What's new
By:

Trump Dictatorship and All Things Politics


Elon Musk on Wednesday called for the elimination of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Formed in the wake of the 2008 banking crisis, the CFPB has a broad mandate to protect Americans from unfair, deceptive or predatory financial practices. Its current director — Rohit Chopra, a Democrat — has recently issued rules meant to shield people from medical debt, make it easier for them to switch banks and limit the fees they face from falling behind on their credit card bills.

Since its founding, the CFPB has secured more than $19 billion in consumer relief, while penalizing large financial institutions and technology firms for allegedly mishandling Americans’ money. Its oversight often has stoked the ire of the nation’s biggest banks, credit card companies and other lenders, which have sued the bureau repeatedly over charges of regulatory overreach.

Marc Andreessen, a Silicon Valley venture capitalist, faulted the CFPB on a podcast this week for “terrorizing financial institutions.” Andreessen is a Trump supporter and donor who is advising Musk and his outside organization, known as DOGE, which is co-led by fellow tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy.

Andreessen’s firm has backed a number of financial technology companies under the CFPB’s watch. In a series of enforcement actions that predate Trump’s first term, the agency in 2021 notably shuttered LendUp Loans, alleging it misled customers about its short-term, high-rate loans and overcharged military service members. At the time, the CFPB specifically highlighted that the company was backed by investors including the Andreessen Horowitz venture capital firm.

Privately, Trump’s top aides have considered new candidates to lead the CFPB who are expected to soften its crackdown on the financial industry.

Some of the president’s former aides, meanwhile, have called for the bureau to be abolished entirely as part of the conservative blueprint known as Project 2025.
 
fishonjazz said:

Elon Musk on Wednesday called for the elimination of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Formed in the wake of the 2008 banking crisis, the CFPB has a broad mandate to protect Americans from unfair, deceptive or predatory financial practices. Its current director — Rohit Chopra, a Democrat — has recently issued rules meant to shield people from medical debt, make it easier for them to switch banks and limit the fees they face from falling behind on their credit card bills.

Since its founding, the CFPB has secured more than $19 billion in consumer relief, while penalizing large financial institutions and technology firms for allegedly mishandling Americans’ money. Its oversight often has stoked the ire of the nation’s biggest banks, credit card companies and other lenders, which have sued the bureau repeatedly over charges of regulatory overreach.

Marc Andreessen, a Silicon Valley venture capitalist, faulted the CFPB on a podcast this week for “terrorizing financial institutions.” Andreessen is a Trump supporter and donor who is advising Musk and his outside organization, known as DOGE, which is co-led by fellow tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy.

Andreessen’s firm has backed a number of financial technology companies under the CFPB’s watch. In a series of enforcement actions that predate Trump’s first term, the agency in 2021 notably shuttered LendUp Loans, alleging it misled customers about its short-term, high-rate loans and overcharged military service members. At the time, the CFPB specifically highlighted that the company was backed by investors including the Andreessen Horowitz venture capital firm.

Privately, Trump’s top aides have considered new candidates to lead the CFPB who are expected to soften its crackdown on the financial industry.

Some of the president’s former aides, meanwhile, have called for the bureau to be abolished entirely as part of the conservative blueprint known as Project 2025.
Click to expand...
From the comments section: Eliminating the CFPB would leave people like you and me vulnerable to predatory financial practices, like surprise fees on credit cards or unfair loan terms that trap families in debt. Without the CFPB, we could face another financial crisis like 2008, when millions lost their homes and savings due to unchecked corporate greed. Musk’s claim that the CFPB is redundant ignores its unique role in protecting everyday consumers, filling gaps other regulators don’t address. Removing this watchdog would hurt individual families, weaken trust in financial institutions, and make it harder for us to feel secure about our money.

Not to take anything away from his accomplishments, but I don't remember voting for/against him in the election. Have we somehow slipped into an oligarchy? Billionaires gone wild. I have doubts it will end well, by that I mean for the average Joe or Jane, it will certainly end well for the wealthy, but it is what it is.

The GOP raised the debt ceiling 3 times under Trump. They raised it 7 times under W. Bush. They raised it 18 times under Reagan.The so-called fiscal conservatives have nearly bankrupted their own party, added trillions to the national debt, and want to install a white collar criminal as their party leader while paying his substantial legal fees.

