented Bear Stearns when JPMorgan Chase acquired it.

In the three years before he became head of the SEC, Clayton represented eight of the 10 largest Wall Street banks, institutions that were then regularly being investigated and charged with securities violations by the very agency Clayton now heads. He and his wife happen to hold assets valued at between $12 million and $47 million in some of those very institutions.

Not surprisingly in this administration (or any other recent one), Clayton also has solid Goldman Sachs ties. On at least seven occasions between 2007 and 2014, he advised Goldman directly or represented its corporate clients in their initial public offerings. Recently, Goldman Sachs requested that the SEC release it from having to report its lobbying activities or payments because, it claimed, they didn’t make up a large enough percentage of its assets to be worth the bother. (Don’t be surprised when the agency agrees.) 

Clayton’s main accomplishment so far has been to significantly reduce oversight activities. SEC penalties, for instance, fell by 15.5% to $3.5 billion during the first year of the Trump administration.  The SEC also issued enforcement actions against only 62 public companies in 2017, a 33% decline from the previous year. Perhaps you won’t then be surprised to learn that its enforcement division has an estimated 100 unfilled investigative and supervisory positions, while it has also trimmed its wish list for new regulatory provisions. As for Dodd-Frank, Clayton insists he won’t “attack” it, but thinks it should be “looked” at.

Mick Mulvaney, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Office of Management and Budget

As a congressman from South Carolina, ultra-conservative Republican Mick Mulvaney, dubbed “Mick the Knife,” once even labeled himself a “right-wing nut job.” Chosen by President Trump in November 2016 to run the Office of Management and Budget, he was confirmed by Congress last February.

As he said during his confirmation hearings, “Each day, families across our nation make disciplined choices about how to spend their hard-earned money, and the federal government should exercise the same discretion that hard-working Americans do every day.” As soon as he was at the OMB, he took an axe to social programs that help everyday Americans. He was instrumental in creating the GOP tax plan that will add up to $1.5 trillion to the country’s debt in order to provide major tax breaks to corporations and wealthy individuals. He was also a key figure in selling the plan to the media.

When Richard Cordray resigned as head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in November, Trump promptly selected Mick the Knife for that role, undercutting the deputy director Cordray had appointed to the post. After much debate and a court order in his favor, Mulvaney grabbed a box of Dunkin' Donuts and headed over from his OMB office adjacent to the White House. So even though he’s got a new job, Mulvaney is never far from Trump’s reach.

The problem for the rest of us: Mulvaney loathes the CFPB, an agency he once called “a joke.” While he can’t unilaterally demolish it, he’s already obstructed its ability to enforce its government mandates. Soon after Trump appointed him, he imposed a 30-day freeze on hiring and similarly froze all further rule-making and regulatory actions.

In his latest effort to undermine American consumers, he’s working to defund the CFPB. He just sent the Federal Reserve a letter stating that, “for the second quarter of fiscal year 2018, the Bureau is requesting $0.” That doesn’t bode well for American consumers.

Jerome “Jay” Powell, Federal Reserve

Thanks to the Senate confirmation of his selection for chairman of the board, Donald Trump now owns the Fed, too. The former number two man under Janet Yellen, Jerome Powell will be running the Fed, come Monday morning, February 5th.

Established in 1913 during President Woodrow Wilson’s administration, the Fed’s official mission is to “promote a safe, sound, competitive, and accessible banking system.” In reality, it’s acted more like that system’s main drug dealer in recent years. In the wake of the 2007-2008 financial crisis, in addition to buying trillions of dollars in bonds (a strategy called “quantitative easing,” or QE), the Fed supplied four of the biggest Wall Street banks with an injection of $7.8 trillion in secret loans. The move was meant to stimulate the economy, but really, it coddled the banks.

Powell’s monetary policy undoubtedly won’t represent a startling change from that of previous head Janet Yellen, or her predecessor, Ben Bernanke. History shows that Powell has repeatedly voted for pumping financial markets with Federal Reserve funds and, despite displaying reservations about the practice of quantitative easing, he always voted in favor of it, too. What makes his nomination out of the ordinary, though, is that he’s a trained lawyer, not an economist.

Powell is assuming the helm at a time when deregulation is central to the White House’s economic and financial strategy.  Keep in mind that he will also have a role in choosing and guiding future Fed appointments. (At present, the Fed has the smallest number of sitting governors in its history.) The first such appointee, private equity investor Randal Quarles, already approved as the Fed’s vice chairman for supervision, is another major deregulator.

