Tue Mar 1, 2016, 04:06 PM
jeff47 (26,549 posts)
Why did DWS just co-sponsor the bill to help payday lenders?
After all, it really doesn't mean anything in terms of getting the bill passed. It's not like DWS's vote in the House is necessary - there's plenty of Republicans to advance the bill.
So why'd she do it? Because now Clinton will come out against the bill. Clinton will trumpet this to try and claim she is not a pro-big-money, pro-establishment candidate. "See! I even oppose what the DNC chair is doing!!"
|
26 replies, 5002 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
jeff47 | Mar 2016 | OP |
Stand and Fight | Mar 2016 | #1 | |
hobbit709 | Mar 2016 | #2 | |
TheBlackAdder | Mar 2016 | #23 | |
stonecutter357 | Mar 2016 | #3 | |
arcane1 | Mar 2016 | #5 | |
jeff47 | Mar 2016 | #11 | |
R. Daneel Olivaw | Mar 2016 | #17 | |
hifiguy | Mar 2016 | #21 | |
stonecutter357 | Mar 2016 | #26 | |
Kip Humphrey | Mar 2016 | #4 | |
Trajan | Mar 2016 | #6 | |
Kip Humphrey | Mar 2016 | #8 | |
PonyUp | Mar 2016 | #7 | |
arcane1 | Mar 2016 | #9 | |
seaotter | Mar 2016 | #10 | |
Sunlei | Mar 2016 | #12 | |
jeff47 | Mar 2016 | #13 | |
Sunlei | Mar 2016 | #14 | |
jeff47 | Mar 2016 | #22 | |
Sunlei | Mar 2016 | #24 | |
AzDar | Mar 2016 | #15 | |
EndElectoral | Mar 2016 | #16 | |
Snotcicles | Mar 2016 | #18 | |
Arazi | Mar 2016 | #19 | |
hifiguy | Mar 2016 | #20 | |
Mufaddal | Mar 2016 | #25 |
Response to jeff47 (Original post)
Stand and Fight This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to jeff47 (Original post)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 04:11 PM
hobbit709 (41,694 posts)
2. Because she is just like her friend. Will say or do anything to get money and power.
Response to hobbit709 (Reply #2)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 05:19 PM
TheBlackAdder (27,383 posts)
23. Because mobbed-up loan sharks donate to sheriff campaigns, PDL's donate to politicians! nt
Response to jeff47 (Original post)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 04:12 PM
stonecutter357 (12,562 posts)
3. payday lenders have saved my ass more than one time.
Response to stonecutter357 (Reply #3)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 04:17 PM
arcane1 (38,613 posts)
5. They also ripped you off. They can do one without doing the other, you know n/t
Response to stonecutter357 (Reply #3)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 04:24 PM
jeff47 (26,549 posts)
11. And guess what? They don't have to charge 300% interest to do so. (nt)
Response to stonecutter357 (Reply #3)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 04:45 PM
R. Daneel Olivaw (12,606 posts)
17. It must have felt good...
Dealing with a legalized loan shark.
|
Response to stonecutter357 (Reply #3)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 04:53 PM
hifiguy (33,688 posts)
21. You could get better rates from the Mob.
Response to hifiguy (Reply #21)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 08:10 PM
stonecutter357 (12,562 posts)
26. The MOB in ALABAMA?
![]() |
Response to jeff47 (Original post)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 04:13 PM
Kip Humphrey (4,753 posts)
4. Ok... that's pretty cynical even for me! I'm thinking its more likely DWS is trolling for campaign
funds since she is being primaried. A good source of cash are payday lenders who only require a 135% quid pro quo!
|
Response to Kip Humphrey (Reply #4)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 04:20 PM
Trajan (19,089 posts)
6. LOL ...
Not a bad deal, if you can get it!
|
Response to Trajan (Reply #6)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 04:24 PM
Kip Humphrey (4,753 posts)
8. yeah, except for all of the carnage involved (which I doubt informs DWS!)
Response to jeff47 (Original post)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 04:23 PM
PonyUp (1,680 posts)
7. Payday lenders using banks in other states are illegal here in NC.
In 2006, the North Carolina Department of Justice announced the state had negotiated agreements with all the payday lenders operating in the state. The state contended that the practice of funding payday loans through banks chartered in other states illegally circumvents North Carolina law. Under the terms of the agreement, the last three lenders will stop making new loans, will collect only principal on existing loans and will pay $700,000 to non-profit organizations for relief.
|
Response to PonyUp (Reply #7)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 04:24 PM
arcane1 (38,613 posts)
9. That's good to know! Nice to see NC looking out for its actual human "persons" n/t
Response to jeff47 (Original post)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 04:24 PM
seaotter (576 posts)
10. It was commanded by her corporate overlords.
Response to jeff47 (Original post)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 04:25 PM
Sunlei (22,651 posts)
12. Do you have a bill number, link to the bill please?
Response to jeff47 (Reply #13)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 04:31 PM
Sunlei (22,651 posts)
14. you find bills on official Gov pages, here you go.
Response to Sunlei (Reply #14)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 04:59 PM
jeff47 (26,549 posts)
22. So wait...you didn't need me to actually give you the link and could find it yourself?
Golly! What a surprise.
|
Response to jeff47 (Reply #22)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 05:29 PM
Sunlei (22,651 posts)
24. Not yet on any officials website. found it, looks ok to me. Here what don't you like about it?
https://www.congress.gov/114/bills/hr4018/BILLS-114hr4018ih.pdf
To amend the Truth in Lending Act to establish deferred presentment transaction requirements You do realize a lot of states don't have any " requirements" for consumer protections from those loan sharks re their 'deferred presentment' repayment requirements? Loan shark Corps hate to be regulated. |
Response to jeff47 (Original post)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 04:41 PM
EndElectoral (4,213 posts)
16. She has lost it. Hopefully, Obama would veto it if passed.
Response to jeff47 (Original post)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 04:46 PM
Snotcicles (9,089 posts)
18. Also, Isn't DWS's husband involved with those legal loan sharks? nt
Response to jeff47 (Original post)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 04:47 PM
Arazi (5,929 posts)
19. Jesus, another big fracture opens up between the DNC and the Sanders wing
Disgusting
![]() |
Response to jeff47 (Original post)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 04:52 PM
hifiguy (33,688 posts)
20. Because she's a bootlicking, craven, hypocritical toady for anyone
who waves the $$$$ around? To the point of campaigning for Repigs? :shrugL
|
Response to jeff47 (Original post)
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 05:36 PM
Mufaddal (1,021 posts)
25. This must be the third thread on this today
and the response from the HRC crew has been overwhelming:
![]() |