'Formed in the wake of the 2008 banking crisis, the CFPB has a broad mandate to protect Americans from unfair, deceptive or predatory financial practices' Interesting, that they want to eliminate the agency tasked with protecting consumers from the very business practices trump has regularly been paying settlements over and convicted of. Hmm
 
Al-O-Meter said:
LOL. I do think it is funny that even if Trump owed such a debt that your believe he'd pay it. No one has confused Trump with the Lannisters.
Click to expand...
Explains why it is so important for him to be POTUS. Russia can't assassinate the POTUS, but they could if he was just some random bankrupt charlatan with a felony record.
 
fishonjazz said:

Elon Musk on Wednesday called for the elimination of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Formed in the wake of the 2008 banking crisis, the CFPB has a broad mandate to protect Americans from unfair, deceptive or predatory financial practices. Its current director — Rohit Chopra, a Democrat — has recently issued rules meant to shield people from medical debt, make it easier for them to switch banks and limit the fees they face from falling behind on their credit card bills.

Since its founding, the CFPB has secured more than $19 billion in consumer relief, while penalizing large financial institutions and technology firms for allegedly mishandling Americans’ money. Its oversight often has stoked the ire of the nation’s biggest banks, credit card companies and other lenders, which have sued the bureau repeatedly over charges of regulatory overreach.

Marc Andreessen, a Silicon Valley venture capitalist, faulted the CFPB on a podcast this week for “terrorizing financial institutions.” Andreessen is a Trump supporter and donor who is advising Musk and his outside organization, known as DOGE, which is co-led by fellow tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy.

Andreessen’s firm has backed a number of financial technology companies under the CFPB’s watch. In a series of enforcement actions that predate Trump’s first term, the agency in 2021 notably shuttered LendUp Loans, alleging it misled customers about its short-term, high-rate loans and overcharged military service members. At the time, the CFPB specifically highlighted that the company was backed by investors including the Andreessen Horowitz venture capital firm.

Privately, Trump’s top aides have considered new candidates to lead the CFPB who are expected to soften its crackdown on the financial industry.

Some of the president’s former aides, meanwhile, have called for the bureau to be abolished entirely as part of the conservative blueprint known as Project 2025.
Click to expand...
This is where real damage will be done. It'll be like Regan 2.0. **** the poor, **** the middle class harder. Only the rich matter.
 
fishonjazz said:
From the comments section: Eliminating the CFPB would leave people like you and me vulnerable to predatory financial practices, like surprise fees on credit cards or unfair loan terms that trap families in debt. Without the CFPB, we could face another financial crisis like 2008, when millions lost their homes and savings due to unchecked corporate greed. Musk’s claim that the CFPB is redundant ignores its unique role in protecting everyday consumers, filling gaps other regulators don’t address. Removing this watchdog would hurt individual families, weaken trust in financial institutions, and make it harder for us to feel secure about our money.

Not to take anything away from his accomplishments, but I don't remember voting for/against him in the election. Have we somehow slipped into an oligarchy? Billionaires gone wild. I have doubts it will end well, by that I mean for the average Joe or Jane, it will certainly end well for the wealthy, but it is what it is.

The GOP raised the debt ceiling 3 times under Trump. They raised it 7 times under W. Bush. They raised it 18 times under Reagan.The so-called fiscal conservatives have nearly bankrupted their own party, added trillions to the national debt, and want to install a white collar criminal as their party leader while paying his substantial legal fees.

'Formed in the wake of the 2008 banking crisis, the CFPB has a broad mandate to protect Americans from unfair, deceptive or predatory financial practices' Interesting, that they want to eliminate the agency tasked with protecting consumers from the very business practices trump has regularly been paying settlements over and convicted of. Hmm
Click to expand...
The oligarchy has been building for a while. With Trump it just comes to a head fully. He obviously won't hesitate to put the billionaires directly in charge and will obviously do nothing to hold them accountable to anything. Man our Republic has fallen completely off the deep end. And it's just going to get worse.
 
Sardines said:
This is where real damage will be done.
Click to expand...
I sure hope so. Creating an institution run by unelected bureaucrats who can effectively pass laws without any input from anyone is not how our system is supposed to work. If there are predatory whatevers, then the people's representatives in Congress need to draft legislation and pass bills to address whatever directly.
 