Powell will be able to steer banking system decisions in other ways.  In recent Senate testimony, he confirmed his deregulatory predisposition. In that vein, the Fed has already announced that it seeks to loosen the capital requirements big banks need to put behind their riskier assets and activities. This will, it claims, allow them to more freely make loans to Main Street, in case a decade of cheap money wasn’t enough of an incentive.

The Emperor Has No Rules

Nearly every regulatory institution in Trumpville tasked with monitoring the financial system is now run by someone who once profited from bending or breaking its rules. Historically, severe financial crises tend to erupt after periods of lax oversight and loose banking regulations. By filling America’s key institutions with representatives of just such negligence, Trump has effectively hired a team of financial arsonists.

Naturally, Wall Street views Trump’s chosen ones with glee. Amid the present financial euphoria of the stock market, big bank stock prices have soared.  But one thing is certain: when the next crisis comes, it will leave the last meltdown in the shade because our financial system is, at its core, unreformed and without adult supervision. Banks not only remain too big to fail but are still growing, while this government pushes policies guaranteed to put us all at risk again.

There’s a pattern to this: first, there’s a crash; then comes a period of remorse and talk of reform; and eventually comes the great forgetting. As time passes, markets rise, greed becomes good, and Wall Street begins to champion more deregulation. The government attracts deregulatory enthusiasts and then, of course, there’s another crash, millions suffer, and remorse returns.

Ominously, we’re now in the deregulation stage following the bull run. We know what comes next, just not when. Count on one thing: it won’t be pretty. 

Comments

infotechsailor brianshell Sat, 02/03/2018 - 04:05 Permalink

Nomi is a Bernie style communist. The banks were never the problem, it was the implied government backing off the mortgages by Fannie and Freddie, and FHA which encouraged the banks to lever up, the government took all the risk so that every idiot with a part time job and a pulse could get their free government sponsored house. 

Yet here come the communists blaming capitalism for damage caused by too much government interference. Peter schiff and Ron Paul have spoken extensively on this topic. 

In reply to by brianshell

ThirteenthFloor infotechsailor Sat, 02/03/2018 - 07:29 Permalink

Rob Paul wrote End The Fed, exactly about how central banks dictate and control governments, your comment is naive.  The president solely controls the ESF to protect US dollar for large corporate America.

Our very economy is built on centralization vis a vis the central bank and its ‘chartered members’ big six banks.  What kind of system is it where the CEO of GE can call the Chairman of the Treasury then he calls the president and gets a bailout ?  Fuck the communist statement, America is the biggest Corporacacy the world has ever known, and Trump has just the right crew to keep it this way.

Nomi’s book All The Presidents Bankers is enlightening, read before throwing darts.

In reply to by infotechsailor

swmnguy infotechsailor Sat, 02/03/2018 - 08:12 Permalink

You're rather conveniently forgetting the invention of derivatives, and the complete deregulation of the derivatives market via the Commodities Modernization Act of 2000.

I worked a couple of business conferences for major banks in 2009 and 2010.  Both hosted by TBTFs.  At one Q&A session with a guy who is now a Fed governor, some high-ranking bank executive tried out your argument, adding in some of the ridiculous Thomas DiLorenzo story that the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 caused the crisis by forcing the innocent banks to lend to poor non-white people.  The bankers laughed him out of the room.

Yes, Fannie and Freddie and the FHA played a nefarious role.  But the real driver of the crisis was the derivatives market.  The banks "knew" they had eliminated risk. Therefore it was 100% safe to lever up to the skies, well past 100:1 rather than the historical 10:1.  Because they had sliced and diced all the tranches of mortgages to the point the risk was so perfectly distributed, there was no risk.

At least, that's what all the banksters were saying in 2004-2008, when people like Prins and Michael Hudson and plenty of others were point out the approaching cataclysm.  In those days, we were all Communists with Bush Derangement Syndrome who didn't understand Capitalism, hated America, envied success; kind of like Bitcoin skeptics today but Commies.  And then it all collapsed.

Nope, it's just pure greed.  Capitalism does this, over and over and over again.  Oligarchs develop "the perfect scam" and denigrate all critics, then it collapses, then the Oligarchs get bailouts, the politicians pass cosmetic safeguards, then lather, rinse repeat.

It's past due for a repeat.  Best to save cash, pay off debt, buy the durable products of your choice, and stay nimble.  And when an Oligarch promises he's watching out for you, you're in a lot of trouble.

