Fox News Blames Elizabeth Warren for Financial Crisis

Fox News Blames Elizabeth Warren for Financial Crisis


fox news also bizarrely claiming that
elizabeth warren is responsible for the financial crisis this is after remember
we talked about her very basic question on the senate banking committee where
she just ast uh… wendy what have you prosecuted
banks when if you brought big banks the trial has too big to fail become too big
for trial the video enviro almost a million uh… almost eleven million
views and paladin surpass that soon is just a few seconds of that to remind
you the video we’re talking about take a look at this so the question i really want is about how tough you are about how much leverage you really have in these settlements and
what i’d like to know is tell me a little bit about the last
few times you’ve taken the biggest financial institutions on wall street all the way to a trial rights issue basically got no answer she
gets around about answers now conservatives are not at all happy about
that uh… i don’t even know it to call it
that very basic set of questions and right wing activist who’s also
foxnews contributor eric erickson had a really weird response to the
elizabeth warren video he wrote an op ed called is a if elizabeth warren wants
the labeling for the financial mess she can look what sense does this make and he says
that warren isn’t advocate of regulations which cause the financial crisis in the
first place in the she wants to prevent lawsuits against wall street bank he says the
rich are irony of elizabeth worn asking her question to these regulators whose
ranks she would have joined but for a republican effort to block renomination
prior to her senate run is that she’s an advocate of increasing the very
regulations that contributed to the financial meltdown and that prevents suits against wall
street bags after all wall street was just complying with
washington’s orders if she wants a scalp she should look in the mir so first of
all is is bring the word scalp in there are
reference to the city are even want to call it controversy but the discussion around what at one point was her
believed uh… partial native american heritage
is seems a little and we would just wouldn’t be music is fox but remember i wouldn’t be surprised but the word
scalp is not a word that would really naturally just show up in things as
elizabeth warren that suspect in the first of all yeah are when was the last
time you heard anyone use that word he has yakking about selling tickets yet it
doesn’t make any sense to me and than the reality fantasy world living is very very fun apparently over on the
right wing at this point there’s a long history of blaming the people trying to fix the
mess by projecting their owned guilt onto the
fixtures and really we’ve seen projection more
broadly beyond just on blame but this projection of all types from the right over the last few years
heavenly yeah and correct me if i’m wrong but one
of the major issues with uh… with the crisis we encountered was a lack of regulating and of course
there dot i mean this it was a free for all loans any terms loans that can just absolutley
not be payoff t-pain interest for five years and yet zero ac witty i mean it’s
just did the idea that it’s that delivers elizabeth warren is the problem
is just unbelievable ridiculous

96 Replies to “Fox News Blames Elizabeth Warren for Financial Crisis

  1. When conservatives say that regulations caused the financial crisis, always follow up by asking them which one. Specifically. 99.999% of the time they cant name one, and if they do, its always the usual, Fannie and Freddie(which only accounted for 5% of total losses) or the Community reinvestment act from like the 1970s. LOL

  2. With something like this you almost have wonder if both the GOP and Faux realize how badly they've been screwing up, and are now just trolling to get a rise out of people. It's hard to think that anyone with half an IQ point wouldn't know the truth by now.

  3. I remember when Deregulation was on the news every night and the big push from conservative Republicans to enact these bills which got rid of regulations; the very same regulations that kept the US from having a single financial bubble from occurring between 1945 and the early 1980s. In other words, the huge deficits and financial bubbles started right when Deregulation started and blaming the rescinded regulations for the financial problems is asinine and ignorant of history.

  4. … and then you ask why did the Community Reinvestment Act not collapse within the first or second generation of mortgages that they approved…

  5. Over the last 30 years our economy has been incredibly deregulated, especially in the financial sector. But no, its Elizabeth Warren and her gang of jackbooted regulators enforcing regulations that haven't existed for decades. Not to mention that banks basically control our government.
    Why would a bank-controlled government implement regulations that would "harm" the banks? Doesn't make much sense does it.

  6. No regulation mean no law so they can do what the shit they want without fear get jail. This what happen to the financial crisis 2007-2008.

  7. Well, they have plenty of people that buy into this propaganda. Remember, Limbaugh has been popular for well over a decade. The question is this: do they have enough to win any elections outside of gerrymandered districts. Even in down home Kentucky a cute lil actress may take the Minority Leader's seat, but he's more worried about primary voters who think Obama is secret gay married to an Islamist member of the Politburo, and helping him enrich uranium.

