Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, September 20, 2016

Facing off with the CEO whose massive bank appropriated customers' information to create millions of bogus accounts, Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts had sharp questions Tuesday for Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf. She told him, "If one of your tellers took a handful of $20 bills out of the crash drawer, they'd probably be looking at criminal charges for theft. They could end up in prison. But you squeezed your employees to the breaking point so they would cheat customers and you could drive up the value of your stock and put hundreds of millions of dollars in your own pocket. You should resign. You should give back the money that you took while this scam was going on, and you should be criminally investigated by both the Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission."

Advertisement

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Watch the video. Warren is sharp, well-prepared and merciless as she pounds away at the hapless executive.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

She should show them the exact same mercy the banks showed underwater mortgage holders during the financial crisis and after.

#1 | Posted by donnerboy at 2016-09-20 08:00 PM | Reply

God damn I wish that woman had run for president.
In order to fight the bankers, you have to be smart enough to know the issues, and ethical enough to not take their bribes or job offers. That doesn't leave many people available.

Of course all of this is tempered by the fact that she's endorsing the banker's favorite candidate.

#2 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2016-09-20 08:05 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Just resigning isn't good enough. Disgorge the profits and then slap fines and jail on the crooks.

Thank you Liz, for giving up any possibility of a fat campaign warchest. I hope your Massachusetts' constituency appreciate you as much as I do.

#3 | Posted by nutcase at 2016-09-20 08:05 PM | Reply

- she's endorsing

Because it's the smart thing to do. She was smart just a second ago, remember? Her and Bernie and Noam are not so caught up in having their own way that they can't see the forest for the trees... or can't see that Dem policies are better for America than GOP Alt Orange policies for their hate of the Dem candidate.

#4 | Posted by Corky at 2016-09-20 08:37 PM | Reply

Any of you actually believe that HRC would have the decency to come out and loudly denounce the criminal bankers at Wells Fargo? Maybe after enough other prominent politicians have done so such that she feels she has some cover. HRC is a triangulating joke. Warren would have been the real deal.

It is a weird reality we live in. I want HRC to lose. And I want Trump to lose even more.

#5 | Posted by moder8 at 2016-09-20 08:41 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 6

Because it's the smart thing to do. She was smart just a second ago, remember? Her and Bernie and Noam are not so caught up in having their own way that they can't see the forest for the trees... or can't see that Dem policies are better for America than GOP Alt Orange policies for their hate of the Dem candidate.

#4 | Posted by Corky

The smart thing to do was run for president. She didn't do that.

Dem policies? Like the iraq war? Wall street deregulation? NAFTA? TPP? Fracking? The drug war? Spying on everyone?
Those are HILLARY policies. Not dem policies. You just accept them because she has a D by her name and a V between her legs.

#6 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2016-09-20 08:49 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Now is a good time to release those paid banker speech transcripts to prove HRC can not be bought.

#7 | Posted by Prolix247 at 2016-09-20 08:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

Unfortunately this appears to be all Warren can do.

Shake her finger at him and send him to bed without supper.

Sucks.

#8 | Posted by eberly at 2016-09-20 08:54 PM | Reply

Great post Prolix. HRC receiving hundreds of thousand of dollars from Wall Street bankers and refusing to now release the transcripts. Gee. I wonder whose side she is on when bankers are accused of malfeasance. What a disgusting person. Had she gone into banking instead of politics I have no doubt but that HRC would have been just like this CEO Stumpf. --------.

#9 | Posted by moder8 at 2016-09-20 08:58 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

Unfortunately this appears to be all Warren can do.

Shake her finger at him and send him to bed without supper.

Sucks.

#8 | Posted by eberly

That's what happens when bankers can pay politicians millions of dollars for secret speeches.

#10 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2016-09-20 09:03 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Advertisement

Advertisement

Now is a good time to release those paid banker speech transcripts to prove HRC can not be bought.

It would be a good time for Trump to release his tax returns, so he can demonstrate specifically how he got politicians to do what he wants and lower his taxes.

#11 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-20 09:48 PM | Reply

Nothing will be done. that's what money buys.

