I'm damn tired of rich people with ulterior motives trying to hijack the Democratic platform.

[Jim Lane]

41. You're mixing up two separate issues.

One issue is whether Glass-Steagall should be reinstated. The other issue is what role, if any, its repeal (or, if you prefer, partial repeal) played in the 2007-08 financial crisis. My post didn't address the second question.

As for Elizabeth Warren, here's what I find on her website from 2013:

"Coming out of the Great Depression, Congress passed the Glass Steagall Act to separate risky investment banking from ordinary commercial banking. And for half a century, the banking system was stable and our middle class grew stronger. As our economy grew, the memory of the regular financial crises we experienced before Glass-Steagall faded away.

"But in the 1980s, the federal regulators started reinterpreting the laws to break down the divide between regular banking and Wall Street risk-taking, and in 1999, Congress repealed Glass Steagall altogether. Wall Street had spent 66 years and millions of dollars lobbying for repeal, and, eventually, the big banks won.

"Our new 21st Century Glass Steagall Act once again separates traditional banks from riskier financial services. And since banking has become much more complicated since the first bill was written in 1933, we’ve updated the law to include new activities and leave no room for regulatory interpretations that water down the rules."

I agree with all of that.

Incidentally, Warren (as of six weeks ago) still supports separating commercial banking from investment banking. This appears from a truly mind-boggling exchange she had with Steve Mnuchin:

"The Trump administration showed its now-routine sense for the absurd when Mnuchin said it supports a 21st-century Glass-Steagall Act ― referring to an updated version of the the Depression-era regulation that separated commercial and investment banks ― but also opposes any bill separating commercial and investment banks.

"Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), the lead sponsor of the bipartisan 21st Century Glass-Steagall Act of 2017, grilled Mnuchin on his statements.

"'The Republican platform did have Glass-Steagall,' Mnuchin said in response to a question from Warren asking if he was reversing the administration’s previous position. 'We, during the campaign ... had the opportunity to work with on this specifically, came out and said we do support a 21st-century Glass-Steagall. Which is ... there are aspects of it, OK, that we think may make sense. But we never said before that we supported a full separation of banks and investment banks.'

"Warren, incredulous, responded, 'There are aspects of Glass-Steagall that you support, but not breaking up the banks and separating commercial banking from investment banking? What do you think Glass-Steagall was if that’s not right at the heart of it?'”

I hope we can all agree that Mnuchin was being thoroughly disingenuous.