  8. Oh, they don't care that they don't know which regulations caused the crisis, nor do they generally care that they can't name which regulations are bad in general. They will just spew the line about how it "stifles entrepreneurial freedom" and how "the economy only prospers when business is totally free."

    It's absolute hogwash with decades upon decades of history to refute it (Crash of 1929, anyone?) but they don't care because they aren't thinking anything through that much.

  9. What I'd like to see is this: A company is hiding 800B, they get a fine of 3.2T because of a 4X policy rule. The regulator is fined 800B that they failed to discover

  10. Yes, David, you're very intuitive [RE: "scalp"], but Erick Erickson? Going after a sub-parasitic hack? Beneath you. At least wait til it hits the spin cycle and is rehashed on the Hill.

  11. GO GET THE ASSHOLES, LIZ!! She is doing EVERYTHING we want her to do and I hope She keeps going! About time someone stood up the Reich Wing Nazi's AND the Big bully bankers!! GOOD FOR HER!

  12. These arguments about regulation being too much or too little is really ridiculous. It doesn't revolve around a slider that goes from 0% to 100% regulation. You have to look at it case by case to find out what is, and is not, necessary.
    For instance, its good that the FDA regulates over in addition to labeling so we know what's in our food. However, the FDA also has a regulation that forces livestock to have antibiotics, even in tight quarters, which may be leading to stronger disease mutations.

  13. Why the hell does anybody still watch ANY of that politically charged bullshit that is our national news. It's not just fox, pretty much all networks seem to have some stupidly overt agendas these days. In picking NBC, CNN, FOX, or whatever other network our there you watch you're just choosing which type of propaganda you want to see. It's all shit, just from a couple different cows.

  14. Yet again more bullshit from Fox. The banks crashed due to lack of regulation. The reason the Canadian banks were not affected in the crash that happened in America is because the banks in Canada are heavily regulated.

  15. I want to spend an afternoon sitting at a table with her and just listen. I get completely wrapped in whatever she is saying. Warren needs to do her thing in the senate, and when she's done, run for president.

  16. "following Washington's orders"

    And those orders would be…? Are they saying that ANTI-REDLINING REGULATIONS, which were all but NEUTERED by the late 90s and early 2000s, were partially responsible for "forcing banks to give bad loans"? I mean, is there ANY evidence whatsoever that some regulator actually told look over execs shoulders and told big banks, "Oh, look at this! You're not giving enough subprime loans. Increase it or else!"?

    This is such clownish logic. OF COURSE lack of effecti

  17. ve regulation of Wall St. caused the crash, for the most part. Sure, Fannie and Freddie LOWERING THEIR STANDARDS for securitization helped, but THE BANKS THEMSELVES were the ones who started subprime in the first place! They saw it as a REAL EASY WAY TO "MAKE LOTS OF EXTRA PROFITS." It was a BRAND NEW MARKET WAITING TO BE SQUEEZED.

    All you need to know can be found in the book "All the Devils Are Here." 2 brilliant NYTimes journalists INTERVIEWED LOADS OF EXECS and mid-level managers

  18. FROM THOSE BIG BANKS AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, and they essentially tell all! It gives you an exclusive, inside look into HOW THE BANKS CAME TO REALLY GET INTO THAT BUSINESS. NONE of the execs have said (at least not PUBLICLY), "I felt forced by federal regulators into giving bad loans I didn't want to." NO ONE!

    So where do they get this crap? They seem to only look at OLD-ASS SHIT like the CRA from the late 1970s or Andrew Cuomo's "hardline ruling for HUD" and say, "Aha! The banks WERE

  19. required to give bad loans." But no CLEAR PROOF… And the idea that REGULATION ITSELF "caused a financial crisis" is THE GOOFIEST NOTION EVER! Since when does REINING IN bad behavior from the banks and making sure they don't take too many risks CAUSE A MELTDOWN?

