Bankster Henry Paulson attacks Trump from the right, says that HRC is closer to his agenda
Among other things, Paulson says that Trump's policies on trade and "entitlements" are too liberal, too close to Bernie. Therefore, Paulson encourages Republicans to instead support Hillary, who, he is confident, will continue Wall Street's trade agenda and who will "fix entitlements". (Note how Paulson describes "entitlements" and how they must be "fixed soon" or else! Bring back any memories?)
Donald Trump targeted by Henry Paulson in op-ed endorsing Hillary Clinton
By REENA FLORES CBS NEWS June 25, 2016, 1:47 PM
snip
Looking past the November election, Paulson raised the specter of Trump in the Oval Office and slammed the businessman's proposals on entitlements and trade.
On entitlement programs, the ex-secretary said if they are "not fixed soon, they threaten our nation with a debt burden that would undermine the retirement security of young Americans and future generations."
"It doesn't surprise me when a socialist such as Bernie Sanders sees no need to fix our entitlement programs," he said. "But I find it particularly appalling that Trump, a businessman, tells us he won't touch Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid."
snip
"We need to welcome rather than shrink from trade and economic competition," he wrote, noting Trump's unwillingness to engage in America's current trade agreements. "Trump calls our current trade deals 'disgusting, the absolute worst ever negotiated by any country in the world.' This is simply false."
= new reply since forum marked as read
Paulson's approval will almost certainly represent a net loss of votes - including among "conservatives" and "right-leaning indies" (precisely the kind of people who despise Wall Street banksters and the plunder of 2008 that the Bankster King Paulson pimped out as a "bailout"
.
This person's "stature" is mainly as a widely-known villain. He does absolutely no favors to anyone through his endorsement. He should have shut up if he wanted to help Clinton. (It's possible sabotage, though I doubt this miscreant is that self-conscious.)
To call him "conservative" or any other kind of political is absurd. He is a bankster, first and last. He made hundreds of millions as a Goldman Sachs CEO - which inevitably means, for literally starving people around the world - and then paid off by getting into the cabinet and providing hundreds of billions in bailouts when his bankster buddies crashed the world - including the incredible $13 billion to the coffers of Goldman on the AIG deal.
What other endorsements would you like to see Clinton get? Cheney's, perhaps? How about GWB's, straight up? It would be as if you put a big flashing sign that said "The Establishment Motherfuckers You Despise Are United for Clinton." If you really support her, pray that these stupid freaks realize that they should STFU with their "endorsements."
own congressman and senators have been up to, much less this guy. If they hear treasury secretary that'll indicate stature and not much else. And most conservatives, even today's resentful populists, are impressed with status, the higher the better.
Furthermore, hearing that he was W's will tell them he's normally on "their side" against Democrats, and that's the most important thing most look for in any candidate. Will he stop the Democrats before they destroy all that's good and right in America? The ones who might be swayed by Paulson's message will of course come from those who are somewhat less knee-jerk biased.
bad with names and did not remember him offhand and had to look him up.
Knowing anyone has been a Republican appointee any time in the past 35+ years automatically raises my suspicions big time. There are sensible, honorable conservatives who tried to fulfill what they felt was their duty to the people, but I have to look them up every time, and way too often I wouldn't trust one to run so much as an animal shelter as humanely and responsibly to the community as I would expect it to be.
Sid
