Bernie Sanders, banks, Iraq war and Panama Papers


This video from the USA says about itself:

New York Daily News Tries Hatchet Job On Bernie, Fails

6 April 2016

The corporate press is going nuts over a so-called failed interview that Bernie Sanders had with the New York Daily News. During this interview with the editorial board of the tabloid publication, there were a number of instances where Bernie Sanders appeared to not know what he was talking about. Did he? Did they? Cenk Uygur and Ana Kasparian, hosts of The Young Turks, break it down. Tell us what you think in the comment section below.

“A notion is rapidly crystallizing among the national media that Bernie Sanders majorly bungled an interview with the editorial board of the New York Daily News. His rival, Hillary Clinton, has even sent a transcript of the interview to supporters as part of a fundraising push. A close look at that transcript, though, suggests the media may be getting worked up over nothing.

In fact, in several instances, it’s the Daily News editors who are bungling the facts in an interview designed to show that Sanders doesn’t understand the fine points of policy. In questions about breaking up big banks, the powers of the Treasury Department and drone strikes, the editors were simply wrong on details.

Take the exchange getting the most attention: Sanders’ supposed inability to describe exactly how he would break up the biggest banks. Sanders said that if the Treasury Department deemed it necessary to do so, the bank would go about unwinding itself as it best saw fit to get to a size that the administration considered no longer a systemic risk to the economy. Sanders said this could be done with new legislation, or through administrative authority under Dodd-Frank.

This is true, as economist Dean Baker, Peter Eavis at The New York Times, and HuffPost’s Zach Carter in a Twitter rant have all pointed out.”

Read more here.

From the Bernie Sanders presidential campaign in the USA today:

Hillary Clinton herself just unleashed the first part of the new “disqualify him, defeat him and then they can unify the party later” strategy we told you about. Look at this new headline:

Washington Post: “Clinton questions whether Sanders is qualified to be president”

Polls in Wisconsin haven’t even been closed for 24 hours, and we’re already seeing the start of the Clinton campaign’s full-on attack before the New York primary. We knew they were getting nervous, but candidly, we didn’t think they would go this negative so quickly. We have to be ready for what comes next.

Contribute $3 to Bernie 2016 right now to help us get ready for the New York primary and be able to fend off whatever the billionaire class throws at us next.

New York is going to be an important state for the Democratic nomination. Bernie was born there, Hillary Clinton moved there, and 247 delegates are at stake on April 19.

We’ve won seven of the last eight contests, and voters clearly side with Bernie. So now the Clinton campaign is moving beyond a discussion of the issues to say Bernie isn’t even qualified to be president.

Meanwhile, Bernie’s going to keep talking about universal health care, fighting climate change, making our economy work for everyone, and taking on our corrupt campaign finance system. Voters seem to like it – and we’re not going to let up now.

Contribute $3 now to help Bernie continue talking to New York voters and defend against the Clinton campaign’s plans to disqualify and defeat our campaign.

The next two weeks until the New York primary are going to be difficult, but if we stand together, we can win. Thanks for standing with Bernie.

In solidarity,

Jeff Weaver
Campaign Manager
Bernie 2016

From Politico.com in the USA today:

“Now the other day, I think, Secretary Clinton appeared to be getting a little bit nervous,” [Sanders in Philadelphia] began. “We have won, we have won seven out of eight of the recent primaries and caucuses. And she has been saying lately that she thinks that I am, quote unquote, not qualified to be president.”

“Well let me, let me just say in response to Secretary Clinton: I don’t believe that she is qualified if she is, if she is, through her super PAC, taking tens of millions of dollars in special interest funds,” he said. “I don’t think you are qualified if you get $15 million from Wall Street through your super PAC.”

Sanders then pivoted to her record on foreign policy, saying, “I don’t think you are qualified if you have voted for the disastrous war in Iraq. I don’t think you are qualified if you’ve supported virtually every disastrous trade agreement, which has cost us millions of decent paying jobs. I don’t think you are qualified if you supported the Panama free trade agreement, something I very strongly opposed and which, as all of you know, has allowed corporations and wealthy people all over the world to avoid paying their taxes to their countries.”