Next step in the fascist play-book, empower the supreme leader to legally crush his opposition with a pen. Unnecessary legislation that gives the president blanket power over organizations he dislikes or stands in his way, like many media outlets. Let's hear how the cult defends this one.

youtube.com

Post from Robert Reich

The U.S. House of Representatives passed a terrifying bill that would empower Donald Trump to strip the nonprofit status of any organization with the stroke ...
youtube.com youtube.com
 
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...1&cvid=bc090ee1591744e49660ae414e4a4fdf&ei=26
trump signed a law into place in his first term and now wont even follow it lol.

A bipartisan bill to boost transparency and make sure incoming presidents stick to an ethics plan was so uncontroversial that it passed the Senate by a voice vote in 2020. Donald Trump then signed it into law.

But now, after blowing past deadlines to adhere to the law after winning the White House a second time, Trump appears to have excluded himself from those same ethical guidelines.

Trump missed two months of deadlines before finally signing off on an agreement with President Joe Biden’s administration to begin the presidential transition process this week.

But the agreement does not appear to include the president-elect’s pledge to avoid conflicts of interest while in office, despite requirements under a renewed Presidential Transition Act he signed into law four years earlier.

Trump’s team is turning down federal funding and office space for his transition team — as well as official government checks and security checks for his staff. The president-elect has rebuffed agreements with the Department of Justice to process security clearances to access classified information during the transition.

“This announcement fails to answer key questions about national security threats and FBI vetting of nominees, and increases concerns about corruption,” said Senator Elizabeth Warren, who co-wrote the Presidential Transition Act.

“There appear to be serious gaps between the Trump transition’s ethics agreement and the letter of the law,” she said. “The reliance on private donors to fund the transition is nothing more than a ploy for well-connected Trump insiders to line their pockets while pretending to save taxpayers money.”

The team said it is turning down federal support “consistent with President Trump’s commitment to save taxpayers’ hard-earned money,” his campaign said in a statement.
But accepting the money would have put a $5,000 cap on individual donations to the transition and require the public disclosure of donors.

By turning down roughly $7 million in federal funding for the transition process, Trump will be able to raise unlimited private donations for the transition.

Trump’s alleged resistance to signing an ethics pledge is a “red flag pointing to nothing so much as greed and corruption and an intention to enrich himself and/or his family through the extensive powers of his office,” according to Virginia Kase Solomón with democracy advocacy group Common Cause.

The plan requires transition team members to “avoid both actual and apparent conflicts of interest” and to “safeguard classified information” and “non-public information and other information that is not readily available to the public.”

It also blocks team members from lobbying activities and prohibits them from serving as registered foreign agents while working during the transition

Without thorough reviews of the incoming administration’s financial withholdings and interests by the Office of Government Ethics, those nominees could be in a position to benefit from their proximity to power, according to Campaign Legal Center counsel Kedric Payne, a former deputy chief counsel with the Office of Congressional Ethics.


“Without this crucial review — which is mandated by law — nominees may enter office with conflicts of interest (obvious or hidden) that they are not ordered to remedy,” Payne said in a statement.

If that happens, “not only are Americans deprived of critical information about those poised to hold immense power, but those power holders could manipulate the government for their own personal benefit while facing little to no consequence,” he added.

Trump’s dismissal of ethics obligations is not only a “break from precedent” but a potentially illegal and “dangerous” scene setter for the years to come, according to Payne.

“If we do not bother to hold some of the most politically powerful members of our government to ethical guidelines before they even enter office, there is little hope that these leaders will bother with ethics guidelines throughout their public service,” he added.

Grifter gonna grift
 
fishonjazz said:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...1&cvid=bc090ee1591744e49660ae414e4a4fdf&ei=26
trump signed a law into place in his first term and now wont even follow it lol.
Click to expand...
There is a law, but the party that "shall" abide it is the General Services Administration (GSA), and the memorandum of understanding (MOU) the GSA is responsible for.

