If you have "no place to go," come here!

Is #Pelosi undermining Elizabeth #Warren?

Yves asks whether Pelosi is undermining Warren, pointing out that Pelosi's appointee, Richard Nieman, joined the Republicans in writing a dissenting opinion, and if Pelosi had a problem with that, she would have spoken up.

It would be nice if Pelosi's advocacy of a Pecora Commission weren't a sham, but let's verify, shall we?

No votes yet


Submitted by jawbone on

The original Depression investigation was also a sham exercise, but Pecora, brought in to write the final report after three previous investigators were fired or quit, asked to reopen the hearings, and some initial successes, plus the arrival of the Roosevelt administration, gave the probe a new leash on life.

But with the both the Democrats and the Republicans firmly in the hold of the banking classes, it will take something more on the order of a miracle to get a serious inquiry underway. (My emphasis)

I had not been aware that the investigation actually began under Hoover and three -- count'em, three -- previous heads of the investigation failed or felt they failed.

It took Pecora, under a real Democrat, to get anywhere. Where and when do we find a real Democrat?

Where does that leave us?

Davidson's picture
Submitted by Davidson on

They're meant for Tweets. Is Corrente even on Twitter? I've been checking it and haven't been able to find Corrente. Even with blogs that are also available on Twitter, I haven't seen blogs use hashtags in their posts, just in their Twitter updates.

leah's picture
Submitted by leah on

Your beginning text appears to be from a source other than yourself, but there is no link to or other indication of what source.

CMike's picture
Submitted by CMike on

Jawbone is quoting Yves Smith at Naked Capitalism who Lambert links to in the parent post of this thread. That's why Jawbone headed his comment "Among much to cause alarm, these two final paragraphs by Yves."

I still haven't figured out what Yves, or Jawbone, mean by "a new leash on life."

Submitted by jawbone on

what the typo or whatever was about. Pretty sure it's "lease on life." T/U for answering Leah. I almost put a link in, but was feeling lazy and assumed the cite was clear.

And you know what they say about "assume": Makes a "ass" out of "(yo)u" and "me."

CMike's picture
Submitted by CMike on

Whereas Google finds nearly 800,000 results for "lease on life," the search engine rings up 130,000 for "leash on life."

CMike's picture
Submitted by CMike on

Thanks for that, I didn't realize this area had been covered to such an extent. However, in this instance, I think something else was going on. I've made similar mistakes several times and my explanation is that it has something to do with both typing and a brain glitch. No one makes such a error while writing in long hand because no one writes as fast as a typist types and the glitch occurs in a blink of the eye.

I think Yves, who frequently posts the oddest of animal pictures and who was about to type the word "life," typed the letters L-E-A-S, her mind wandered, she made a quick association with something to do with pets and that led to the error. This then would be a sort of Freudian slip of the finger.

(What do you think of my theory?)

hank's picture
Submitted by hank on

I quoted and cited this bit of history over there. See the thread for the cite and more.

'Douglas (December 8, 1933) wrote that the monied interest "suffered more actual damage by the Pecora investigation that they ever would under the Securities Act." The Pecora hearings showed that the nation could no longer rely on the noblesse oblige of financial capitalists.'

Look it up. Then look around.