#12 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2016-09-20 09:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

-Dem policies?-You just accept them because she has a D by her name and a V between her legs.

You always act like the only real world alternative, Donald Trump, isn't much worse. Living in a fantasy where one of them won't be President is fine when you realize that is what you are doing. The problem comes when don't.

-You just accept them because she has a D by her name and a V between her legs.

I thought you didn't like logical fallacies. You assign motivation in lieu of argument constantly. But that's what happens when you have none.

Unless some leftier than thou "liberals" frak it up by helping the GOP and that Alt Orange Right take the Presidency along with most of the rest of the government they already have because VOTERS, we'll eventually see the FDR-is reforms most of us want... IF we retain control of the one branch of government we already have.

But it will take a lot longer, maybe never at all, if we have to live thru Worse Than GW.

You live in an idealist fantasy world without voters. Hope the weather is nice there!

#13 | Posted by Corky at 2016-09-21 12:39 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

when you don't.

#14 | Posted by Corky at 2016-09-21 12:40 AM | Reply

Nothing will be done.
#12 | POSTED BY SHEEPLESCHISM

No joke what a pathetic speech, there is no legal basis, or reason to resign. Perhaps a moral one, but so what. Morals, as liberals have promoted are relative.

It would be a good time for Trump to release his tax returns, so he can demonstrate specifically how he got politicians to do what he wants and lower his taxes.
#11 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Why don't you ask Bill Clinton, he pretty much admitted it was going on with the Clinton Foundation.
theweek.com

#15 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2016-09-21 12:48 AM | Reply

Ahh, the usual show where congress persons are mean to some business person for a few hours. Much ado about nothing.

#16 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2016-09-21 07:30 AM | Reply

This is one case where I agree with Pocahontas. When the fraud is that widespread the problem goes to the top.

This by-the-way is also why Obama should resign.

#17 | Posted by sawdust at 2016-09-21 07:43 AM | Reply

So will Liz be giving back the money she earned off of her Wells Fargo stock?

#18 | Posted by Federalist at 2016-09-21 07:51 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The hypocritical dr left out in full force, grossly exposing EXTREME BIAS once again.

You holier then thou elitist would hyperventilate until you were purple....if WFC was owned by Koch Industries!!!!!
OMG if it were Koch, you all would be demanding they divest all financial holdings, maybe even strip them of US citizenship??
BUT wfc is owned by WB so none of you care.

What was it that Obama nick named as his anti bankster rule ? The Buffet Rule?? As usual the rules only apply to other people.
This is one of the most egregious breeches of fiduciary responsibilities since the sub prime crisis.

SO did dodd frank stop this. Or...is this really the Buffet rule in effect, that rules are only for little people??

#19 | Posted by DavetheWave at 2016-09-21 07:55 AM | Reply

"What was it that Obama nick named as his anti bankster rule ? The Buffet Rule??"

Great...so now "anti-bankster" means "they pay the same rate as workers".

#20 | Posted by Danforth at 2016-09-21 08:00 AM | Reply

#19 | Posted by DavetheWave

That's a nice rant, but what exactly are you raving about?

#21 | Posted by REDIAL at 2016-09-21 08:05 AM | Reply

"SO did dodd frank stop this."

Dodd Frank exposed it and punished Wells Fargo to the tune of 185 Million dollars. That we need stronger regulations is obvious and we need to jail these crooks. The person in charge of the people who did this walked away from the bank with 130 million dollars and is still eligible for a bonus this year. She should be and hopefully will be prosecuted.

#22 | Posted by danni at 2016-09-21 08:24 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"She should be and hopefully will be prosecuted." #22 | POSTED BY DANNI

Who's in charge of seeing to that?

#23 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2016-09-21 08:27 AM | Reply

God damn I wish that woman had run for president.
In order to fight the bankers, you have to be smart enough to know the issues, and ethical enough to not take their bribes or job offers. That doesn't leave many people available.

Of course all of this is tempered by the fact that she's endorsing the banker's favorite candidate.

#2 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2016-09-20 08:05 PM

NW flag.

