Hillary’s Bold Plan to Financially Penalize Recidivist Super-Predators

The other day Hillary promised she would appoint Attorneys General like Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch. “I will appoint an Attorney General who will continue the courageous work of Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch.” Given that the comments came at an Al Sharpton event, I assumed the comment meant to invoke Holder and Lynch’s efforts to reform criminal justice and, presumably, their even more laudable support for civil rights.

Nevertheless, it was a disturbing comment, given that Holder and Lynch have also both coddled the bankers who crashed our economy. Indeed, when Hillary tries to defend her huge donations from bankers, she always points to Obama’s even huger ones, and insists that there’s no evidence he was influenced by them. But the Obama DOJ record on bank crime is itself the counter to Hillary’s claim those donations didn’t influence the President.

But then, last night, Hillary said something even more outrageous, which I take to be a solid promise to her funders they’ll continue to get special treatment before the law. Amid a comment shifting from Too Big to Fail into the serial settlements the banks have signed for their crimes, Hillary took the bold step of calling for financial penalties for the people directing that crime.

CLINTON: Dana, let me add here that there are two ways to at this under Dodd-Frank, which is after all the law we passed under President Obama, and I’m proud that Barney Frank, one of the authors, has endorsed me because what I have said continuously is, yes, sometimes the government may have to order certain actions. Sometime the government can permit the institution themselves to take those actions. That has to be the judgement of the regulators.

But, there’s another element to this. I believe strongly that executives of any of these organizations should be financially penalized if there is a settlement.


CLINTON: They should have to pay up through compensation or bonuses because we have to go after not just the big giant institution, we have got to go after the people who are making the decisions in the institutions.

Granted, under Holder and Lynch, those courageous Attorneys General Hillary would model her own pick on, the banksters haven’t even been asked to do this much.

But the fact that Hillary thought a great punishment for those harming the country with their serial crime wave is to fine them is a testament that she doesn’t even see the underlying crimes.

This is behavior that has continued over years, often after previous settlements. If anyone can be called a super-predator, it’s the bankers who toy with millions of people’s livelihoods and savings to make a buck. If there were a Three Strikes law for bankers most of these guys would be looking at life imprisonment.

And yet Hillary’s bold plan is not to incarcerate them, but instead to take a little bit of their money.

7 replies
  1. Mass Independent says:

    Hillary Clinton is thoroughly in the pockets of the bankers. She is a sell out, and will let the financial disasters continue, because her family and associates are insulated from the results. Her claims to be “fighting for us” and “caring about women and children” ring so hollow, they would be humorous if not so outrageous.

  2. Les says:

    Cost of doing business. The central banks stuff the banks with money on one end.

    Recently, predatory loans are making a comeback.

    “Housing officials are urging the Justice Department to provide assurances to banks, which have become increasingly cautious, that they will not face legal or financial recriminations if they make loans to riskier borrowers who meet government standards but later default.

    Officials are also encouraging lenders to use more subjective judgment in determining whether to offer a loan and are seeking to make it easier for people who owe more than their properties are worth to refinance at today’s low interest rates, among other steps.”


  3. bevin says:

    She is so tone deaf that she has slipped into self parody which is beginning to become farcical. I cannot believe that she will still be in this race when summer comes.

    As Bill showed you need a light touch and an ability to hint at self deprecation to engage in this kind of cynical demagoguery.

    I guess everyone has read this?

  4. RUKidding says:

    “…I assumed the comment meant to invoke Holder and Lynch’s efforts to reform criminal justice and, presumably, their even more laudable support for civil rights.”
    Did I blink and miss something? What “laudable” support for civil rights?
    Clinton will install another Wall Street toady suck up doing nothing just like Holder & HBSC money-launder Lynch. And like both Holder and Lynch, that appointee will do bupkiss to reform criminal justice or support civil rights. And probably Clinton, like Obama, will continue to maintain the deep embedding of Republican appointments in the DOJ that go back to the W Bush reign of error. A lot of powerful and influential employees remain at the DOJ who are rightwing to the core.
    Why am I supposed to vote for Clinton again??

  5. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Unless you take away enough of their money (or their freedom, as in jail time for serial felonies) for these banksters/MOU to no longer to qualify among the richest 400, they will consider the fines a cost of doing business. When the fines do not exceed the profits gained through fraud, they amount to a tax, and permission to continue the frauds. Ms. Hillary knows that, which is a clear statement that she will do less than Mr. Obama to reduce the endemic fraud. Especially since some of the profits obtained thereby may put her into the White House. Would that make her an accomplice or co-conspirator?

Comments are closed.