    The "smart" banking execs who WERE ABLE TO ENGINEER SUCH A PROFITABLE SUBPRIME INDUSTRY FOR OVER A DECADE somehow COULD NOT HAVE FOUND WAYS AROUND "subprime regulation" if it actually DID have much of an impact?? gimme a break

  20. Hell, BEFORE major banking regulation (esp. the 1700s and 1800s), there were LOADS of financial disasters nationwide! Bank panics happened quite frequently, in fact. For all the bitching about the Fed, the fact of the matter is that, at most, TWO huge financial crises happened under their watch, and BOTH OF THOSE WERE B/C THE FED DID TOO LITTLE TOO LATE AND REFUSED TO PROPERLY REGULATE.

  21. Elizabeth Warren is the problem? What planet do these people live on? Talk about crazy, psycho talk, that is it. That is beyond absurd. It was the repealing of the Glass/Steagal act that broke down the Chinese firewall between mortgage and commercial bankers and banks that caused this huge mess. But you will hear all the right wingers claim that it was the CRA that caused big banks to sell worthless securities that they said were triple AAA rated. Seriously these people are just plain crazy.

  22. "Elizabeth Warren is the problem? What planet do these people live on?";
    It's a panic response, they've no one else to target and Elizabeth is currently in the lime light causing her to be a prime target, remember, facts don't matter to fox.

  23. Normal person question: when was the last time you took a big bank to trial?
    Paniced responder: when… its all your fault, thats when.

  24. I think the right is afraid of her and what she signifies.If the general public gets exposed to her aims there may be a public outcry for prosecution of the responsible parties. I have seen no coverage of her actions in mainstream media.I wonder if the lack of coverage is deliberate.

  25. Don't forget the Commodities Futures Modernization Act which removed all oversight from small mortgage companies like country wide the originated half of the liars loans that went belly up in 07'. None of those mortgage companies were bound by the CRA at all, and were going WELL beyond the requirements under the CRA by giving out loans with no credit check and no money down!

  26. except that deregulation of the banking industy never happened, we got way more regulation. we got deregulation of the airlines and the government owned phone monopoly was ended. but no deregulation of banks and financial businesses. (and no regulations have ever prevented "financial bubbles" )

  27. Erick Erickson is full of shit. Elizabeth Warren is to blame for trying to hold those who screwed our economy into the toilet, accountable. Great video.

  28. In all fairness the regulations didn't completely remove all bubbles, but the bubbles were far less frequent and FAR less severe.

    There is a great movie called inside job that details this well. Everyone should watch it.

  29. I think you are living in a bubble Hallorand if you truely believe this.

    Watch a movie called Inside Job. It's on netflix.

  30. So what regulations is he talking about??? Just going to skip his main point and delve into why he said scalp… So many liberals are suffering from cognitive dissonance about how inept and corrupt the federal government is… Time for you progressives to realize you are supporting a corportized monster when you continually fund the federal gov. Time for you good hearted liberals to act locally.

  31. Wait, this guy says she would PREVENT lawsuits? She practically said in plain freaking English with that questioning that our government isn't doing ENOUGH to bring those responsible for causing this to justice.
    What goddamn drug was this "contributor" smoking, cause I don't think anyone wants any of that.

  32. no, regulation of prices is socialism, that causes higher prices and lower quality and quantity , (you obviously don't care that it is slavery) the financial collapse was caused by socialism, as an excuse for more socialism. just like the great depression.

  33. You're a dense fucktard. I watched the video and he addressed a couple things that were no longer regulated, but you're too stupid to understand English so you must have missed it. You're a good example as to why YouTube comments are a joke and a waste of time.

  34. The banks were not only pushed under threat of lawsuit, but actively subsidized to give out sub-prime loans like lollipops. Clinton forced Fannie and Freddie to securitize 45% of all sub-prime loans in the country, freeing up the banks to give out even more, and the Riegle Act created the Community Redevelopment Financial Institutions Fund, which pumped taxpayer money directly into the banks. As for Reagan, the economy was in a limping, zombie-like state before he came along.

  35. What was packaged into the derivatives and bundles which were rated AAA by the corrupt ratings agencies? Sub-prime loans, a creation of government policy. The banks were pushed under threat of lawsuit and subsidized to lend heavily to "under-served" communities. How can you expect the housing market to not become artificially inflated with the government spending over a decade pumping money into it, subsidizing the banks?

  36. You have it backwards good sir. Complete lack of regulation caused both collapses you mention.

    Regulation of prices is actually a part of communism, which is different than socialism, and no where that I am aware of are prices regulated by the government in the market. Perhaps you could give me some examples of what you are talking about?