#24 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2016-09-21 09:44 AM | Reply

trying to make sense of waveydavey,

Obama has been in the Bankers pockets from day one. They provided most of the funds for his campaign. There are some (liberals) who view Buffet, Gates, and Soros through rosy glasses, whereas the likes of Geithner, Greenspan, Paulson, Rubin, Summers and Trump are rightly considered tyrants. In fact they are all more or less in the same camp, just like the Bushes and Clintons. Waveydavey sees this as hypocrisy.

But this is a story about Warren, who has relentlessly attacked the problems caused by a rigged financial system. Wells Fargo invented a new scam unanticipated by Dodd-Frank, which should surprise no one.

Having made a fortune in unproductive trading waveydavey does not appreciate sound criticism and he has swallowed the mass media's excoriation of all liberals, to whom his rant is directed. As if they were somehow the monsters behind 2008. Its easy to fall into that trap because the Clintons and Obama want you to believe they are on your side and represent just, liberal causes. But its all BS and its bad for you.

#25 | Posted by nutcase at 2016-09-21 09:47 AM | Reply

"SO did dodd frank stop this."

Dodd Frank exposed it and punished Wells Fargo to the tune of 185 Million dollars. That we need stronger regulations is obvious and we need to jail these crooks. The person in charge of the people who did this walked away from the bank with 130 million dollars and is still eligible for a bonus this year. She should be and hopefully will be prosecuted.

#22 | Posted by danni at 2016-09-21 08:24 AM | Reply | Flag:

| Newsworthy 1

"She should be and hopefully will be prosecuted." #22 | POSTED BY DANNI

Who's in charge of seeing to that?

#23 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2016-09-21 08:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

Dodd-Frank created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which, according to this article, has already asked the U.S. Attorney's office to investigate Wells Fargo.
www.usatoday.com

#26 | Posted by cbob at 2016-09-21 10:35 AM | Reply

Excellent post nut. It's a riot that the usual suspects aren't piling on Warren Buffett. As the largest shareholder he owns this outrageous scandal. And seeing how cosy he is with Obama and the Democratic party, they to own it by extension. All these threads about fat cat banksters missed the target didn't they. MS OWS danni was out marching in the streets promoting the buffet rule. Guess she didn't know how easily manipulated they were!

The charge is failure to supervise. Heads should roll, starting at the top. This was years in the making

#27 | Posted by DavetheWave at 2016-09-21 01:21 PM | Reply

I've heard rumblings that some shareholders are considering a suit in response to Wells Fargo providing fraudulent account numbers and user growth projections to shareholders.

#28 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2016-09-21 01:28 PM | Reply

28, lol. There don't have to be any rumblings, trial lawyers are fighting for pecking order.

#29 | Posted by DavetheWave at 2016-09-21 02:20 PM | Reply

SO did dodd frank stop this.
#19 | POSTED BY DAVETHEWAVE

It was the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau which was the brainchild of Warren and the product of the Dodd-Frank law which exposed the fraud and levied the $185M fine.

www.drudge.com

#30 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2016-09-21 05:11 PM | Reply

I see the next GOP presidential candidate!

#31 | Posted by Sycophant at 2016-09-21 05:49 PM | Reply

That's no fine, nor a slap on the wrist to wfc. It's the OCC that is their primary regulator in consumer affairs, and they haven't responded yet.

What I find hysterical is the OWS supporting drudgery, who give buffet a pass i by omission. None of the left are calling him out for his hand in this, nor for his silence

#32 | Posted by DavetheWave at 2016-09-21 08:08 PM | Reply

Warren is a buffoon and the exact reason why I left the Dem party. I actually have much more respect for the turncoat Neocons who are flocking to Hillary based on their shared love of war rather than sticking with Trump just because of the R. Either Warren is the biggest phony since Bernie Sanders and really does not care about the issues the Libs hold her up as championing or she is 100% party of values given her whole hearted support for Hillary. Hey Warren - the Dems control the justice department and president for 8 years - they can literally prosecute ANYONE THEY WANT WHENEVER THEY WANT. You are part of the controlling party and have done ZERO to go after Wall Street other than you faux outraged speeches. You should resign - phony!!!