In reply to by infotechsailor

TrustbutVerify infotechsailor Sat, 02/03/2018 - 12:00 Permalink

InfotechSailor,

A bit understated but you are on target.  

Government regulators are in these financial institutions constantly.  In some they maintain offices.  Remember the "ownership society?"  Over time classical lending standards were abandoned, often with open encouragement, and even coercion, by government.  Consider, too, if various banks weren't 
"in the game" making loans, buying selling, etc., stock analysts could and would rate their stocks lower.  "Not good for shareholders!"  

Everyone drank the kool-aid.  Well, 99.9%.  Anyone, like Schiff and a few others, warned against danger they were laughed at.  I remember specifically Schiff being essentially laughed at on CNBC.  

Here's the trick.  Everything can rock along for a long time, making the doomsayers (rationalists) look stupid.  But when the doomsayers are right they are VERY RIGHT.  None of what they speak is about worrying about a simple 10 or 15% correction.  

What does anyone think the movie, "The Big Short," was about?  

Kyle Bass recommended the book, "All the Devils are Here."  Its much more comprehensive than the almost hipsterish, though exciting, "The Big Short," though a tougher read.  

In reply to by infotechsailor

new game brianshell Sat, 02/03/2018 - 04:48 Permalink

divide the country into two groups: righteous law followers and crooked law breakers. in a land governed by law it is the law breakers that are getting ahead. this crosses all demographic lines, from wall street to trailer trash. whether it be wall street scum or bums, it is becoming the majority that is forced to break the law to survive or get ahead. game the neighbor, because is in the end a game of survival as the fittest lower their standards til their are no standards except the rule of the jungle. civilized, my ass, just civilized law breakers ruling over us...

In reply to by brianshell

earleflorida brianshell Sat, 02/03/2018 - 11:56 Permalink

you didn't read it.

did you!

Trump is all about the Aristocrats (here and abroad)!

Naomi makes that perfectly clear.

Ps. Hillary was not to be? She was too much a 'War Hawk'. The world doesn't need a (WWIII) war with Russia and China?

Ps2: Trump is backed 100% by the Jewish Money-changers (World Wars was their thing in the 19th & 20th centuries $$$ ) [and], a ?WWIII! wouldn't bode well in the 21st c.. [Again], it was aOK in the lart two centuries,... but the NWOs matrix is pretty much max-out [?]!

Great read Naomi :)

In reply to by brianshell

crazzziecanuck earleflorida Sat, 02/03/2018 - 12:09 Permalink

I think your giving Trump too much credit.  This is a man that epitomizes short-term naked thinking.  Sure, he's your friend now, but he'll turn on a dime and drive a dagger into your back for a nickel.

Just like Obama.  Trump is just Obama 2016, but for the Right.  A larger than life figure promising changing a corrupt system.  Neither have any intention of doing so, and they'd likely be shot if they tried.  The political system filters out people of morals and ethics.  That's how you end up with a choice between vainglorious and corrupt figures such as Clinton and Trump.   The system demands it.  It cannot properly function without it.

Obama told the Left that things were futile.  They're doing the same with the Right in 2016.  Instead of getting rid of democracy with a police truncheon, water cannons and strategic disappearances of dissidents, they'll just discourage the majority from voting.  The system needs people to believe that voting changes nothing in terms of policy.

In reply to by earleflorida

swmnguy Jumanji1959 Sat, 02/03/2018 - 08:21 Permalink

Wow.  Not one Republican?  Interesting list you got there.

If you think the Oligarchy is all from one party, you've been chumped and you'll find out soon enough.  The looting of America is thoroughly bipartisan, so actually non-partisan, affair. 

The current age of Financial looting was kicked off by the Bill Clinton Administration, specifically Bob Rubin, working hand in glove with the Republican Congress to repeal Glass-Steagal, and pass the Commodities Modernization Act in 2000.  Admirably bi-partisan, if you admire such things.

Dodd-Frank was the Band-Aid applied to the sucking chest wound to give cover for the diversion of the US Treasury through Wall Street.  Republicans let Democrats take the lead on that, so they could turn it into a partisan issue when that became convenient, but the Kabuki arrangement was agreed upon by all.

And now the current batch of Oligarchs is telling us the same story they told us in 2000-2007, that we just need to get rid of the mean rules that are keeping the benevolent Oligarchs from helping us all get as rich as they are.

