Why should anyone believe her now?
As we’ve already pointed out, Elizabeth Warren’s endorsement of Hillary Clinton proves she’s a fraud. An old video which has been floating around the blogosphere lately, really drives the point home.
Back in 2004 during an interview with Bill Moyers, Elizabeth Warren told a very different story about the politician she now claims to support.
Zero Hedge provides the background, emphasis is theirs:
2004 Flashback: Elizabeth Warren Describes Hillary Clinton As A Puppet For Wall Street
In an interview that is said to date back to 2004, Warren begins by explaining that she and then First Lady Hillary Clinton sat down and discussed the negative impacts a pending bankruptcy bill would have on women who were raising families. As a result of their meeting Warren said, Hillary went to work in the White House in order to stop the legislation, and ultimately influenced her husband to veto the bill when it came across his desk.
“She says, ‘tell me about bankruptcy’ – I go over the law, went over the economics, showed her the graphs, showed her the charts, and she got it.”
“At the end of the conversation, Mrs. Clinton stood up, and she said professor Warren we’ve got to stop that awful bill.”
“She went back to Washington and I heard later from someone who was a White House staffer that there were skid marks in the hallways when Mrs. Clinton got back as people reversed direction on that bankruptcy bill. When Mrs. Clinton came back with a little better understanding of how it all worked, they reversed course and they reversed course fast. And the proof is in the pudding. The last bill that came before President Clinton was that bankruptcy bill that was passed by the House and the Senate in 2000 and he vetoed it. In her autobiography Mrs. Clinton took credit for that veto and she rightly should.“
However, as Senator Clinton, now entirely beholden to banks after generous contributions made to finance her campaign, her vote was different. Funny how that all works isn’t it?
“One of the first bills that came up after she was ‘Senator Clinton’ was the bankruptcy bill – she voted in favor of it.“
When asked why, Warren points out that as Senator the stakes are different, and Clinton didn’t want to bit the hand that fed her, rather, funded campaign coffers (and of course would later pay Clinton millions to give speeches – it’s always important to have an eye toward the future).
“As Senator Clinton, the pressures are very different. It’s a well financed industry. 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 that have been giving money, and they have influence. She has taken money from the groups, and more to the point, she worries about them as a constituency.
Watch the video:
By the way, it seems we’re not the only ones who think Warren is a fraud.
Seth Mandel writes at the New York Post:
Endorsing Hillary is the just latest sign that Warren is a fraud
American politics may have no bigger fraud than Elizabeth “Fauxcahontas” Warren.
So I got a good chuckle from Politico’s Thursday story saying the Massachusetts Democratic senator had called Donald Trump, among other grade-school taunts, a fraud.
I don’t know whether Warren fancies herself the pot or the kettle in this one, but she’s definitely a hypocrite.
In fact, while she was preparing to call Trump a fraud, her advisers were leaking to every major press outlet they could find that she was finally going to endorse Hillary Clinton for president, now that she has secured the necessary delegates. What a profile in courage.
Endorsing Hillary could be the most fraudulent act of Warren’s brief political career, since Warren is a less compelling version of Bernie Sanders on economics and even once boasted she essentially “created” Occupy Wall Street.
But there’s stiff competition.
Start with that Fauxcahontas moniker. She earned it during her 2012 Senate campaign against Scott Brown after it came to light she’d claimed to be 1/32 Cherokee decades ago when seeking a Harvard Law faculty position.
She wasn’t able to back up the claim. “These are my family stories,” she said. As a wealthy white woman, her gaming of the affirmative-action system also made a mockery of race-based hiring and the left’s supposed commitment to “diversity.”
Featured image via YouTube.DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.