#33 | Posted by USinVN at 2016-09-21 09:02 PM | Reply

#33 I am impressed you were able to tee off on Warren without slipping in any references to Pocahontas. ;)

#34 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-21 09:06 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

None of the left are calling him out for his hand in this, nor for his silence

We're supposed to call him out when the company he invests in takes aggressive action to maximize shareholder profits?

#35 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-21 09:08 PM | Reply

"#33 I am impressed you were able to tee off on Warren without slipping in any references to Pocahontas. ;)

#34 | POSTED BY SNOOFY "

Well, she is clearly a complete phony a la Bernie...you admit that if she was interested in actually prosecuting Wall Street she could have gotten something done given the Dem control of the president and department of justice? Let's talk meat and potatoes rather than ignoring the point of my post.

#36 | Posted by USinVN at 2016-09-21 09:12 PM | Reply

you admit that if she was interested in actually prosecuting Wall Street she could have gotten something done given the Dem control of the president and department of justice?

I don't see how she could directly accomplish that, unless all the other players you mentioned are on board, which they are not.

#37 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-21 09:14 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"I don't see how she could directly accomplish that, unless all the other players you mentioned are on board, which they are not.

#37 | POSTED BY SNOOFY"

Did she pick up the phone and ask Obama to prosecute? Did she hold any senate hearings on it? Did she call Lynch or Holder and ask them to prosecute? You know - her saying that she asked Obama or the Justice Department to prosecute and telling us that they refused would go a long way in shaming them into action - of course, we all know that she did none of these things because she is a complete phony.

#38 | Posted by USinVN at 2016-09-21 09:19 PM | Reply

Just one thing, are there any politicians who aren't complete phonies?

#39 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-21 09:21 PM | Reply

"Just one thing, are there any politicians who aren't complete phonies?

#39 | POSTED BY SNOOFY "

If you believe that - then why would you hold her up as a champion against Wall Street? Why would you not laugh at the people saying that she should have run for president? She is a one issue senator and even you seem to accept that she is a complete phony even on that one issue.

#40 | Posted by USinVN at 2016-09-21 09:23 PM | Reply

I'm asking you if you believe it.

#41 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-21 09:25 PM | Reply

"I'm asking you if you believe it.

#41 | POSTED BY SNOOFY"

Well, I know the Dems are lying sacks of horse crap based on their flip flop on immigration this election after saying for 40 years that the lack of action was due to the GOP. I know they are lying about not wanting more wars (even the Neocons see through that) and I believe they are lying about wanting to regulate Wall Street - clearly Hillary does not want to and Warren is a phoney.

Is Trump a phony too? Time will tell. I think he will address immigration and trade deals. In other aspects - like him being a bible thumper? I trust that as much as 'till death do us part' in his wedding vows.

#42 | Posted by USinVN at 2016-09-21 09:32 PM | Reply

Warren is wonderful. There is no one else left in Congress like her. But it is difficult to combine this action with support for Hillary. Many people believe Trump is simply too big a risk to take a chance with and I'm certain this includes Bernie and pretty sure this includes Warren. 2016 is the year of pick your poison.

#43 | Posted by nutcase at 2016-09-22 11:11 AM | Reply

"Is Trump a phony too? Time will tell."

Time has already told us. Some refuse to accept reality.

#44 | Posted by danni at 2016-09-22 11:39 AM | Reply

"Is Trump a phony too? Time will tell."

Trump is obviously a phony. The fact that you haven't figured that out yet speaks volumes about you.

#45 | Posted by donnerboy at 2016-09-22 11:59 AM | Reply

I find it interesting that you think being CEO and having a 20% stake in a holding company (Berkshire Hathaway), that then has less than a 10% stake in a company (Wells Fargo) suddenly makes Buffett culpable in the internal workings of said company. What about the other 98% of ownership stake in Wells Fargo?

#46 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2016-09-22 03:53 PM | Reply

"Warren is a phoney."

Ridiculous post.

#47 | Posted by danni at 2016-09-22 04:25 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2016 World Readable

Drudge Retort