The hilarious thing is how far the Democrats will go to avoid addressing the obvious flaws in our version of Corporate Finance Capitalism which keep repeating themselves over and over and over again.  As the American people see the issue more and more clearly, it forces the Democrats to more and more ridiculous lengths to avoid mentioning the elephant in the room.  The Republicans like the elephant in the room and think it's good and that what's going to happen soon enough is just fine because they think they'll make out like bandits on the next leg of the collapse and be able to blame it on everyone else while they rake in the loot and their gullible loyalists will fall for it as they always do.  They're probably correct, too.

Having heard this story before, and not so long ago, I know how it ends.  You sound like you'll be surprised, so I won't spoil it for you.

In reply to by Jumanji1959

MK ULTRA Alpha nailGun Sat, 02/03/2018 - 03:05 Permalink

Should we include Obama as one of the reasons? It looks like he was an ARSONIST.

Obama was the arsonist and Trump inherited massive government debt and deficits. Did Obama run up a $10 trillion debt in eight years? That's over a trillion dollars per year and taxes were raised and every kind of fee went up, and greater control, restrictions, and regulations in our history, were used to punish the American people in Obama's America.

We lost more of our civil rights and constitutional protections under Obama. The government blatantly broke the law in the new normal anything goes culture being promoted to replace our values. Obama fostered an atmosphere of corruption and lawlessness.

Obama's wife says all we have left is hope, well the wealthy neoliberal elite, the army of wealthy networked homosexuals and pedos stole the money and the hope.

We survived Obama, and these people who wanted Clinton, they want to kill us now. When the mask came off, the real agenda was exposed.

This author was one of the Jews on Wall Street at the time of the huge derivative fraud which wiped out middle class housing. She worked for Goldman and now she preaches to us? She's an Eastern European Jew, it's either Greenspan and Stockman wanting to take our social security, the last pot of wealth($3 trillion) to be stolen or we're misled by armies of an inbred species with a history of destroying the host species. She's blaming Trump for what she helped do to us.

In reply to by nailGun

MK ULTRA Alpha Singelguy Sat, 02/03/2018 - 11:04 Permalink

The $3 trillion in "worthless IOU's" pay each month, that's right, the Social Security pays out from the money it makes off of those IOU's. Since I am a senior, I spend more time studying about it.

The social security holds a reserve of $3 trillion which is just like a US government bond, which is paid no matter what.

 
The propaganda about the short falls etc. is propaganda. Keep paying in like you're suppose to, and quit trying to join the band wagon of those wanting to destroy it.

How old are you? and how many more years will you have to pay in to social security?

In reply to by Singelguy

JRobby BigCumulusClouds Sat, 02/03/2018 - 07:34 Permalink

Agreed. Nice profile on all of the un-punished psychopaths. There are plenty more. Mnuchin has a particular "evil Poindexter" look about him.

Let's face it, the people that knew how to run banks instead of casinos have been dead for years.

You can run 100 wood chippers for weeks and put the whole lot of them through them world wide but the system will still collapse.

In reply to by BigCumulusClouds

lew1024 zorba THE GREEK Fri, 02/02/2018 - 22:50 Permalink

There issue isn't whether there will be a financial crash, so blame Trump, the issue is whether anyone could avoid a financial crash, or even delay it.

Implementing controls for systems is generally challenging, the more complex, the more challenging.  The higher the necessary reliability, the more challenging.

If systems are not designed to be failsafe and extensively tested under real world operating conditions, they will fail. Always.

Was the financial system so designed? No? QED.

There is no technology allowing control of open, evolving complex systems.

Is the financial system open, evolving and complex? Yes? QED again, independently.

In reply to by zorba THE GREEK

Laowei Gweilo lew1024 Fri, 02/02/2018 - 23:03 Permalink

Anyone that could influence the election that way would not be interested in crashing the market ...

 

Moreover, it says: 'hey the anger that got Trump elected isn't real -- we tricked the system to make him our fall guy'

Except that if that happens, all it's going to do is going to turn voters EVEN MORE away from both DEMS and REPS to someone even more anti-government.

 

There's no conspiracy here:

Trump won cuz people are fed up.

The market will crash because it was too 'Fed' up.