By September 1 of a year during which a presidential election occurs, the GSA shall enter into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with each eligible candidate, which shall include the conditions for administrative support services and facilities. To the maximum extent practicable, an MOU shall be based on MOUs relating to previous presidential transitions. Each MOU shall include an agreement that the eligible candidate will implement and enforce an ethics plan to guide the conduct of the transition beginning on the date on which such candidate becomes President-elect. The plan shall be published on the GSA website.

By September 15 of a year during which a presidential election occurs, each agency shall ensure that a succession plan is in place for each senior noncareer position in the agency.


There is nothing in the law anywhere that dictates what a President-elect "shall" do. Trump hasn't violated anything. The GSA has violated the law by not getting Trump to implement and enforce an ethics plan. Right now Biden's DOJ should be prosecuting the criminals at GSA for their lawbreaking.
 
Last edited:
Elon, Vivek, and Marc Andreesen (Google him if you don’t know him) are exactly what the working class needed to defend their quality of life.

Remember how the working class slob was tired of two tiers of justice and corruption? It’s time for season 2 of the Trump show!

www.forbes.com

Who Is Charles Kushner? What To Know About Trump’s Pick For U.S. Ambassador To France.

Kushner, father of Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, pleaded guilty to tax evasion and witness tampering in the 2000s.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com

Btw, why do we need another FBI director? Wasn’t the one Trump appointed 7 years ago doing okay? Why would Trump need a loyalist in that position?

 
The Thriller said:
Elon, Vivek, and Marc Andreesen (Google him if you don’t know him) are exactly what the working class needed to defend their quality of life.

Remember how the working class slob was tired of two tiers of justice and corruption? It’s time for season 2 of the Trump show!

www.forbes.com

Who Is Charles Kushner? What To Know About Trump’s Pick For U.S. Ambassador To France.

Kushner, father of Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, pleaded guilty to tax evasion and witness tampering in the 2000s.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com

Btw, why do we need another FBI director? Wasn’t the one Trump appointed 7 years ago doing okay? Why would Trump need a loyalist in that position?

Click to expand...
Was just going to post about this. Another horrible choice.
www.nytimes.com

Trump Says He Will Nominate Kash Patel to Run F.B.I.

President-elect Donald J. Trump turned to a firebrand loyalist to become director of the bureau, which he sees as part of a ‘deep state’ conspiracy against him.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com
 
In case anyone hasn't been paying attention, the U.S. elected a felon who was also found civilly liable for sexual assault.

The people who can forgive that are the same people who freaked out over a tan suit.

It is hard to take their concern seriously.
 
Sardines said:
In case anyone hasn't been paying attention, the U.S. elected a felon who was also found civilly liable for sexual assault.

The people who can forgive that are the same people who freaked out over a tan suit.

It is hard to take their concern seriously.
Click to expand...
Also made a fake university in order to steal from people.
Also stole from charity.
 
Sardines said:
Are we supposed to be holding people to standards that we are not holding the President-elect to?

No thanks. I'm done with that. Fire with fire. Set the rules and let the game play out.
Click to expand...
That Joe Biden pardoned Hunter means the opposite. It means they believe Trump will be the better person, and the fearmongering over prosecution of political enemies was always fake. If they genuinely believed Trump was going to seek to weaponize the DOJ in the same way the Democrats have, the worst thing Joe could have done would be to pardon Hunter. If there is one guy who knows where all the bodies are buried, it is Hunter Biden, and the pardon just stripped Hunter of the right to remain silent because now he can’t incriminate himself.

If Trump intended to bring down the Biden crime family, he’d drag Hunter in for questioning on day one. Hunter’s only options would be to tell what he knows or lie and send himself to jail for obstruction of justice. But no, it won’t be fire with fire. That is not going to happen and everyone knows it. I wouldn’t even be surprised if Trump were the one to have asked Joe Biden to pardon Hunter just so Trump had a bit of cover to let things go.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Joe just said **** you to everyone, including and perhaps especially the Democrats.

What a **** face.
Click to expand...
In case everyone is wondering why...

www.nbcnews.com

President Biden pardons his son Hunter Biden

The decision, which was first reported by NBC News, is a reversal for the president, who repeatedly said he would not use his authority to pardon his son or commute his sentence.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com

What a piece of work. Tarnish an otherwise decent presidency by stooping to the lowest level of any presidential candidate in our country's history, Donald Trump.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top