  37. Dont be angery buddy, its ok to be wrong. I liked what Elizebeth Warren said on that hearing about how the regulators are not perusing trial for sociopathic WS corporations (however she is a two party politician and therefore is compromised). The only thing is though, that the lobbyist are writing the laws and there is a revolving door in DC and NY for regulators, corporations use the federal gov as a crutch and as a barrier of entry for Small Business. republicrats are selling our nation away.

  38. that is incorrect. there has been no complete lack of regulation for decades. do you not understand what the word "socialism" means? socialism is when the govt determines the price and distribution of commodities(that is what makes it slavery) it does not matter if you mean communist or fascist .

  39. You can not think of any examples of the government determining the price and distribution of commodities? What country are you from? In America we have market orders, subsidies, import taxes, quest labor laws, forced purchases, quantity limits, government owned businesses, even whole industries that are owned by the govt. socialist subversives began this assault on Americas poor almost a century ago, and we have been fighting it ever since. You never heard of socialism before?

  40. You are right that there are not a complete lack oif regulations. Poor choice of works on my part. There is a lack of enough regulations.

    And no, you are wrong on the definitions. Feel free to look them up in a dictionary.
    Regardless, no western government dictates the prices of commodities or finished goods. I don't know if that was your point or not. The banks failed because they were allowed to create a system that was desingned to fail and then bet against it. And they became to big to fail

  41. 1) all fascist governments determine the price and distribution of commodities, that is what the word "socialism" means, when the govt determines the price and distribution of commodities. 2) the banks failed because they were ordered to make a sale, to whom, at what price, in which quantities. the banks told them it was impossible . the banks failed because socialist subversives intentionally caused them to fail, and then offered more socialism as a solution.(and "too big to fail, is socialist)

  42. I would have said this in the last post but ran out of room, this is my last post to you. You seem to take your talking points from extreme right wing pundants, and not from economics classes. I obviously can't convince you how you are wrong, but no big deal. Everyone can believe what they want. IF someone believes the sun goes around the earth and won't listen to the evidense then that is their perogative. Same for you. Have a good day Halloran.

  43. than you know that the bank collapse was intentionally caused by socialist, and only capitalism will cure the damage intentionally done by socialist. the bailout was socialism, ordering the banks to make loans they knew could not work was socialism.

  44. incorrect. do your home work before posting. they were ordered to make loans to people they would not have made loans to, at interest rates they would not have qualified for. the banks informed the govt. that this would not work (they knew they were bad) the socialist subversives in our govt invented the process that created the meltdown! intentionally ! and then they took money away from you and used it to buy the banks for the govt. Did you want to donate money to the banks ?

  45. "too big to fail" is socialist, When America was a free country , no money would be taken away from you and used to buy a private business for the govt. Did you notice that the same socialist subversives who said "too big to fail" (you know, the ones that caused the failure) are the same people who used to say "too big" (IE monopolies) ????

  46. Two excellent books on the financial crises are 'Grifftopia' and 'The Global Minotaur'. It has nothing to do with Warren.

  47. Moron. That legislation was NOT as you claim – and TYPICAL fucking ignrant rightwinger DRIPPING in Dunning Kruger idiocy. The legislation stopped DISTRICTING. Where the financial institutions applied BROAD rules to whole districts. The legislation stopped this by saying you cant tarnish all people in a district with the same brush you must judge on a person by person basis. This did NOT IN ANY FUCKING WAY cause the crash. The crash was from STUNNING corruption and deregulation. MORON

  48. Whenever republican accuses anyone of anything it is either because they themselves are guilty of or planning on doing themselves. There are 2 word not in the GOP dictionary, shame and reality.

  49. No, that is a lie. the banks were required to give loans to people they would not have given loans to, at rates they would not have qualified for. had nothing to do with "districting" this is SPECIFICALLY what caused the crash. (as intended) which was solved by donating your money to buy the bank for the government. both the cause and the solution were socialist. in a free country, people can not be told what to sell, or to whom, or at what price, that happened twice.

