Wow. He referred to her skin color as proof she wasn't American Indian in any way?
Really?
That is amazing. He actually referred to skin color in relation to her heritage. Wow.
White Buffalo Woman not happy with Mr. Wall Street!
Elizabeth Warren has no character issues, Mr. Brown on the other hand has many. We can begin with the fact his pick up truck was quickly turned into a Wall Street dynasty as the sole Senator any banker could count on to cheat the USA Treasury.
...For the Wall Street bankers, (click here) hedge fund managers, and private equity executives from New York, Connecticut, and elsewhere who are pouring money into Brown’s campaign, it’s also about something much closer to their hearts: stopping Elizabeth Warren....
...However, he used his vote to extract changes that financial institutions wanted made to the Volcker Rule, a central aspect of the legislation that limits proprietary trading for FDIC-insured banks, giving them a little more “wiggle room,” as Frank puts it. As a result, banks are allowed to invest up to 3 percent of their capital in private equity and hedge funds, a change that benefited Wall Street as well as Massachusetts-based Fidelity Investments and State Street (STT). Brown, along with Senators Olympia Snowe (R-Me.) and Susan Collins (R-Me.), also insisted that the cost of implementing the legislation, estimated at around $20 billion by the Congressional Budget Office, come from TARP money rather than through a levy on the largest banks, as the Democrats wanted. “Since we needed their votes,” Frank says, “we had to relieve the financial institutions of that and put it on the taxpayers.”...
That is outrageous. FDIC insured banks are suppose to be protected for the depositors, not as a corrupted arm of Wall Street. I cannot believe this portion of the law is even constitutional. The FDIC is suppose to be protected from ever being exposed to unreasonable risk. It is insurance, not a gambling arena.
Increasingly, institutions are also offering (click here) consumers a broad array of investment products that are not deposits, such as mutual funds, annuities, life insurance policies, stocks and bonds. Unlike the traditional checking or savings account, however, these non-deposit investment products are not insured by the FDIC.
There better be a very hefty disclosure statement explaining how these deposits are not protected. I mean in the FIRST LINE and in larger print than the rest of the disclosure statement, "The monies deposited into this investment instrument are not FDIC insured."
Because anything short of that is fraud.
Uninsured Investment Products: A Pocket Guide for Financial Institutions (click here)
Oh, it is all very clever, but, FDIC banks are not about being clever, they are about being safe! As a matter of fact, in any signage in the bank, outside of the bank and in advertising where "FDIC Insured" is stated there needs to be an accompanying statement immediately below it that reads, "There are investment instruments in this institution not FDIC insured. Ask your banker when depositing to explain the difference."
If all that is not in place and citizen's attention are NOT openly and overtly brought to the fact they could lose every dime they deposit, then it is fraud, deception and is litigable to remove it from the Dodd-Frank Law as a breech in the fiduciary requirements of banks with their depositors under the brevity of federal law. I guarantee you, that part of Dodd-Frank is unconstitutional under the provisions of existing legal precedent. I am very confident there is already a case on the books whereby a bank in history defrauded depositors while stating monies were insured by FDIC when they were not. Guaranteed.