In the wake of Senator Bernie Sanders’ crushing victory over former secretary of state Hillary Clinton in Tuesday’s Wisconsin primary, the corporate-controlled media and the political establishment have been at pains to dismiss the significance of half a million people voting for a candidate claiming to be a socialist. Sanders outpolled Clinton in 79 of the state’s 82 counties and dominated nearly every demographic and income group. He won more than 80 percent of the vote among those aged 18 to 29, more than 70 percent of the vote among independents, and defeated Clinton by 54 percent to 44 percent among nonwhite voters under 45 years of age: here.

INSIDE THE SENATE’S BIPARTISAN MOVE TO GUT DODD-FRANK REGULATIONS “The measure would exempt 25 of America’s biggest banks from regulations created in response to the financial crisis that contributed to the Great Recession a decade ago. The Congressional Budget Office warned that the risk of another financial crisis ‘would be slightly greater under the legislation.'” [HuffPost]

28 thoughts on “Bernie Sanders, banks, Iraq war and Panama Papers

  1. Pingback: Icelanders keep fighting their ‘Panama Papers’ government | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  2. Thursday 7th April 2016

    posted by Morning Star in Features

    ERIC LEE asks whether a Clinton victory in the US Democratic primaries is really guaranteed, as pundits seem to think

    BERNIE SANDERS’S victory in the Wisconsin Democratic primary this week is being spun by the mainstream media as “too little, too late.” The consensus among pundits is that Hillary Clinton’s delegate lead is so huge that there is simply no way for the democratic-socialist senator from Vermont to catch up.

    That has been the case for every single one of Sanders’s recent victories, starting with his wins in Idaho and Utah on March 22. Those two victories, in two small states, went barely noticed even if they were shocking in their scale.

    In Idaho, Sanders took 78 per cent of the vote and in Utah he won over 79 per cent. His supporters reacted by donating a staggering amount of money online, making it the third month in a row that Sanders has out-raised Clinton. But the consensus among experts was that he didn’t have a chance.

    Four days later, Alaska, Washington and Hawaii had their opportunity to vote. Sanders won all three by even larger margins, including a staggering 81.6 per cent in Alaska. Still, pundits were saying that he can’t possibly beat Clinton; that her lead is too great. And even while conceding that he won five states in a row, these were mostly caucus states, not primaries, with very few black and Latino voters, so the Vermont senator had an advantage.

    Wisconsin was supposed to be yet another Clinton “firewall” to stop the Sanders campaign and put an end to the primary fight. According to the last poll released before the vote on Tuesday, Clinton was projected to win by 1 per cent. This was a steep drop for Clinton, as polls a year ago were showing her easily winning the state with a lead of sometimes 50 per cent or more.

    In the end, Sanders won nearly 57 per cent of the vote in Wisconsin, dealing Clinton a crushing defeat. Yet again the polls and pundits were proven wrong.

    On Saturday, voters again go to the polls in the sparsely populated western state of Wyoming. Again, Sanders is expected to win and the Clinton campaign has already prepared its excuses (the state is heavily white, it’s a caucus rather a primary, etc). And the media spin is again predicable: it will echo the Clinton campaign line.

    The big prize is New York on April 19, a state that will send 247 delegates to the Democratic National Convention that meets in Philadelphia in July. Polls are showing Clinton in the lead, but Sanders is starting to catch up.

    The Clinton campaign is right about one thing: Sanders is trailing the former Secretary of State by a large number of delegates. Clinton’s lead over Sanders is shrinking dramatically day by day, but it’s still a lead. She had a 300+ delegate lead over Sanders just a few weeks ago, but this has already shrunk by a third.

    Can Sanders make up the difference and come to the Democratic convention in July with more pledged delegates?

    Yes, but it will be difficult. In fact, it is likely that we won’t know who is actually the frontrunner until June 8, the morning after the California and other late primaries, when 694 delegates are at stake.

    Much is being made of Clinton’s lead among the so-called “super-delegates” — party officials who get to vote at the convention. But the precedent in 2008 showed that they were prepared to desert Clinton in droves once it appeared that Barack Obama had won more delegates in the primaries and caucuses.