 

The simplest explanation is most often the real one, and this is one case where you _don't_ need an Illuminati Soros fake moon landing inside job theory to explain it o.0 

In reply to by lew1024

hxc lew1024 Fri, 02/02/2018 - 23:04 Permalink

Nomi Prins is a FAKE libertarian and fake fellow traveller of free-marketeers and Austrian economics. I've seen her her present her leftist CB-loving pseudo-libertarian trash at a conference in my hometown and she got skewered by the average pissed off right wingers here. Called her a fucking Goldman shill and NWO type after tearing apart her crap arguments.

Tribal shill trash and not on our side.

In reply to by lew1024

tion Mustafa Kemal Sat, 02/03/2018 - 00:00 Permalink

Standards for thee but not for she?

The main premise is highly fallacious.  

 

>Donald Trump’s economic team is in the process of making the financial system combustible again.

>These entities are now run by men whose only desire is to give Wall Street more latitude.

>In time, we’ll come to a reckoning with this era of Trumpian finance.

 

Where the fuck has this lady been hiding the last ten years? Under a rock? No, she hasn't been.

 

>As he said during his confirmation hearings, “Each day, families across our nation make disciplined choices about how to spend their hard-earned money, and the federal government should exercise the same discretion that hard-working Americans do every day.” As soon as he was at the OMB, he took an axe to social programs that help everyday Americans. He was instrumental in creating the GOP tax plan that will add up to $1.5 trillion to the country’s debt in order to provide major tax breaks to corporations and wealthy individuals. He was also a key figure in selling the plan to the media.

 

The fuck is she even trying to say here?  It's almost like she can't tell the difference between.... letting people keep their own hard earned money and spending it as they wish, and having the government steal their hard-earned money to pay for 'social programs that help everyday Americans.' 

Is Nomi too retarded to be able to tell the difference between a disciplined hard worker and a social program junkie? No, no she is not retarded.

 

Does Nomi think the government should fund its wanton excesses and army of mostly worthless parasitic government workers by maximizing how much it steals from productive businesses?

 

Nomi has not been living under a rock, Nomi is not retarded, and Nomi is not a libertarian. 

File this one in the 'Potential Snake in the Grass' folder.

 

In reply to by Mustafa Kemal

Mustafa Kemal tion Sat, 02/03/2018 - 01:03 Permalink

 

"Standards for thee but not for she?

The main premise is highly fallacious.  

 

>Donald Trump’s economic team is in the process of making the financial system combustible again.

>These entities are now run by men whose only desire is to give Wall Street more latitude.

>In time, we’ll come to a reckoning with this era of Trumpian finance.

 

Where the fuck has this lady been hiding the last ten years? Under a rock? No, she hasn't been."

Indeed she has not been.  I thought she supported these assertions rather well.  But your point with regards to adhominens? 

 

In reply to by tion

tion Mustafa Kemal Sat, 02/03/2018 - 14:55 Permalink

With regards to your ad hominem comment, you are not only appealing to the fallacy fallacy, but you are holding the commenter to a standard of logic that Nomi fails to meet.  Even if the commenter were deigning to be engaging in logical debate, an ad hominem attack is perhaps the least insidious of all fallacies.

 

What exactly were her assertions?  Were there unspoken assertions?  Did the fact presented actually support these assertions, or were they used as rhetorical manipulation?  Did you actually click on the links 'supporting' her assertions?  How many times does Nomi directly contradict herself in this article?  

 

Generally, it is a terrible mistake to ever engage in debate with Alinskyists on rhetorical grounds, as only a dialectical approach can suffice with these types, who use facts and perversion of the meanings of things to sell lies.

In reply to by Mustafa Kemal

holdbuysell Mustafa Kemal Sat, 02/03/2018 - 00:05 Permalink

Yes. This:

"In time, we’ll come to a reckoning with this era of Trumpian finance."

This is NOT a Trump phenomenon. Prins showed her liberal card in this callout, as other admins, on both faux aisles bailed out the precious banks prior to Trump.

Including Obama.

This is not a defense of Trump, but a statement that the banks run the USA. Full Stop.

Very disappointed, Nomi.

In reply to by Mustafa Kemal

Mustafa Kemal holdbuysell Sat, 02/03/2018 - 00:59 Permalink

"

Yes. This:

"In time, we’ll come to a reckoning with this era of Trumpian finance."

This is NOT a Trump phenomenon. Prins showed her liberal card in this callout, as other admins, on both faux aisles bailed out the precious banks prior to Trump.

Including Obama."

She never said it was a Trump phenomina. She has  already documented just what you said. But we are NOW, and it is now the Trump era. 

In reply to by holdbuysell