Warren is now in on the "artful smear" (through time travel, I guess)

[Mufaddal]

This just keeps getting better. The more you pull the thread, the more interesting stuff unravels.

So most people are probably by now familiar with the fact that Warren once pointed out, in an interview, one of the ways in which she felt Hillary had been influenced by Wall St. connections:

ELIZABETH WARREN: She voted in favor of it.

BILL MOYERS: Why?

ELIZABETH WARREN: As Senator Clinton, the pressures are very different. It’s a well-financed industry. You know a lot of people don’t realize that the industry that gave the most money to Washington over the past few years was not the oil industry, was not pharmaceuticals. It was consumer credit products. Those are the people. The credit card companies have been giving money, and they have influence.

BILL MOYERS: And Mrs. Clinton was one of them as senator.

ELIZABETH WARREN: She has taken money from the groups, and more to the point, she worries about them as a constituency.

Link with video: http://billmoyers.com/2015/11/18/flashback-elizabeth-warren-tells-a-story-about-hillary-clinton-wall-street-and-lobbying/

Well, now Hillary is saying she voted for the bill because she was "protecting women":

"It had to do with protecting women... So then years later, part of what Sen. Warren said... I faced a tough decision, I stood up for women... And then when the next bill came up in 2005, womens (sic) issues were taken care of, so then I was against the bill."

Full article: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/02/07/clinton_accuses_sanders_and_warren_of_smear_campaign.html

The original Moyers' story has even been updated to reflect Clinton's objection. Can't wait for a response from Warren and/or Politifact.

EDIT: If anyone is truly inclined to believe that Clinton has spent a career fighting for women and children, I invite them to look at Clintonian welfare "reform" for more than five seconds.

[Mufaddal]

1. Yeah, I know, I'm replying to my own thread.

Warren apparently preempted this kind of rebuttal last year, albeit addressing Biden who apparently framed it the same way that Clinton is trying to now, here: http://www.ibtimes.com/sen-warrens-criticism-joe-biden-complicates-vice-presidents-2016-plans-2075663

As a Harvard law professor in 2002, Warren published a journal article excoriating Biden for playing a leading role in delivering legislation that made it more difficult for Americans to reduce debts through bankruptcy filings. His repeated push for the bill -- signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2005 -- amounted to “vigorous support of legislation that hurts women,” Warren declared. She said "the group that will be most affected by the changes in the bankruptcy legislation Senator Biden so forcefully supports will be women, particularly women heads of household who are supporting children." She called Biden a “zealous advocate on behalf of one of his biggest contributors,” singling out the credit card industry, which has a strong presence in Biden’s home state of Delaware.

In her 2002 article, though, Warren accused Biden of playing an especially pernicious role in pressing the legislation, harnessing his reputation as an advocate for the interests of working women to curry the support of interest groups that would otherwise have opposed the bill. In Warren’s account, Biden exploited the fact that he was a supporter of a separate bill to combat violence against women while trying to focus public attention on the alimony provisions in the bankruptcy measure. His support for the bankruptcy legislation, she said, provided crucial political cover that enabled other lawmakers to support the measure and avoid criticism from women’s groups.

“He has shielded his colleagues on both sides of the aisle from being branded as anti-women for their support of this legislation,” Warren wrote. “Senator Biden can publicly support one very visible piece of legislation on behalf of women, satisfying his duty and assuring the loyal support of millions of women. He is then free to be a zealous advocate on behalf of one of his biggest contributors, the financial services industry, and still position himself as a champion for women.”

[daleanime]

2. No probllem....

extra information is always good.

[jillan]

3. I saw her talk about this on State of the Union this morning (CNN) she said the deal was

she could get her amendments put in the bill only if she voted yes on the bill - and so she did.

Such great leadership!

[Akamai]

5. Well I guess Hillary did not misrepresent Bernie's vote on deregulation of swaps and derivatives.NOT

Well, the change was deep in an omnibus bill that the country had to pass, and more, was promoted by major leaders in her husband's White House and was supported by both Podesta and Gensler, both intimately associated with her campaign. When Bernie found out about it, he protested vigorously.

Hillary is certainly misrepresenting greatly. I wonder what another word for that is? Hmm... Rhymes with "tie"?

Talk about "an artful smear."

Go Bernie!

[TTUBatfan2008]

7. The derivatives charge is really dirty

I wish someone in the TV media would call her out for it because she keeps saying it in her interviews/speeches. Her fucking husband deregulated the bank laws and pushed this derivative crap down the throat of everyone in Congress by stuffing it into the Omnibus.

[SoapBox]

11. Yes!

And another reason I keep repeating...

No...More...Clintons.

[passiveporcupine]

10. Yes, I just brouht this up in another thread

Hillary is the queen of artful smears. She's been smearing Bernie non-stop in the last couple of debates. Using these very tactics she's crying about now that they are aimed at her. But when she does it, it's "that's how congress works". Even if in her case it was a well managed maneuver like the Biden vote depicted above.

[SoapBox]

12. All while share and Camp Weathervane fail to talk issues.

More smearing and less talking about her positions.

Of course, if she talks issues, she has to spin, spin, spin because she has been all over the planet on everything.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

15. Seriously... we can do better!

[Babel_17]

4. It's a useful reminder of what Senator Warren said. Thanks!

Got to love the internet era, it makes it harder to slam someone while counting on it taking a long time for a rebuttal to get out there. In the case of Senator Sanders, the debate is an awkward place to fit in an extensive reply to the charge leveled against him, in the time allotted. Practicality would have reduced him to in effect just barking back, and following that just engaging in personal verbal combat. It was hoped he'd take that bait, imo, but he had the judgement not to.

Kudos to all the journalists, bloggers, diarists, and posters on the internet, who rushed to the fore to provide the facts regarding the claims made during the debate.

I salute you all. Salute!

[3star2nr]

6. artful smear

The truth has been called many things Now it's called an artful smear.

Call it what you want the truth always endures long after the lies and names fade

[Duppers]

8. Didn't many of Hillary supporters here

tout Elizabeth Warren's policies a year ago? Strange that.

[Akamai]

9. The great person Elizabeth Warren has no time for distraction and nonsense.

She is comfortable in the flames of "we have to do it now" because otherwise incredibly bad things are going to happen. She knows mountains have to be moved, hearts have to be changed, and if they are not, then truly absolutely terrible things can happen to average people.

Incremental changes not going to do it. Going to the right or left by a millimeter is not going to save us, or the planet.

Time is short and Elizabeth Warren is one of the soothsayers.

Go Bernie!!!

[AzDar]

13. She is SO full of shit...

[Jenny_92808]

14. FULL OF SHITE

Women deserve better!

[cui bono]

16. Me thinks this 'artful smear' is just propaganda catapulted by an 'artful dodger'.

Last edited Mon Feb 8, 2016, 11:36 PM - Edit history (1)

!

.