    In Sanders’s case, there’s another good reason to expect those party leaders to rethink their support for Clinton.

    All polls are now showing Sanders is a much stronger candidate in the general election against any Republic nominee. The most recent poll shows Sanders with a 17-point lead over Donald Trump which, if it translated into reality, would mean a Democratic victory also in Congress on a scale not seen for more than 50 years.

    The last time that happened was in 1964, when Lyndon Johnson crushed Barry Goldwater, resulting in the most progressive congress the country had seen since the New Deal. The result was the passage of civil rights laws including the Voting Rights Act, Medicare, Medicaid and even an early attempt at a “war on poverty.”

    Since Sanders first announced his candidacy a year ago, mainstream media has insisted that he cannot win. That message is becoming harder to spin now that he wins state after state, eroding Clinton’s delegate lead.

    The Democratic primaries were set up in such a way to ensure that the most conservative candidate would win.

    The southern states, which the Republicans are likely to win in November anyway, got to vote first and were given undue influence. Clinton won in those states. But the moment the campaign moved north, even to ethnically diverse states like Michigan, Sanders began to win — and win big.

    His message that the US has a rigged economy, that only the wealthy benefit, that politics is in the hands of billionaires and so on has resonated in a big way with young people, working-class people and independent voters.

    The candidate himself has been scrupulously honest about his chances from the beginning, acknowledging when he does well and what his chances really are.

    Now he’s saying, if I win New York, I win the nomination — and the presidency. He may well be right.

    For more information on Bernie Sanders’s candidacy, see londonforbernie.com facebook.com/bernie2016london and follow on Twitter @London4Bernie. Join the mailing list at eepurl.com/byDyTH.

    Like

  3. Pingback: Panama Papers scandal and Britain | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  4. It’s happening again…

    In primary after primary in this campaign, we’ll get to a state and find ourselves down 30, 40 points or more. But then we get our field operation running, start talking to voters, run a few ads, and people contribute to fund that operation. Then we find ourselves down 20 points, then 10, then single digits…and then we win. Check this out:

    Quinnipiac – Pennsylvania (April 6, 2016)
    Hillary Clinton: 50%
    Bernie Sanders: 44%

    Quinnipiac’s first poll of this race had us down 38 points, and we’ve come all the way back. We’re too close to come up short now. And if people keep stepping up to power our campaign with their contributions, we’re going to win another state with A LOT of delegates.

    Contribute $3 to our campaign today and Bernie is going to keep gaining in the polls until we win New York, Pennsylvania and this Democratic primary.

    This is, without question, the most important three week stretch of this campaign. We are waging an ambitious challenge to every piece of the political and financial establishment in this country, and after a string of overwhelming victories we have a chance to win this thing!

    But we can’t afford to come up short in a number of the important primaries and caucuses right around the corner. That’s why your $3 contribution is just so important.

    All my best,

    Jeff Weaver
    Campaign Manager

    Like

  5. Pingback: Argentine president Macri’s Panama Papers scandal | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  6. Pingback: Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton news update | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  7. Pingback: David Cameron’s Panama, war scandals | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  8. Pingback: Verizon workers on strike in the USA | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  9. Pingback: Big anti-Cameron demonstration in London today | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  10. Pingback: Can Bernie Sanders win New York primary election? | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  11. Pingback: Trump, Clinton election victories in New York | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  12. Pingback: Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton election campaigns continue | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  13. Pingback: Bernie Sanders wins Indiana, USA primary election | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  14. Pingback: ‘Sanders more electable anti-Trump candidate than Hillary Clinton’ | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  15. Pingback: United States Democratic party convention today | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  16. Pingback: United States Democratic party convention update | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  17. Pingback: Stop Trans Pacific Partnership deal, petition | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  18. Pingback: Hillary Clinton, lower corporate taxes and TPP | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  19. Pingback: Clinton’s pro-bankers speeches, Trump’s sexism revealed | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  20. Pingback: Trump inauguration, not even fake Bruce Springsteen music | Dear Kitty. Some blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.