  50. Tell me you grovelling toady to stunning greed and corruption WHY THE FUCK did this also happen in Europe? What they forced the banks as well? The level of wilfully fucking idiocy is JAW DROPPING. TRY READING SOME FUCKING BOOKS. 'It Takes A Pillage', 'Grifftopia', 'the Global Minotaur' are excellent starting points. And get down the hardware store and get a crowbar to get your head out of your ass… BTW socialism is giving THE WORKERS control of the means of production this did NOT happen-sheez

  51. get a reference book yourself. the communist party ordered them to make a sale (socialism) ordered them who to make it to, at what price. this was intended to make real estate more expensive for poor people and to bankrupt the banks, once the damage became apparent the communist took possession of the banks WITH YOUR MONEY did you choose to make a donation to those banks? do you get a dividend from them? of course not.

  52. Not to butt in but Fascism and socialism are two different things,, as a matter of fact anyone who knows anything about 20th century history knows that Fascism and Socialism have always been each other’s worst enemies, as in the Spanish Civil War, the war between Nazi Germany and Russia, and many other conflicts.. Just saying…

  53. yes i mean it, nobody can believe about this quickly. the thing is, i get sent a list of high paying surveys every few days and easy make around $60 off each list. i got it from here. you can also try it: bit.ly15jY8nn

  54. No, "socialism" is when the govt determines the price and distribution of commodities,(that's what makes it slavery,it negates all commercial rights) "fascism" is socialism with the right of ownership (even though property rights without commercial rights are meaningless, it's still slavery) "communism" is socialism without property rights, now do you understand that fascism is socialism?

  55. socialism is an economic system in which "the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy." socialism often attempts to eradicate class divisions. fascism uses a central authority to maintain control, but "terror and censorship" are common. It results, while socialism and communism are both on the left end of the political spectrum, fascism contains elements of both "left and right ideology"

  56. no, that is incorrect. 'socialism" is the economic system where the govt determines the price and distribution of commodities. fascism is socialism with property rights and communism is socialism without property rights. capitalism is when the govt DOES NOT determine the price and distribution of commodities. Now do you understand that fascism and communism are both socialism? and capitalism is not ?

  57. Once again Where socialism sought totalitarian control of a society’s economic processes through direct state operation of the means of production, fascism sought that control indirectly, through domination of nominally private owners.

  58. still don't get it huh? Once again, "socialism" is when the govt determines the price and distribution of commodities. fascism is socialism with property rights. Now do you understand ?

  59. Socialism is any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods.. FASCISM:a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

  60. So once again i'll explain it to you, i'll try to dumb it down for you,,
    In Socialism everyone works and everyone gets a share,, Now in Fascism is everyone works but only a select few get a share,, Did i dumb it down enough for you to understand?

  61. no, pay attention this time. "socialism" is when the govt determines the price and distribution of commodities(that is what makes it slavery, it negates all commercial rights. "fascism" is socialism with the right of ownership (even though property rights without commercial rights are meaningless) Now do you understand ?

  62. No , you still have it wrong, socialism" is when the govt determines the price and distribution of commodities. fascism is socialism with property rights. Now do you understand ?

  63. perhaps this will help, Your definition is an incorrect definition of "communism" which is one of the two forms of socialism. Your definition of fascism is simply a list of everything the nazis did EXCEPT fascism, which is when the govt determines the price and distribution of commodities (socialism) with property rights.

  64. I'm done arguing with you,, each definition i gave you was from dictionaries, but you know better then them right?

  65. did you think that socialism was the one where the free market determines the price and distribution of commodities? if that were true than you simply have "socialism" confused with "capitalism" . capitalism is the one where the govt DOES NOT determine the price and distribution of commodities. Now do you understand ?

  66. do you think that englands govt is nazi? or canada? or sweden ? not everything the nazis did was "fascism" "fascism" is simply when the govt determines the price and distribution of commodities. Now do you understand ???

  67. I don't understand why all of you hate Fox News? it is the only news outlet that has 100% integrity/

    Just like George W Bush is the deeply misunderstood , that man is a man of such integrity, I would let my two year son spend a night with him, and know he is not going to molest my little boy!

  68. Fraud, is the most serious crime in a capitalist economy. It is not enough to punish those who commit it, you have to have strong regulations to prevent it. These are CRIMES. The responsibility is ONLY with the criminals. And yes, to state it bluntly, it IS THEIR FAULT. And, by the way, it is not only in the mind of Elizabeth Warren, it is in the minds of about 250 million Americans.

  69. Yeah, scalping is a common phrase get over it. Plus Warren did push the regulations that caused the crisis. What's wrong with pointing that out?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *